{"id":13032,"date":"2020-11-24T09:05:08","date_gmt":"2020-11-24T09:05:08","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/index.php\/2020\/11\/24\/week-5-pt-journal-psychology-homework\/"},"modified":"2020-11-24T09:05:08","modified_gmt":"2020-11-24T09:05:08","slug":"week-5-pt-journal-psychology-homework","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/index.php\/2020\/11\/24\/week-5-pt-journal-psychology-homework\/","title":{"rendered":"Week 5 pt journal | Psychology homework"},"content":{"rendered":"<style type=\"text\/css\"><\/style><h4>Assignment Instructions<\/h4>\n<h4>THIS IS FOR WEEK 5!!<\/h4>\n<p><strong>The Learning Reflection Journal is a compilation of weekly<\/strong>\u00a0<strong>learning reflections you\u2019ll independently write about across Weeks 2, 3, 5, 6 and 7. During each of the assigned weeks, you will write two paragraphs, each 300 words in length (i.e., 600 words total). The first paragraph will describe a topic that you found particularly interesting during that week and what made it interesting, and the second paragraph will describe something that you have observed occurring in the real world that exemplified that topic. Only one topic may be recorded in the journal for each assigned week and your observed real word occurrence must be clearly related to it.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>READING<\/strong><\/p>\n<h2>Personality Theory<\/h2>\n<p><em>Created\u00a0<\/em><em><strong>July 7, 2017<\/strong><\/em><em>\u00a0by\u00a0<\/em><a href=\"https:\/\/www.oercommons.org\/profile\/140438\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow noopener noreferrer\"><em>userMark Kelland<\/em><\/a><\/p>\n<p>In contrast to both the often dark, subconscious emphasis of the psychodynamic theorists and the somewhat cold, calculated perspectives of behavioral\/cognitive theorists, the humanistic psychologists focus on each individual\u2019s potential for personal growth and self-actualization. \u00a0Carl Rogers was influenced by strong religious experiences (both in America and in China) and his early clinical career in a children\u2019s hospital. \u00a0Consequently, he developed his therapeutic techniques and the accompanying theory in accordance with a positive and hopeful perspective. \u00a0Rogers also focused on the unique characteristics and viewpoint of individuals.<\/p>\n<p>Abraham Maslow is best known for his extensive studies on the most salient feature of the humanistic perspective: \u00a0self-actualization. \u00a0He is also the one who referred to humanistic psychology as the third force, after the psychodynamic and behavioral\/cognitive perspectives, and he specifically addressed the need for psychology to move beyond its study of unhealthy individuals. \u00a0He was also interested in the psychology of the work place, and his recognition in the business field has perhaps made him the most famous psychologist.<\/p>\n<p>Henry Murray was an enigmatic figure, who seemingly failed to properly acknowledge the woman who inspired much of his work, and who believed his life had been something of a failure. \u00a0Perhaps he felt remorse as a result of maintaining an extramarital affair with the aforementioned woman, thanks in large part to the advice and help of Carl Jung! \u00a0Murray extended a primarily psychodynamic perspective to the study of human needs in normal individuals. \u00a0His Thematic Apperception Test was one of the first psychological tests applied outside of a therapeutic setting, and it provided the basis for studying the need for achievement (something akin to a learned form of self-actualization).<\/p>\n<h3><strong>Carl Rogers and Humanistic Psychology<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p>Carl Rogers is the psychologist many people associate first with humanistic psychology, but he did not establish the field in the way that Freud established psychoanalysis. \u00a0A few years older than Abraham Maslow, and having moved into clinical practice more directly, Rogers felt a need to develop a new theoretical perspective that fit with his clinical observations and personal beliefs. \u00a0Thus, he was proposing a humanistic approach to psychology and, more specifically, psychotherapy before Maslow. \u00a0It was Maslow, however, who used the term humanistic psychology as a direct contrast to behaviorism and psychoanalysis. \u00a0And it was Maslow who contacted some friends, in 1954, in order to begin meetings that led to the creation of the American Association for Humanistic Psychology. \u00a0Rogers was included in that group, but so were Erich Fromm and Karen Horney, both of whom had distinctly humanistic elements in their own theories, elements that shared a common connection to Alfred Adler\u2019s Individual Psychology (Stagner, 1988). \u00a0In addition, the spiritual aspects of humanistic psychology, such as peak experiences and transcendence, have roots in the work of Carl Jung and William James, and go even further back in time to ancient philosophies of Yoga and Buddhism.<\/p>\n<p>In at least one important way, Rogers\u2019 career was similar to that of Sigmund Freud. \u00a0As he began his clinical career, he found that the techniques he had been taught were not very effective. \u00a0So, he began experimenting with his own ideas, and developing his own therapeutic approach. \u00a0As that approach developed, so did a unique theory of personality that aimed at explaining the effectiveness of the therapy. \u00a0Rogers found it difficult to explain what he had learned, but he felt quite passionately about it:<\/p>\n<p>\u2026the real meaning of a word can never be expressed in words, because the real meaning would be the thing itself. \u00a0If one wishes to give such a real meaning he should put his hand over his mouth and\u00a0<em>point<\/em>. \u00a0This is what I should most like to do. \u00a0I would willingly throw away all the words of this manuscript if I could, somehow, effectively\u00a0<em>point<\/em>\u00a0to the experience which is therapy. \u00a0It is a process, a thing-in-itself, an experience, a relationship, a dynamic\u2026 (pp. ix; Rogers, 1951)<\/p>\n<h4>Brief Biography of Carl Rogers<\/h4>\n<p>Carl Ransom Rogers was born on January 8, 1902, in Chicago, Illinois. \u00a0His parents were well-educated, and his father was a successful civil engineer. \u00a0His parents loved their six children, of whom Rogers was the fourth, but they exerted a distinct control over them. \u00a0They were fundamentalist Christians, who emphasized a close-knit family and constant, productive work, but approved of little else. \u00a0The Rogers household expected standards of behavior appropriate for the \u2018elect\u2019 of God: \u00a0there was no drinking of alcohol, no dancing, no visits to the theater, no card games, and little social life at all (DeCarvalho, 1991; Thorne, 2003).<\/p>\n<p>Rogers was not the healthiest of children, and his family considered him to be overly sensitive. \u00a0The more his family teased him, the more he retreated into a lonely world of fantasy. \u00a0He sought consolation by reading books, and he was well above his grade level for reading when he began school. \u00a0In 1914 the family moved to a large farm west of Chicago, a move motivated primarily by a desire to keep the children away from the temptations of suburban city life. \u00a0The result was even more isolation for Rogers, who lamented that he\u2019d only had two dates by the end of high school. \u00a0He continued to learn, however, becoming something of an expert on the large moths that lived in the area. \u00a0In addition, his father encouraged the children to develop their own ventures, and Rogers and his brothers raised a variety of livestock. \u00a0Given these interests, and in keeping with family tradition, Rogers enrolled in the University of Wisconsin-Madison to study scientific agriculture (DeCarvalho, 1991; Thorne, 2003).<\/p>\n<p>During his first year of college, Rogers attended a Sunday morning group of students led by Professor George Humphrey. \u00a0Professor Humphrey was a facilitative leader, who refused to be conventional and who encouraged the students to make their own decisions. \u00a0Rogers found the intellectual freedom very stimulating, and he also began to make close friends. \u00a0This increased intellectual and emotional energy led Rogers to re-examine his commitment to Christianity. \u00a0Given his strong religious faith, he decided to change his major to history, in anticipation of a career as a Christian minister. \u00a0He was fortunate to be chosen as one of only twelve students from America to attend a World Student Christian Federation conference in Peking, China. \u00a0He traveled throughout China (also visiting Korea, Hong Kong, Japan, the Philippines, and Hawaii) for 6 months, surrounded by other intelligent and creative young people. \u00a0He kept a detailed journal, and wrote lengthy letters to his family and Helen Elliott, a childhood friend whom he considered to be his \u201csweetheart.\u201d \u00a0His mind was stretched in all directions by this profound cross-cultural experience, and the intellectual and spiritual freedom he was embracing blinded him to the fact that his fundamentalist family was deeply disturbed by what he had to say. \u00a0However, by the time Rogers was aware of his family\u2019s disapproval, he had been changed, and he believed that people of very different cultures and faiths can all be sincere and honest (Kirschenbaum, 1995; Thorne, 2003). \u00a0As a curious side note, Rogers\u2019 roommate on the trip was a Black seminary professor. \u00a0Rogers was vaguely aware that it was strange at that time for a Black man and a White man to room together, but he was particularly surprised at the stares they received from the Chinese people they met, who had never seen a Black person before (Rogers &amp; Russell, 2002). \u00a0After his return from China, Rogers graduated from college, and 2 months later he married Helen. \u00a0Again his family disapproved, believing that the young couple should be more established first. \u00a0But Rogers had been accepted to the Union Theological Seminary in New York City, and both he and Helen wanted to be together. \u00a0His family may have wanted them to wait because Union Theological Seminary was, perhaps, the most liberal seminary in America at the time (DeCarvalho, 1991; Rogers &amp; Russell, 2002; Thorne, 2003).<\/p>\n<p>Rogers spent 2 years at the seminary, including a summer assignment as the pastor of a small church in Vermont. \u00a0However, his desire not to impose his own beliefs on others, made it difficult for him to preach. \u00a0He began taking courses at nearby Teachers\u2019 College of Columbia University, where he learned about clinical and educational psychology, as well as working with disturbed children. \u00a0He then transferred to Teachers\u2019 College, and after writing a dissertation in which he developed a test for measuring personality adjustment in children, he earned his Ph.D. in Clinical Psychology. \u00a0Then, in 1928, he began working at the Rochester Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (DeCarvalho, 1991; Thorne, 2003).<\/p>\n<p>Rogers was immersed in his work in Rochester for 12 years. \u00a0He found that even the most elaborate theories made little sense when dealing with children who had suffered severe psychological damage after traveling through the courts and the social work systems. \u00a0So Rogers developed his own approach, and did his best to help them. \u00a0Many of his colleagues, including the director, had no particular therapeutic orientation:<\/p>\n<p>When I would try to see what I could do to alter their behavior, sometimes they would refuse to see me the next time. \u00a0I\u2019d have a hard time getting them to come from the detention home to my office, and that would cause me to think, \u201cWhat is it that I did that offended the child?\u201d \u00a0Well, usually it was overinterpretation, or getting too smart in analyzing the causes of behavior\u2026So we approached every situation with much more of a question of \u201cWhat can we do to help?\u201d rather than \u201cWhat is the mysterious cause of this behavior?\u201d or \u201cWhat theory does the child fit into?\u201d \u00a0It was a very good place for learning in that it was easy to be open to experience, and there was certainly no pressure to fit into any particular pattern of thought. (pg. 108; Rogers &amp; Russell, 2002)<\/p>\n<p>Eventually Rogers wrote a book outlining his work with children,\u00a0<em>The Clinical Treatment of the Problem Child<\/em>\u00a0(Rogers, 1939), which received excellent reviews. \u00a0He was offered a professorship at Ohio State University. \u00a0Beginning as a full professor gave Rogers a great deal of freedom, and he was frequently invited to give talks. \u00a0It has been suggested that one such talk, in December 1940, at the University of Minnesota, entitled \u201cNewer Concepts in Psychotherapy,\u201d was the official birthday of client-centered therapy. \u00a0Very popular with his students, Rogers was not so welcome amongst his colleagues. \u00a0Rogers believed that his work was particularly threatening to those colleagues who believed that only their own expertise could make psychotherapy effective. \u00a0After only 4 years, during which he published\u00a0<em>Counseling and Psychotherapy<\/em>\u00a0(Rogers, 1942), Rogers moved on to the University of Chicago, where he established the counseling center, wrote\u00a0<em>Client-Centered Therapy<\/em>\u00a0(Rogers, 1951) and contributed several chapters to\u00a0<em>Psychotherapy and Personality Change<\/em>\u00a0(Rogers &amp; Dymond, 1954), and in 1956 received a\u00a0<em>Distinguished Scientific Contribution Award<\/em>\u00a0from the American Psychological Association. \u00a0Then, in 1957, he accepted a joint appointment in psychiatry and psychology at the University of Wisconsin to study psychotic individuals. \u00a0Rogers had serious doubts about leaving Chicago, but felt that the joint appointment would allow him to make a dramatic contribution to psychotherapy. \u00a0It was a serious mistake. \u00a0He did not get along with his colleagues in the psychology department, whom he considered to be antagonistic, outdated, \u201crat-oriented,\u201d and distrustful of clinical psychology, and so he resigned. \u00a0He kept his appointment in the psychiatry department, however, and in 1961 published perhaps his most influential book,\u00a0<em>On Becoming a Person<\/em>\u00a0(Rogers, 1961).<\/p>\n<p>In 1963, Rogers moved to California to join the Western Behavioral Sciences Institute, at the invitation of one of his former students, Richard Farson. \u00a0This was a non-profit institute dedicated to the study of humanistically-oriented interpersonal relations. \u00a0Rogers was leery of making another major move, but eventually agreed. \u00a0He became very active in research on encounter groups and educational theory. \u00a0Five years later, when Farson left the institute, there was a change in its direction. \u00a0Rogers was unhappy with the changes, so he joined some colleagues in leaving and establishing the Center for Studies of the Person, where he remained until his death. \u00a0In his later years, Rogers wrote books on topics such as personal power and marriage (Rogers, 1972, 1977). \u00a0In 1980, he published\u00a0<em>A Way of Being<\/em>\u00a0(Rogers, 1980), in which he changed the terminology of his perspective from \u201cclient-centered\u201d to \u201cperson-centered.\u201d \u00a0With the assistance of his daughter Natalie, who had studied with Abraham Maslow, he held many group workshops on life, family, business, education, and world peace. \u00a0He traveled to regions where tension and danger were high, including Poland, Russia, South Africa, and Northern Ireland. \u00a0In 1985 he brought together influential leaders of seventeen Central American countries for a peace conference in Austria. \u00a0The day he died, February 4, 1987, without knowing it, he had just been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize (DeCarvalho, 1991; Kirschenbaum, 1995; Thorne, 2003).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Placing Rogers in Context: \u00a0A Psychology 2,600 Years in the Making<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Carl Rogers was an extraordinary individual whose approach to psychology emphasized individuality. \u00a0Raised with a strong Christian faith, exposed to Eastern culture and spirituality in college, and then employed as a therapist for children, he came to value and respect each person he met. \u00a0Because of that respect for the ability of each person to grow, and the belief that we are innately driven toward actualization, Rogers began the distinctly humanistic approach to psychotherapy that became known as client-centered therapy.<\/p>\n<p>Taken together, client-centered therapy and self-actualization offer a far more positive approach to fostering the growth of each person than most other disciplines in psychology. \u00a0Unlike the existing approaches of psychoanalysis, which aimed to uncover problems from the past, or behavior therapies, which aimed to identify problem behaviors and control or \u201cfix\u201d them, client-centered therapy grew out of Rogers\u2019 simple desire to help his clients move forward in their lives. \u00a0Indeed, he had been trained as a psychoanalyst, but Rogers found the techniques unsatisfying, both in their goals and their ability to help the children he was working with at the time. \u00a0The seemingly hands-off approach of client-centered therapy fit well with a Taoist perspective, something Rogers had studied, discussed, and debated during his trip to China. \u00a0In\u00a0<em>A Way of Being<\/em>, Rogers (1980) quotes what he says is perhaps his favorite saying, one which sums up many of his deeper beliefs:<\/p>\n<p>If I keep from meddling with people, they take care of themselves,<br \/>\nIf I keep from commanding people, they behave themselves,<br \/>\nIf I keep from preaching at people, they improve themselves,<br \/>\nIf I keep from imposing on people, they become themselves.<br \/>\n<em>Lao Tsu, c600 B.C.<\/em>; Note: This translation differs somewhat from the one<br \/>\ncited in the References. \u00a0I have included the translation Rogers quoted,<br \/>\nsince the difference likely influenced his impression of this saying.<\/p>\n<p>Rogers, like Maslow, wanted to see psychology contribute far more to society than merely helping individuals with psychological distress. \u00a0He extended his sincere desire to help people learn to really communicate, with empathic understanding, to efforts aimed at bringing peace to the world. \u00a0On the day he died, he had just been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize. \u00a0Since a Nobel Prize cannot be awarded to someone who has died, he was not eligible to be nominated again. \u00a0If he had lived a few more years, he may well have received that award. \u00a0His later years were certainly committed to peace in a way that deserved such recognition.<\/p>\n<h4>Basic Concepts<\/h4>\n<p>Rogers believed that each of us lives in a constantly changing private world, which he called the\u00a0<strong>experiential field<\/strong>. \u00a0Everyone exists at the center of their own experiential field, and that field can only be fully understood from the perspective of the individual. \u00a0This concept has a number of important implications. \u00a0The individual\u2019s behavior must be understood as a reaction to their experience and perception of the field. \u00a0They react to it as an organized whole, and it is their reality. \u00a0The problem this presents for the therapist is that only the individual can really understand their experiential field. \u00a0This is quite different than the Freudian perspective, in which only the trained and objective psychoanalyst can break through the defense mechanisms and understand the basis of the patient\u2019s unconscious impulses. \u00a0One\u2019s perception of the experiential field is limited, however. \u00a0Rogers believed that certain impulses, or sensations, can only enter into the conscious field of experience under certain circumstances. \u00a0Thus, the experiential field is not a true reality, but rather an individual\u2019s potential reality (Rogers, 1951).<\/p>\n<p>The one basic tendency and striving of the individual is to actualize, maintain, and enhance the experiencing of the individual or, in other words, an\u00a0<strong>actualizing tendency<\/strong>. \u00a0Rogers borrowed the term\u00a0<strong>self-actualization<\/strong>, a term first used by Kurt Goldstein, to describe this basic striving.<\/p>\n<p>The tendency of normal life is toward activity and progress. \u00a0For the sick, the only form of self-actualization that remains is the maintenance of the existent state. \u00a0That, however, is not the tendency of the normal\u2026Under adequate conditions the normal organism seeks further activity. (pp. 162-163; Goldstein, 1934\/1995).<\/p>\n<p>For Rogers, self-actualization was a tendency to move forward, toward greater maturity and independence, or self-responsibility. \u00a0This development occurs throughout life, both biologically (the differentiation of a fertilized egg into the many organ systems of the body) and psychologically (self-government, self-regulation, socialization, even to the point of choosing life goals). \u00a0A key factor in understanding self-actualization is the experiential field. \u00a0A person\u2019s needs are defined, as well as limited, by their own potential for experience. \u00a0Part of this experiential field is an individual\u2019s emotions, feelings, and attitudes. \u00a0Therefore, who the individual is, their actual\u00a0<strong>self<\/strong>, is critical in determining the nature and course of their self-actualization (Rogers, 1951). \u00a0We will examine Maslow\u2019s work on self-actualization in more detail below.<\/p>\n<p>What then, is the self? \u00a0In Rogers\u2019 (1951) initial description of his theory of personality, the experiential field is described in four points, the self-actualizing tendency in three points, and the remaining eleven points attempt to define the self. \u00a0First and foremost, the self is a differentiated portion of the experiential field. \u00a0In other words, the self is that part of our private world that we identify as \u201cme,\u201d \u201cmyself,\u201d or \u201cI.\u201d \u00a0Beyond that, the self remains somewhat puzzling. \u00a0Can the self exist in isolation, outside of relationships that provide some context for the self? \u00a0Must the self be synonymous with the physical body? \u00a0As Rogers\u2019 pointed out, when our foot \u201cgoes to sleep\u201d from a lack of circulation, we view it as an object, not as a part of our self! \u00a0Despite these challenging questions, Rogers tried to define and describe the self.<\/p>\n<p>Rogers believed the self is formed in relation to others; it is an organized, fluid, yet consistent conceptual pattern of our experiential interactions with the environment and the values attached to those experiences. \u00a0These experiences are symbolized and incorporated into the structure of the self, and our behavior is guided largely by how well new experiences fit within that structure. \u00a0We may behave in ways inconsistent with the structure of our self, but when we do we will not \u201cown\u201d that behavior. \u00a0When experiences are so inconsistent that we cannot symbolize them, or fit them into the structure of our self, the potential for psychological distress arises. \u00a0On the other hand, when our concept of self is mature enough to incorporate all of our perceptions and experiences, and we can assimilate those experiences symbolically into our self, our psychological adjustment will be quite healthy. \u00a0Individuals who find it difficult to assimilate new and different experiences, those experiences that threaten the structure of the self, will develop an increasingly rigid\u00a0<strong>self-structure<\/strong>. \u00a0Healthy individuals, in contrast, will assimilate new experiences, their self-structure will change and continue to grow, and they will become more capable of understanding and accepting others as individuals (Rogers, 1951).<\/p>\n<p>The ability of individuals to make the choices necessary for actualizing their self-structure and to then fulfill those choices is what Rogers called\u00a0<strong>personal power<\/strong>\u00a0(Rogers, 1977). \u00a0He believed there are many self-actualized individuals revolutionizing the world by trusting their own power, without feeling a need to have \u201cpower over\u201d others. \u00a0They are also willing to foster the latent actualizing tendency in others. \u00a0We can easily see the influence of Alfred Adler here, both in terms of the creative power of the individual and seeking superiority within a healthy context of social interest. \u00a0<strong>Client-centered therapy<\/strong>\u00a0was based on making the context of personal power a clear strategy in the therapeutic relationship:<\/p>\n<p>\u2026the client-centered approach is a conscious renunciation and avoidance by the therapist of all control over, or decision-making for, the client. \u00a0It is the facilitation of self-ownership by the client and the strategies by which this can be achieved\u2026based on the premise that the human being is basically a trustworthy organism, capable of\u2026making constructive choices as to the next steps in life, and acting on those choices. (pp. 14-15; Rogers, 1977)<\/p>\n<p><strong>Discussion Question:<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0Rogers claimed that no one can really understand your experiential field. \u00a0Would you agree, or do you sometimes find that close friends or family members seem to understand you better than you understand yourself? \u00a0Are these relationships congruent?<\/p>\n<h4>Personality Development<\/h4>\n<p>Although Rogers described personality within the therapist-client relationship, the focus of his therapeutic approach was based on how he believed the person had arrived at a point in their life where they were suffering from psychological distress. \u00a0Therefore, the same issues apply to personality development as in therapy. \u00a0A very important aspect of personality development, according to Rogers, is the parent-child relationship. \u00a0The nature of that relationship, and whether it fosters self-actualization or impedes personal growth, determines the nature of the individual\u2019s personality and, consequently, their self-structure and psychological adjustment.<\/p>\n<p>A child begins life with an actualizing tendency. \u00a0As they experience life, and perceive the world around them, they may be supported in all things by those who care for them, or they may only be supported under certain conditions (e.g., if their behavior complies with strict rules). \u00a0As the child becomes self-aware, it develops a need for\u00a0<strong>positive regard<\/strong>. \u00a0When the parents offer the child\u00a0<strong>unconditional positive regard<\/strong>, the child continues moving forward in concert with its actualizing tendency. \u00a0So, when there is no discrepancy between the child\u2019s\u00a0<strong>self-regard<\/strong>\u00a0and its positive regard (from the parents), the child will grow up psychologically healthy and well-adjusted. \u00a0However, if the parents offer only\u00a0<strong>conditional positive regard<\/strong>, if they only support the child according the desires and rules of the parents, the child will develop\u00a0<strong>conditions of worth<\/strong>. \u00a0As a result of these conditions of worth, the child will begin to perceive their world selectively; they will avoid those experiences that do not fit with its goal of obtaining positive regard. \u00a0The child will begin to live the life of those who set the conditions of worth, rather than living its own life.<\/p>\n<p>As the child grows older, and more aware of its own condition in the world, their behavior will either fit within their own self-structure or not. \u00a0If they have received unconditional positive regard, such that their self-regard and positive regard are closely matched, they will experience\u00a0<strong>congruence<\/strong>. \u00a0In other words, their sense of self and their experiences in life will fit together, and the child will be relatively happy and well-adjusted. \u00a0But, if their sense of self and their ability to obtain positive regard do not match, the child will develop\u00a0<strong>incongruence<\/strong>. \u00a0Consider, for example, children playing sports. \u00a0That alone tells us that parents have established guidelines within which the children are expected to \u201cplay.\u201d \u00a0Then we have some children who are naturally athletic, and other children who are more awkward and\/or clumsy. \u00a0They may become quite athletic later in life, or not, but during childhood there are many different levels of ability as they grow. \u00a0If a parent expects their child to be the best player on the team, but the child simply isn\u2019t athletic, how does the parent react? \u00a0Do they support the child and encourage them to have fun, or do they pressure the child to perform better and belittle them when they can\u2019t? \u00a0Children are very good at recognizing who the better athletes are, and they know their place in the hierarchy of athletics, i.e., their athletic self-structure. \u00a0So if a parent demands dominance from a child who knows they just aren\u2019t that good, the child will develop incongruence. \u00a0Rogers believed, quite understandably, that such conditions are threatening to a child, and will activate defense mechanisms. \u00a0Over time, however, excessive or sudden and dramatic incongruence can lead to the breakdown and disorganization of the self-structure. \u00a0As a result, the individual is likely to experience psychological distress that will continue throughout life (Rogers, 1959\/1989).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Discussion Question:<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0Conditions of worth are typically first established in childhood, based on the relationship between a child and his or her parents. \u00a0Think about your relationship with your own parents and, if you have children, think about how you treat them. \u00a0Are most of the examples that come to mind unconditional positive regard, or conditional positive regard? \u00a0How has that affected your relationship with your parents and\/or your own children?<\/p>\n<p>Another way in which Rogers approached the idea of congruence and incongruence was based on an individual\u2019s dual concept of self. \u00a0There is, of course, the actual self-structure, or\u00a0<strong>real self<\/strong>. \u00a0In addition, there is also an\u00a0<strong>ideal self<\/strong>, much like the fictional finalism described by Adler or the idealized self-image described by Horney. \u00a0Incongruence develops when the real self falls far short of the accomplishment expected of the ideal self, when experience does not match the expectations of the self-structure (Rogers, 1951, 1959\/1989). \u00a0Once again, the relationship between parents and their children plays an important role in this development. \u00a0If parents expect too much, such as all A\u2019s every marking period in school, but the child just isn\u2019t academically talented, or if the parents expect their child to be the football team\u2019s quarterback, but the child isn\u2019t a good athlete, then the ideal self will remain out of reach. \u00a0Perhaps even worse, is when a child is physically or emotionally abused. \u00a0Such a child\u2019s ideal self may remain at a relatively low standard, but the real self may be so utterly depressed that incongruence is still the result. \u00a0An important aspect of therapy will be to provide a relationship in which a person in this unfortunate condition can experience the unconditional positive regard necessary to begin reintegrating the self-structure, such that the gap between the real self and the ideal self can begin to close, allowing the person to experience congruence in their life.<\/p>\n<p>What about individuals who have developed congruence, having received unconditional positive regard throughout development or having experienced successful client-centered therapy? \u00a0They become, according to Rogers (1961), a\u00a0<strong>fully functioning person<\/strong>. \u00a0He also said they lead a good life. \u00a0The good life is a process, not a state of being, and a direction, not a destination. \u00a0It requires psychological freedom, and is the natural consequence of being psychologically free to begin with. \u00a0Whether or not it develops naturally, thanks to a healthy and supportive environment in the home, or comes about as a result of successful therapy, there are certain characteristics of this process. \u00a0The fully functioning person is increasingly open to new experiences, they live fully in each moment, and they trust themselves more and more. \u00a0They become more able and more willing to experience all of their feelings, they are creative, they trust human nature, and they experience the richness of life. \u00a0The fully functioning person is not simply content, or happy, they are\u00a0<em>alive<\/em>:<\/p>\n<p>I believe it will become evident why, for me, adjectives such as happy, contented, blissful, enjoyable, do not seem quite appropriate to any general description of this process I have called the good life, even though the person in this process would experience each one of these feelings at appropriate times. \u00a0But the adjectives which seem more generally fitting are adjectives such as enriching, exciting, rewarding, challenging, meaningful. \u00a0This process\u2026involves the courage to be. \u00a0\u2026the deeply exciting thing about human beings is that when the individual is inwardly free, he chooses as the good life this process of becoming. (pp. 195-196; Rogers, 1961)<\/p>\n<p><strong>Discussion Question:<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0Rogers described self-actualized people as fully functioning persons who are living a good life. \u00a0Do you know anyone who seems to be a fully functioning person? \u00a0Are there aspects of their personality that you aspire to for yourself? \u00a0Does it seem difficult to be fully functioning, or does it seem to make life both easier and more enjoyable?<\/p>\n<p><strong>Connections Across Cultures: \u00a0Self-Realization as the<\/strong><br \/>\n<strong>Path to Being a Fully Functioning Person<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Rogers described an innate drive toward self-actualization, he talked about an ideal self, and he said that a fully functioning person lived a good life. \u00a0But what does this actually mean? \u00a0In the Western world we look for specific, tangible answers to such questions. \u00a0We want to know what the self-actualization drive is, we want to know which ideals, or virtues, are best or right, and we want to define a \u201cgood life.\u201d \u00a0All too often, we define a good life in terms of money, power, and possessions. \u00a0The Eastern world has, for thousands of years, emphasized a very different perspective. \u00a0They believe there is a natural order to life, and it is important that we let go of our need to explain the universe, and it is especially important that we let go of our need to own pieces of the universe. \u00a0In the\u00a0<em>Tao Te Ching<\/em>, Lao Tsu (c. 600 B.C.\/1989) writes:<\/p>\n<p>Something mysteriously formed,<br \/>\nBorn before heaven and earth.<br \/>\nIn the silence and the void,<br \/>\nStanding alone and unchanging,<br \/>\nEver present and in motion.<br \/>\nPerhaps it is the mother of ten thousand things.<br \/>\nI do not know its name,<br \/>\nCall it Tao.<br \/>\nFor lack of a better word, I call it great\u2026<\/p>\n<p>The greatest Virtue is to follow Tao and Tao alone\u2026<br \/>\nTao follows what is natural.<\/p>\n<p>At about the same time, some 2,600 years ago, the\u00a0<em>Bhagavad Gita<\/em>\u00a0was also written down (Mitchell, 2000). \u00a0In the second chapter one finds:<\/p>\n<p>When a man gives up all desires<br \/>\nThat emerge from the mind, and rests<br \/>\nContented in the Self by the Self,<br \/>\nHe is called a man of firm wisdom\u2026<\/p>\n<p>In the night of all beings, the wise man<br \/>\nSees only the radiance of the Self;<br \/>\nBut the sense-world where all beings wake,<br \/>\nFor him is as dark as night.<\/p>\n<p>In each of these sacred books, we are taught that there is something deeper than ourselves that permeates the universe, but it is beyond our comprehension. \u00a0It is only when we stop attempting to explain it, our way of trying to control it, and be content to just be ourselves, that we can actually attain that goal. \u00a0To achieve this goal seems to require the absence of conditions of worth. \u00a0If someone has been given unconditional positive regard throughout their life, they will be content to live that life as it is. \u00a0Rogers was well aware of this challenge, and he described the good life as a process, not something that you could actually get, but something that you had to \u201cBe.\u201d \u00a0Still, is it possible that a fully functioning person might have the insight necessary to understand the essence of the universe? \u00a0Not according to Swami Sri Yukteswar:<\/p>\n<p>Man possesses eternal faith and believes intuitively in the existence of a Substance, of which the objects of sense \u2013 sound, touch, sight, taste, and smell, the component parts of this visible world \u2013 are but properties. \u00a0As man identifies himself with his material body, composed of the aforesaid properties, he is able to comprehend by these imperfect organs these properties only, and not the Substance to which these properties belong. \u00a0The eternal Father, God, the only Substance in the universe, is therefore not comprehensible by man of this material world, unless he becomes divine by lifting his self above this creation of Darkness or\u00a0<em>Maya<\/em>. \u00a0See Hebrews 11:1 and John 8:28.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cNow faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.\u201d<br \/>\n\u201cThen said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the son of man, then shall ye know that I am he.\u201d<br \/>\n<em>Jnanavatar Swami Sri Yukteswar Giri, 1894\/1990<\/em><\/p>\n<p>So whether we believe in God, Tao, an eternal Self, a mortal Self, or merely an actualizing tendency, for thousands of years there has been the belief, amongst many people, that our lives are about more than just being alive for a limited period of time. \u00a0And it is in the recognition and acceptance, indeed the embracing, of that something more, even if we can\u2019t conceive it in our conscious mind, that we find and live a good life. \u00a0When Paramahansa Yogananda, a direct disciple of Swami Yukteswar, came to the United States in 1920 to establish a permanent Yoga society, it was suggested that he name his society God-Realization. \u00a0However, since he believed life is about realizing (or actualizing, in psychological terms) our selves, he established his organization as the Self-Realization Fellowship (Yogananda, 1946).<\/p>\n<p>Self-realization, in the context of Yoga, refers to becoming aware of one\u2019s connection to the spark of divinity that exists within us, which may well be the source of our actualizing tendency. \u00a0It is not the same as the sense of \u201cI\u201d or \u201cme\u201d that we normally think of. \u00a0After all, are we our body or our mind? \u00a0Consider the body. \u00a0Is it the body we were born with, or the body we have now? \u00a0Is our mind what we are thinking now, or what we were thinking 2 years ago? \u00a0Both the body and the mind are transient, but the Self continues. \u00a0It is that Self that Yogis, Buddhists, and Taoists seek to realize, and it may well be that Self which seeks its own actualization (separate from the consciousness created by the brain underlying our mind; see Feuerstein, 2003; Kabat-Zinn, 1994). \u00a0This is also the Self of Being and transcendence, as described by Maslow.<\/p>\n<h4>Social Relationships and Marriage<\/h4>\n<p>Social and personal relationships were very important to Rogers, both in therapy and in everyday life. \u00a0During each moment, we have our awareness (or consciousness), our experience (our perception of what is happening), and our communication (our relational behavior). \u00a0For the fully functioning person, there is congruence between each of these phenomena. \u00a0Unfortunately, we tend to be a poor judge of our own congruence. \u00a0For example, if someone becomes angry with another person at a meeting or in a therapy group, they may remain unaware of their anger, even though it may be quite obvious to everyone else in the room. \u00a0Thus, our relationship with others can reflect the true nature of our own personality, and the degree to which we are congruent. \u00a0If others are congruent, and therefore are willing to talk to us openly and honestly, it will encourage us to become more congruent and, consequently, more psychologically healthy (Rogers, 1961, 1980). \u00a0Curiously, the reason this became so important to Rogers was the lack of such meaningful relationships in his own life. \u00a0Because his family followed strict, fundamentalist rules, they discouraged relationships with people outside their family. \u00a0The consequences were rather disturbing for Rogers:<\/p>\n<p>\u2026the attitudes toward persons outside our large family can be summed up schematically in this way: \u00a0\u201cOther persons behave in dubious ways which we do not approve in our family. \u00a0Many of them play cards, go to movies, smoke, dance, drink, and engage in other activities, some unmentionable. \u00a0So the best thing to do is to be tolerant of them, since they may not know better, but to keep away from any close communication with them and to live your life within the family\u2026\u201d<\/p>\n<p>I could sum up these boyhood years by saying that anything I would today regard as a close and communicative interpersonal relationship with another was completely lacking during that period\u2026I was peculiar, a loner, with very little place or opportunity for a place in the world of persons. \u00a0I was socially incompetent in any but superficial contacts. \u00a0My fantasies during this period were definitely bizarre, and probably would be classed as schizoid by a diagnostician, but fortunately I never came in contact with a psychologist. (pp. 28-30; Rogers, 1980)<\/p>\n<p>As noted above, the development of healthy relationships takes place whenever one person in the relationship is congruent. \u00a0Their congruence encourages the other person to be more congruent, which supports the continued open communication on behalf of the first person. \u00a0This interplay goes back and forth, encouraging continued and growing congruence in the relationship. \u00a0As we will see below, this is basically the therapeutic situation, in which the therapist is expected to be congruent. \u00a0However, it certainly does not require a trained therapist, since it occurs naturally in any situation in which one person is congruent from the beginning of the relationship.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most important, and hopefully meaningful, relationships in anyone\u2019s life is marriage. \u00a0Rogers was married for 55 years, and as the end of his wife\u2019s life approached he poured out his love to her with a depth that astonished him (Rogers, 1980). \u00a0As relationships became more and more meaningful to him, he wanted to study the extraordinary relationships that become more than temporary. \u00a0Although this is not necessarily synonymous with marriage, it most typically is. \u00a0So he conducted a series of informal interviews with people who were, or had been, in lengthy relationships (at least 3 years). \u00a0In comparing the relationships that seemed successful, as compared to those that were unhappy or had already come to an end, Rogers identified four factors that he believed were most important for long-term, healthy relationships: \u00a0dedication or commitment, communication, the dissolution of roles, and becoming a separate self (Rogers, 1972).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Dedication, Commitment<\/strong>: \u00a0Marriage is challenging: \u00a0\u00a0love seems to fade, vows are forgotten or set aside, religious rules are ignored (e.g., \u201cWhat therefore God has joined together, let no man put asunder.\u201d; \u00a0Matthew 19:6; Holy Bible, 1962). \u00a0Rogers believed that in order for a relationship to last, each person must be dedicated to their partnership. \u00a0They must commit themselves to working together throughout the changing process of their relationship, which is enriching their love and their life.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Communication<\/strong>: \u00a0Communication encompasses much of human behavior, and it can be both subtle and complex. \u00a0Communication itself is not a good thing, since many negative and hurtful things can be communicated. \u00a0However, Rogers believed that we need to communicate persistent feeling, whether positive or negative, so that they don\u2019t overwhelm us and come out in inappropriate ways. \u00a0It is always important to express such communication in terms of your own thoughts and feelings, rather than projecting those feelings onto others (especially in angry and\/or accusatory ways). \u00a0This process involves risk, but one must be willing to risk the end of a relationship in order to allow it to grow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Dissolution of Roles<\/strong>: \u00a0Culture provides many expectations for the nature of relationships, whether it be dating or something more permanent like marriage. \u00a0According to Rogers, obeying the cultural rules seems to contradict the idea of a growing and maturing relationship, a relationship that is moving forward (toward actualization). \u00a0However, when individuals make an intentional choice to fulfill cultural expectations, because they\u00a0<em>want<\/em>\u00a0to, then the relationship can certainly be actualizing for them.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Becoming a Separate Self<\/strong>: \u00a0Rogers believed that \u201ca\u00a0<em>living<\/em>\u00a0partnership is composed of two people, each of whom owns, respect, and develops his or her own selfhood\u201d (pg. 206; Rogers, 1972). \u00a0While it may seem contradictory that becoming an individual should enhance a relationship, as each person becomes more real and more open they can bring these qualities into the relationship. \u00a0As a result, the relationship can contribute to the continued growth of each person.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Discussion Question:<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0Consider Rogers\u2019 criteria for a successful marriage, which begins with commitment to the marriage. \u00a0Given the divorce rate (which studies now place at over 60%), and ongoing political debates about what marriage is or is not, what is your opinion of the status of marriage in society today?<\/p>\n<h4>Client-Centered and Person-Centered Therapy<\/h4>\n<p>Central to Rogers\u2019 view of psychotherapy is the relationship between the therapist and the client, and we must again emphasize the distinction between a client and a patient. \u00a0This involves shifting the emphasis in therapy from a psychologist\/psychiatrist who can \u201cfix\u201d the patient to the client themselves, since only the client can truly understand their own experiential field. \u00a0The therapist must provide a warm, safe environment in which the client feels free to express whatever attitude they experience in the same way that they perceive it. \u00a0At the same time, the client experiences the therapist as someone temporarily divested of their own self, in their complete desire to understand the client. \u00a0The therapist can then accurately and objectively reflect the thoughts, feelings, perceptions, confusions, ambivalences, etc., of the client back to the client. \u00a0In this open, congruent, and supportive environment, the client is able to begin the process of reorganizing and reintegrating their self-structure, and living congruently within that self-structure (Rogers, 1951).<\/p>\n<p>In 1957, Rogers published an article entitled\u00a0<em>The Necessary and Sufficient Conditions of Therapeutic Personality Change<\/em>\u00a0(Rogers, 1957\/1989). \u00a0The list is fairly short and straightforward:<\/p>\n<p>1. The client and the therapist must be in psychological contact.<\/p>\n<p>2. The client must be in a state of incongruence, being vulnerable or anxious.<\/p>\n<p>3. The therapist must be congruent in the relationship.<\/p>\n<p>4. The therapist must experience unconditional positive regard for the client.<\/p>\n<p>5. The therapist must experience empathic understanding of the client\u2019s frame of reference and endeavor to communicate this experience to the client.<\/p>\n<p>6. The client must perceive, at least to a minimal degree, the therapist\u2019s empathic understanding and unconditional positive regard.<\/p>\n<p>According to Rogers, there is nothing else that is required; if these conditions are met over a period of time, there will be constructive personality change. \u00a0What Rogers considered more remarkable are those factors that do\u00a0<em>not<\/em>\u00a0seem necessary for positive therapeutic change. \u00a0For example, these conditions do not apply to one type of client, but to all clients, and they are not unique to client-centered therapy, but apply in all types of therapy. \u00a0The relationship between the therapist and client is also not unique, these factors hold true in any interpersonal relationship. \u00a0And most surprisingly, these conditions do not require any special training on the part of therapist, or even an accurate diagnosis of the client\u2019s psychological problems! \u00a0Any program designed for the purpose of encouraging constructive change in the personality structure and behavior of individuals, whether educational, military, correctional, or industrial, can benefit from these conditions and use them as a measure of the effectiveness of the program (Rogers, 1957).<\/p>\n<p>Can any one of these conditions be considered more important than the others? \u00a0Although they are all necessary, Rogers came to believe that the critical factor may be the therapist\u2019s\u00a0<strong>empathic understanding<\/strong>\u00a0of the client (Rogers, 1980). \u00a0The Dalai Lama (2001) has said that empathy is an essential first step toward a compassionate heart. \u00a0It brings us closer to others, and allows us to recognize the depth of their pain. \u00a0According to Rogers, empathy refers to entering the private world of the client, and moving about within it without making any judgments. \u00a0It is essential to set aside one\u2019s own views and values, so that the other person\u2019s world may be entered without prejudice. \u00a0Not just anyone can accomplish this successfully:<\/p>\n<p>In some sense it means that you lay aside your self; this can only be done by persons who are secure enough in themselves that they know they will not get lost in what may turn out to be the strange or bizarre world of the other, and that they can comfortably return to their own world when they wish. (pg. 143; Rogers, 1980)<\/p>\n<p>Finally, let us consider group therapy situations. \u00a0Within a group, all of the factors described above hold true. \u00a0Rogers, who late in his career was becoming more and more interested in the growth of all people, including those reasonably well-adjusted and mature to begin with, became particularly interested in\u00a0<strong>T-groups<\/strong>\u00a0and\u00a0<strong>encounter groups<\/strong>. \u00a0These groups were developed following the proposition by Kurt Lewin that modern society was overlooking the importance of training in human relations skills (the \u201cT\u201d in T-group stands for \u201ctraining\u201d). \u00a0Encounter groups were quite similar to T-groups, except that there was a greater emphasis on personal growth and improved interpersonal communication through an experiential process. \u00a0Each group has a leader, or facilitator, who fosters and encourages open communication. \u00a0The group serves as a reflection of the congruence, or lack thereof, in the communication of whoever is currently expressing themselves. \u00a0As a result, the group hopefully moves toward congruence, and the subsequent personal growth and actualization of the individual (Rogers, 1970).<\/p>\n<p>Given the usefulness of T-groups and encounter in a variety of settings, as well as the importance of continued personal growth and actualization for the well-adjusted as well as those suffering psychological distress, Rogers shifted his focus from simply client-centered therapy to a more universal\u00a0<strong>person-centered approach<\/strong>, which encompasses client-centered therapy, student-centered teaching, and group-centered leadership (Rogers, 1980; see also Rogers &amp; Roethlisberger, 1952\/1993). \u00a0Rogers believed that all people have within them vast resources for self-understanding and for changing their self-concepts, attitudes, and behaviors. \u00a0In all relationships, whether therapist-client, parent-child, teacher-student, leader-group, employer-employee, etc., there are three elements that can foster personal growth: \u00a0genuineness or congruence, acceptance or caring, and empathic understanding. \u00a0When these elements are fostered in any setting, \u201cthere is greater freedom to be the true, whole person.\u201d \u00a0The implications go far beyond individual relationships. \u00a0We live in what seems to be an increasingly dangerous world. \u00a0Globalism has brought with it global tension and conflict. \u00a0However, Rogers argued that a person-centered approach would help to ease intercultural tension, by helping each of us to learn to appreciate and understand others. \u00a0Whether the cultural differences are political, racial, ethnic, economic, whatever, as more leaders become person-centered there is the possibility for future growth of intercultural understanding and cooperation (Rogers, 1977).<\/p>\n<h3><strong>Abraham Maslow and Holistic-Dynamic Psychology<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p>Maslow stands alongside Rogers as one of the founders of humanistic psychology. \u00a0Although he began his career working with two of the most famous experimental psychologists in America, he was profoundly influenced by the events that led into World War II. \u00a0He became devoted to studying the more virtuous aspects of personality, and he may be viewed as one of the founders of positive psychology. \u00a0Well-known primarily for his work on self-actualization, Maslow also had a significant impact on the field of management. \u00a0His fame in both psychology and business makes him a candidate for being, perhaps, the best-known psychologist of all time (Freud is certainly more famous, but remember that he was a psychiatrist). \u00a0According to Maslow, his\u00a0<strong>holistic-dynamic theory<\/strong>\u00a0of personality was a blend of theories that had come before his:<\/p>\n<p>This theory is, I think, in the functionalist tradition of James and Dewey, and is fused with the holism of Wertheimer, Goldstein, and Gestalt psychology, and with the dynamicism of Freud, Fromm, Horney, Reich, Jung, and Adler. \u00a0This integration or synthesis may be called a holistic-dynamic theory. (pg. 35; Maslow, 1970)<\/p>\n<h4>Brief Biography of Abraham Maslow<\/h4>\n<p>Abraham H. Maslow was born on April 1, 1908 in Brooklyn, New York, the first of seven children. \u00a0His father, Samuel, had left Kiev, Russia at just 14 years old. \u00a0When Samuel Maslow arrived in America he had no money and did not speak English. \u00a0Samuel Maslow spent a few years in Philadelphia, doing odd jobs and learning the language, before moving to New York City, where he married his first cousin Rose and began a cooperage business (a cooper builds and repairs barrels). \u00a0Samuel and Rose Maslow did not have a happy marriage, and Abraham Maslow was particularly sensitive to this fact. \u00a0Maslow resented his father\u2019s frequent absences, and apparently hated his mother. \u00a0His mother was a superstitious woman, who severely punished Maslow for even minor misbehavior by threatening him with God\u2019s wrath. \u00a0Maslow developed an intense distrust of religion, and was proud to consider himself an atheist (Gabor, 2000; Hoffman, 1988; Maddi &amp; Costa, 1972).<\/p>\n<p>Maslow\u2019s childhood was no better outside the home. \u00a0Anti-Semitism was rampant in New York. \u00a0Many teachers were cruel, and he overheard them say nasty things about him. \u00a0He had no friends, and there were anti-Semitic gangs that would find and beat up Jewish children. \u00a0At one point he decided to join a Jewish gang for protection, but he didn\u2019t have the \u201cright\u201d attitude:<\/p>\n<p>I wanted to be a member of the gang, but I couldn\u2019t: \u00a0they rejected me because I couldn\u2019t kill cats\u2026We\u2019d stake out a cat on a [clothesline] and stand back so many paces and throw rocks at it and kill it.<\/p>\n<p>And the other thing was to throw rocks at the girls on the corner. \u00a0Now I knew that the girls liked it, and yet I couldn\u2019t throw rocks at girls and I couldn\u2019t kill cats, so I was ruled out of the gang, and I could never be the gangster that I wanted to become. (pg. 4; Maslow, cited in Hoffman, 1988)<\/p>\n<p>With six more children joining the family, one every couple of years, the family was constantly moving and, following the troubling death of one of his little sisters (Maslow blamed her illness, in part, on their mother\u2019s neglect), Maslow became a very unhappy and shy child. \u00a0He also thought he was terribly ugly, something his father said openly at a large family gathering! \u00a0Perhaps worst of all, he felt profoundly strange and different than other children, largely because he was so intellectual. \u00a0Maslow reconciled with his father later in life. \u00a0During the depression, Samuel Maslow lost his business. \u00a0By that time he had divorced Maslow\u2019s mother, Rose, and he moved in with his son. \u00a0The two became close, and after Samuel Maslow died, his son remembered him fondly. \u00a0Maslow never forgave his mother, however. \u00a0Some of the childhood stories he related were shockingly cruel. \u00a0Once, he had searched through second-hand record shops for some special 78-RPM records. \u00a0When he failed to put them away soon after returning home, his mother stomped them into pieces on the living room floor. \u00a0Another time, Maslow brought home two abandoned kittens he had found. \u00a0When his mother caught him feeding them a saucer of milk, she grabbed the kittens and smashed their heads against a wall until they were dead! \u00a0Later in life, he refused to even attend her funeral.<\/p>\n<p>What I had reacted to and totally hated and rejected was not only her physical appearance, but also her values and world view\u2026I\u2019ve always wondered where my utopianism, ethical stress, humanism, stress on kindness, love, friendship, and all the rest came from. \u00a0I knew certainly of the direct consequences of having no mother-love. \u00a0But the whole thrust of my life-philosophy and all my research and theorizing also has its roots in a hatred for and revulsion against everything she stood for. (pg. 9; Maslow cited in Hoffman, 1988)<\/p>\n<p>Maslow spent much of his childhood reading, and despite the treatment he received from many of his prejudiced teachers, he loved to learn. \u00a0After high school Maslow won a scholarship to Cornell University, but encountered pervasive anti-Semitism throughout his first year. \u00a0So he transferred to City College, where he first studied the work of behavioral scientists like John B. Watson. \u00a0He was impressed by Watson\u2019s desire to use the newly created science of behaviorism to fight social problems, such as racial and ethnic discrimination. \u00a0At the same time, however, Maslow had fallen in love with his first cousin Bertha Goodman, a relationship his parents strongly opposed. \u00a0So Maslow left for the University of Wisconsin (Gabor, 2000; Hoffman, 1988; Maddi &amp; Costa, 1972). \u00a0Bertha Goodman followed, and they were soon married. \u00a0Marriage boosted Maslow\u2019s self-esteem, and provided him with a sense of purpose in life. \u00a0He later said that \u201clife didn\u2019t really start for me until I got married and went to Wisconsin\u201d (pg. 128; cited in Maddi &amp; Costa, 1972).<\/p>\n<p>In Wisconsin, Maslow studied the behavior of primates under the supervision of the renowned Harry Harlow (most famous for his studies on\u00a0<strong>contact comfort<\/strong>). \u00a0One day, while watching some monkeys seemingly enjoy munching on peanuts and other treats, Maslow recognized that appetite and hunger are two different things. \u00a0Thus, motivation must be comprised of separate elements as well. \u00a0In another study, Maslow tried to address the different aspects of Freud and Adler\u2019s psychodynamic perspectives by observing dominance behavior amongst the monkeys. \u00a0His colleagues and professors, however, had little interest in the psychoanalytic science that they considered to be a European endeavor. \u00a0Maslow completed his Ph.D. at Wisconsin in 1934, and then returned to New York. \u00a0He earned a position at Columbia University with the renowned Edward Thorndike, and began studying the relative contributions of heredity and environment on social behavior, as part of a project to study factors involved in poverty, illiteracy, and crime. \u00a0As a curious side note, Thorndike had also developed an IQ test; Maslow scored 195 on this test, one of the highest scores ever recorded. \u00a0During this time at Columbia University, Maslow also began relationships with many of the psychologists, sociologists, and anthropologists who had fled Nazi Germany. \u00a0He was very impressed with Max Wertheimer, one of the founders of Gestalt psychology, and who helped to lay the foundation for positive psychology:<\/p>\n<p>\u201cAre there not tendencies in men and in children to be kind, to deal sincerely [and] justly with the other fellow? \u00a0Are these nothing but internalized rules on the basis of compulsion and fear?\u201d he asked rhetorically. \u00a0(pg. 159; Wertheimer, cited in Gabor, 2000)<\/p>\n<p>Maslow was one of the first students to study with Alfred Adler in America, being particularly impressed with Adler\u2019s work helping academically-challenged children to succeed despite their low IQ scores. \u00a0Maslow also studied with Erich Fromm, Karen Horney, and Ruth Benedict. \u00a0Benedict was an anthropologist who encouraged Maslow to gain some field experience. \u00a0She sponsored a grant application that Maslow received to study the Blackfoot Indians. \u00a0During the summer of 1938, Maslow examined the dominance and emotional security of the Blackfoot Indians. \u00a0He was impressed by their culture, and recognized what he believed was an innate need to experience a sense of purpose in life, a sense of meaning. \u00a0A few years later, shortly after the beginning of World War II, Maslow had an epiphany regarding psychology\u2019s failure to understand the true nature of people. \u00a0He devoted the rest of his life to the study of a hopeful psychology (Gabor, 2000; Hoffman, 1988; Maddi &amp; Costa, 1972).<\/p>\n<p>Maslow taught for a few years at Brooklyn College, and also served as the plant manager for the Maslow Cooperage Corporation (from 1947-1949). \u00a0In 1951 he was appointed Professor and Chair of the Department of Psychology at Brandeis University, where he conducted the research and wrote the books for which he is most famous. \u00a0By the late 1960s, Maslow had become disillusioned with academic life. \u00a0He had suffered a heart attack in 1966, and seemed somewhat disconnected from the very department he had helped to form. \u00a0In 1969, however, he accepted a four year grant from the Laughlin Foundation, primarily to study the philosophy of democracy, economics, and ethics as influenced by humanistic psychology. \u00a0He had been troubled by what he viewed as a loss of faith in American values, and he was greatly enjoying his time working in California. \u00a0He also attended management seminars at the Saga Corporation, urging the participants to commit themselves to humanistic management. \u00a0One day in June, 1970, he was jogging slowly when he suffered a massive heart attack. \u00a0He was already dead by the time his wife rushed over to him (Gabor, 2000; Hoffman, 1988; Maddi &amp; Costa, 1972). \u00a0He was only 62 years old. \u00a0Shortly after his death, the\u00a0<em>International Study Project<\/em>\u00a0of Menlo Park, CA published a memorial volume in tribute to Abraham Maslow (International Study Project, 1972).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Placing Maslow in Context: \u00a0Beyond Humanistic Psychology<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Whereas Carl Rogers is often thought of as the founder of humanistic psychology, in large part because of his emphasis on psychotherapy, it was Maslow who studied in great detail the most significant theoretical aspect of it: \u00a0self-actualization. \u00a0In addition to studying self-actualization, he applied it both in psychology and beyond. \u00a0His application of self-actualization to management continued the classic relationship between psychology and business (which began with John B. Watson and his application of psychological principles to advertising). \u00a0Unfortunately, Maslow died just as he was beginning to study his proposed fourth force: \u00a0transpersonal psychology. \u00a0Transpersonal psychology offered a connection between psychology and many of the Eastern philosophies associated with Yoga and Buddhism, and also provided a foundation for the study of positive psychology.<\/p>\n<p>Maslow\u2019s interest in business and management has quite possibly led to his being the most famous psychologist of all time, since he is well-known in both psychology and business. \u00a0If he had continued being a vocal advocate for transpersonal psychology (if not for his untimely death at an early age), given today\u2019s growing interest in Eastern philosophy and psychology and the establishment of positive psychology as a goal for the field of psychology by former APA President Martin Seligman, Maslow may well have become even more famous. \u00a0It is interesting to note that someone so truly visionary seems to have become that way as a result of studying people whom he felt were themselves self-actualized. \u00a0If positive psychology, the psychology of virtue and values, becomes the heir of Maslow\u2019s goal, it should become a significant force in the field of psychology. \u00a0That will be Maslow\u2019s true legacy.<\/p>\n<h4>The Importance of Values in the Science of Psychology<\/h4>\n<p>A common criticism leveled against many personality theorists is that they have not confirmed their theories in a strict, scientific manner. \u00a0When one goes so far as to consider\u00a0<strong>values<\/strong>, which are typically associated with religious morality, there is even greater resistance on the part of those who would have psychology become \u201ctruly\u201d scientific to consider such matters worthy of examination. \u00a0However, Maslow felt that:<\/p>\n<p>Both orthodox science and orthodox religion have been institutionalized and frozen into a mutually excluding dichotomy\u2026One consequence is that they are both pathologized, split into sickness, ripped apart into a crippled half-science and a crippled half-religion\u2026As a result\u2026the student who becomes a scientist automatically gives up a great deal of life, especially its richest portions. (pg. 119; Maslow, 1966)<\/p>\n<p>Consequently, Maslow urged that we need to be fully aware of our values at all times, and aware of how our values influence us in our study of psychology. \u00a0Although people approach the world in common ways, they also pay selective attention to what is happening, and they reshuffle the events occurring around them according to their own interests, needs, desires, fears, etc. \u00a0Consequently, Maslow believed that paying attention to human values, particularly to an individual\u2019s values, actually helps the psychological scientist achieve the goal of clearly understanding human behavior (Maslow, 1970). \u00a0In a similar vein, when Maslow co-authored an abnormal psychology text early in his career, he included a chapter on normal psychology. \u00a0His description of the characteristics of a healthy, normal personality provides an interesting foreshadowing of his research on self-actualization (Maslow &amp; Mittelmann, 1941).<\/p>\n<p>Maslow felt so strongly about the loss of values in our society that he helped to organize a conference and then served as editor for a book entitled\u00a0<em>New Knowledge in Human Values<\/em>\u00a0(Maslow, 1959). \u00a0In the preface, Maslow laments that \u201c\u2026the ultimate disease of our time is valuelessness\u2026this state is more crucially dangerous than ever before in history\u2026\u201d (pg. vii; Maslow, 1959). \u00a0Maslow does suggest, however, that something can be done about this loss of values, if only people will try. \u00a0In the book, he brought together an interesting variety of individuals, including: \u00a0Kurt Goldstein, a well-known neurophysiologist who studied the holistic function of healthy vs. brain-damaged patients and who coined the term self-actualization; D. T. Suzuki, a renowned Zen Buddhist scholar; and Paul Tillich, a highly respected existential theologian (who had a direct and significant influence on the career of Rollo May). \u00a0There are also chapters by Gordon Allport and Erich Fromm. \u00a0In his own chapter, Maslow concludes:<\/p>\n<p>If we wish to help humans to become more fully human, we must realize not only that they try to realize themselves but that they are also reluctant or afraid or unable to do so. \u00a0Only by fully appreciating this dialectic between sickness and health can we help to tip the balance in favor of health. (pg. 135; Maslow, 1959)<\/p>\n<p><strong>Discussion Question:<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0Maslow believed that values are very important, not only in the study of psychology, but in society as well. \u00a0Do you agree? \u00a0When politicians or religious leaders talk about values, do you think they represent meaningful, true values, or do they just support the values that are an advantage to their own goal or the goals of their political party or church?<\/p>\n<h4>The Hierarchy of Needs<\/h4>\n<p>Maslow\u2019s is undoubtedly best known for his\u00a0<strong>hierarchy of needs<\/strong>. \u00a0Developed within the context of a theory of human motivation, Maslow believed that human behavior is driven and guided by a set of\u00a0<strong>basic needs<\/strong>: \u00a0<strong>physiological needs, safety needs, belongingness and love needs, esteem needs,<\/strong>\u00a0and the\u00a0<strong>need for self-actualization<\/strong>. \u00a0It is generally accepted that individuals must move through the hierarchy in order, satisfying the needs at each level before one can move on to a higher level. \u00a0The reason for this is that lower needs tend to occupy the mind if they remain unsatisfied. \u00a0How easy is it to work or study when you are really hungry or thirsty? \u00a0But Maslow did not consider the hierarchy to be rigid. \u00a0For example, he encountered some people for whom self-esteem was more important than love, individuals suffering from antisocial personality disorder seem to have a permanent loss of the need for love, or if a need has been satisfied for a long time it may become less important. \u00a0As lower needs are becoming satisfied, though not yet fully satisfied, higher needs may begin to present themselves. \u00a0And of course there are sometimes multiple determinants of behavior, making the relationship between a given behavior and a basic need difficult to identify (Maslow, 1943\/1973; Maslow, 1970).<\/p>\n<p>The physiological needs are based, in part, on the concept of\u00a0<strong>homeostasis<\/strong>, the natural tendency of the body to maintain critical biological levels of essential elements or conditions, such as water, salt, energy, and body temperature. \u00a0Sexual activity, though not essential for the individual, is biologically necessary for the human species to survive. \u00a0Maslow described the physiological needs as the most\u00a0<strong>prepotent<\/strong>. \u00a0In other words, if a person is lacking everything in life, having failed to satisfy physiological, safety, belongingness and love, and esteem needs, their consciousness will most like be consumed with their desire for food and water. \u00a0As the lowest and most clearly biological of the needs, these are also the most animal-like of our behavior. \u00a0In Western culture, however, it is rare to find someone who is actually starving. \u00a0So when we talk about being hungry, we are really talking about an appetite, rather than real hunger (Maslow, 1943\/1973; Maslow, 1970). \u00a0Many Americans are fascinated by stories such as those of the ill-fated Donner party, trapped in the Sierra Nevada mountains during the winter of 1846-1847, and the Uruguayan soccer team whose plane crashed in the Andes mountains in 1972. \u00a0In each case, either some or all of the survivors were forced to cannibalize those who had died. \u00a0As shocking as such stories are, they demonstrate just how powerful our physiological needs can be.<\/p>\n<p>The safety needs can easily be seen in young children. \u00a0They are easily startled or frightened by loud noises, flashing lights, and rough handling. \u00a0They can become quite upset when other family members are fighting, since it disrupts the feeling of safety usually associated with the home. \u00a0According to Maslow, many adult neurotics are like children who do not feel safe. \u00a0From another perspective, that of Erik Erikson, children and adults raised in such an environment do not trust the environment to provide for their needs. \u00a0Although it can be argued that few people in America seriously suffer from a lack of satisfying physiological needs, there are many people who live unsafe lives. \u00a0For example, inner city crime, abusive spouses and parents, incurable diseases like HIV\/AIDS, all present life threatening dangers to many people on a daily basis.<\/p>\n<p>One place where we expect our children to be safe is in school. \u00a0However, as we saw in the last chapter (in the section on the martial arts), 160,000 children each day are too frightened to attend school (Nathan, 2005). \u00a0Juvonen et al. (2006) looked at the effects of ethnic diversity on children\u2019s perception of safety in urban middle schools (Grade 6). \u00a0They surveyed approximately 2,000 students in 99 classrooms in the greater Los Angeles area. \u00a0The ethnicity of the students in this study was 46 percent Latino (primarily of Mexican origin), 29 percent African American, 9 percent Asian (primarily East Asian), 9 percent Caucasian, and 7 percent multiracial. \u00a0When a given classroom, or a given school, is more ethnically diverse, both African American and Latino students felt safer, were harassed less by peers, felt less lonely, and they had higher levels of self-worth (even when the authors controlled for differences in academic engagement). \u00a0Thus, it appears that ethnic diversity in schools leads toward satisfaction of the need for safety, at least in one important area of a child\u2019s life. \u00a0Unfortunately, most minority students continue to be educated in schools that are largely ethnically segregated (Juvonen, et al., 2006).<\/p>\n<p>Throughout the evolution of the human species we found safety primarily within our family, tribal group, or our community. \u00a0It was within those groups that we shared the hunting and gathering that provided food. \u00a0Once the physiological and safety needs have been fairly well satisfied, according to Maslow, \u201cthe person will feel keenly, as never before, the absence of friends, or a sweetheart, or a wife, or children\u201d (Maslow, 1970). \u00a0Although there is little scientific confirmation of the belongingness and love needs, many therapists attribute much of human suffering to society\u2019s thwarting of the need for love and affection. \u00a0Most notable among personality theorists who addressed this issue was Wilhelm Reich. \u00a0An important aspect of love and affection is sex. \u00a0Although sex is often considered a physiological need, given its role in procreation, sex is what Maslow referred to as a multidetermined behavior. \u00a0In other words, it serves both a physiological role (procreation) and a belongingness\/love role (the tenderness and\/or passion of the physical side of love). \u00a0Maslow was also careful to point out that love needs involve both giving and receiving love in order for them to be fully satisfied (Maslow, 1943\/1973; Maslow, 1970).<\/p>\n<p>Maslow believed that all people desire a stable and firmly based high evaluation of themselves and others (at least the others who comprise their close relationships). \u00a0This need for self-esteem, or self-respect, involves two components. \u00a0First is the desire to feel competent, strong, and successful (similar to Bandura\u2019s self-efficacy). \u00a0Second is the need for prestige or status, which can range from simple recognition to fame and glory. \u00a0Maslow credited Adler for addressing this human need, but felt that Freud had neglected it. \u00a0Maslow also believed that the need for self-esteem was becoming a central issue in therapy for many psychotherapists. \u00a0However, as we saw in Chapter 12, Albert Ellis considers self-esteem to be a sickness. \u00a0Ellis\u2019 concern is that self-esteem, including efforts to boost self-esteem in therapy, requires that people rate themselves, something that Ellis felt will eventually lead to a negative evaluation (no one is perfect!). \u00a0Maslow did acknowledge that the healthiest self-esteem is based on well-earned and deserved respect from others, rather than fleeting fame or celebrity status (Maslow, 1943\/1973; Maslow, 1970).<\/p>\n<p>When all of these lower needs (physiological, safety, belongingness and love, and esteem) have been largely satisfied, we may still feel restless and discontented unless we are doing what is right for ourselves. \u00a0\u201cWhat a man\u00a0<em>can<\/em>\u00a0be, he\u00a0<em>must<\/em>\u00a0be\u201d (pg. 46; Maslow, 1970). \u00a0Thus, the need for self-actualization, which Maslow described as the highest of the basic needs, can also be referred to as a\u00a0<strong>Being-need<\/strong>, as opposed to the lower\u00a0<strong>deficiency-needs<\/strong>\u00a0(Maslow, 1968). \u00a0We will examine self-actualization in more detail in the following section.<\/p>\n<p>Although Maslow recognized that humans no longer have instincts in the technical sense, we nonetheless share basic drives with other animals. \u00a0We get hungry, even though how and what we eat is determined culturally. \u00a0We need to be safe, like any other animal, but again we seek and maintain our safety in different ways (such as having a police force to provide safety for us). \u00a0Given our fundamental similarity to other animals, therefore, Maslow referred to the basic needs as\u00a0<strong>instinctoid<\/strong>. \u00a0The lower the need the more animal-like it is, the higher the need, the more human it is, and self-actualization was, in Maslow\u2019s opinion, uniquely human (Maslow, 1970).<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the basic needs, Maslow referred to\u00a0<strong>cognitive needs<\/strong>\u00a0and\u00a0<strong>aesthetic needs<\/strong>. \u00a0Little is known about cognitive needs, since they are seldom an important focus in clinic settings. \u00a0However, he felt there were ample grounds for proposing that there are positive impulses to know, to satisfy curiosity, to understand, and to explain. \u00a0The eight-fold path described by the Buddha, some 2,600 years ago, begins with right knowledge. \u00a0The importance of mental stimulation for some people is described quite vividly by Maslow:<\/p>\n<p>I have seen a few cases in which it seemed clear to me that the pathology (boredom, loss of zest in life, self-dislike, general depression of the bodily functions, steady deterioration of the intellectual life, of tastes, etc.) were produced in intelligent people leading stupid lives in stupid jobs. \u00a0I have at least one case in which the appropriate cognitive therapy (resuming part-time studies, getting a position that was more intellectually demanding, insight) removed the symptoms.<\/p>\n<p>I have seen many women, intelligent, prosperous, and unoccupied, slowly develop these same symptoms of intellectual inanition. \u00a0Those who followed my recommendation to immerse themselves in something worthy of them showed improvement or cure often enough to impress me with the reality of the cognitive needs. (pg. 49; Maslow, 1970)<\/p>\n<p>There are also classic studies on the importance of environmental enrichment on the structural development of the brain itself (Diamond et al., 1975; Globus, et al., 1973; Greenough &amp; Volkmar, 1973; Rosenzweig, 1984; Spinelli &amp; Jensen, 1979; Spinelli, Jensen, &amp; DiPrisco, 1980). \u00a0Even less is known about the aesthetic needs, but Maslow was convinced that some people need to experience, indeed they crave, beauty in their world. \u00a0Ancient cave drawings have been found that seem to serve no other purpose than being art. \u00a0The cognitive and aesthetic needs may very well have been fundamental to our evolution as modern humans.<\/p>\n<h4>Self-Actualization<\/h4>\n<p>Maslow began his studies on self-actualization in order to satisfy his own curiosity about people who seemed to be fulfilling their unique potential as individuals. \u00a0He did not intend to undertake a formal research project, but he was so impressed by his results that he felt compelled to report his findings. \u00a0Amongst people he knew personally and public and historical figures, he looked for individuals who appeared to have made full use of their talents, capacities, and potentialities. \u00a0In other words, \u201cpeople who have developed or are developing to the full stature of which they are capable\u201d (Maslow, 1970). \u00a0His list of those who clearly seemed self-actualized included Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson, Albert Einstein, Eleanor Roosevelt, Jane Addams, William James, Albert Schweitzer, Aldous Huxley, and Baruch Spinoza. \u00a0His list of individuals who were most-likely self-actualized included Goethe (possibly the great-grandfather of Carl Jung), George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Harriet Tubman (born into slavery, she became a conductor on the Underground Railroad prior to the Civil War), and George Washington Carver (born into slavery at the end of the Civil War, he became an agricultural chemist and prolific inventor). \u00a0In addition to the positive attributes listed above, Maslow also considered it very important that there be no evidence of psychopathology in those he chose to study. \u00a0After comparing the seemingly self-actualized individuals to people who did not seem to have fulfilled their lives, Maslow identified fourteen characteristics of self-actualizing people (Maslow, 1950\/1973, 1970), as follows:<\/p>\n<p><strong>More Efficient Perception of Reality and More Comfortable Relations with It<\/strong>: \u00a0Self-actualizing people have an ability to recognize fakers, those who present a false persona. \u00a0More than that, however, Maslow believed they could recognize hidden or confused realities in all aspects of life: \u00a0science, politics, values and ethics, etc. \u00a0They are not afraid of the unknown or people who are different, they find such differences to be a pleasant challenge. \u00a0Although a high IQ may be associated with this characteristic, it is not uncommon to find those who are seemingly intelligent yet unable to be creative in their efforts to discover new phenomena. \u00a0Thus, the perception of reality is not simply the same as being smart.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Acceptance (Self, Others, Nature)<\/strong>: \u00a0Similar to the approach Albert Ellis took with REBT (and his hypothesized dangers inherent in self-esteem), Maslow believed that self-actualizing people accept themselves as they are, including their faults and the differences between their personal reality and their ideal image of themselves. \u00a0This is not to say that they are without guilt. \u00a0They are concerned about personal faults that can be improved, any remaining habits or psychological issues that are unhealthy (e.g., prejudice, jealousy, etc.), and the shortcomings of their community and\/or culture.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Spontaneity<\/strong>: \u00a0The lives of self-actualizing people are marked by simplicity and a natural ease as they pursue their goals. \u00a0Their outward behavior is relatively spontaneous, and their inner life (thoughts, drives, etc.) is particularly so. \u00a0In spite of this spontaneity, they are not always unconventional, because they can easily accept the constraints of society and find their own way to fit in without being untrue to their own sense of self.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Problem-Centering<\/strong>: \u00a0Self-actualizing individuals are highly problem-centered, not ego-centered. \u00a0The problems they focus on are typically not their own, however. \u00a0They focus on problems outside themselves, on important causes they would describe as necessary. \u00a0Solving such problems is taken as their duty or responsibility, rather than as something they want to do for themselves.<\/p>\n<p><strong>The Quality of Detachment; the Need for Privacy<\/strong>: \u00a0Whereas social withdrawal is often seen as psychologically unhealthy, self-actualizing people enjoy their privacy. \u00a0They can remain calm as they separate themselves from problematic situations, remaining above the fray. \u00a0In accordance with this healthy form of detachment, they are active, responsible, self-disciplined individuals in charge of their own lives. \u00a0Maslow believed that they have more free will than the average person.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Autonomy, Independence of Culture and Environment<\/strong>: \u00a0As an extension of the preceding characteristics, self-actualizing individuals are growth-motivated as opposed to being deficiency-motivated. \u00a0They do not need the presence, companionship, or approval of others. \u00a0Indeed, they may be hampered by others. \u00a0The love, honor, esteem, etc., that can be bestowed by others has become less important to someone who is self-actualizing than self-development and inner growth.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Continued Freshness of Appreciation<\/strong>: \u00a0Self-actualizing people are able to appreciate the wonders, as well as the common aspects, of life again and again. \u00a0Such feelings may not occur all the time, but they can occur in the most unexpected ways and at unexpected times. \u00a0Maslow offered a surprising evaluation of the importance of this characteristic of self-actualization:<\/p>\n<p>I have also become convinced that getting used to our blessings is one of the most important nonevil generators of human evil, tragedy, and suffering. \u00a0What we take for granted we undervalue, and we are therefore too apt to sell a valuable birthright for a mess of pottage, leaving behind regret, remorse, and a lowering of self-esteem. \u00a0Wives, husbands, children, friends are unfortunately more apt to be loved and appreciated after they have died than while they are still available. \u00a0Something similar is true for physical health, for political freedoms, for economic well-being; we learn their true value after we have lost them. (pp. 163-164; Maslow, 1970)<\/p>\n<p><strong>The \u201cMystic Experience\u201d or \u201cOceanic Feeling;\u201d Peak Experiences<\/strong>: \u00a0The difference between a\u00a0<strong>mystic experience<\/strong>\u00a0(also known as an\u00a0<strong>oceanic feeling<\/strong>) and a\u00a0<strong>peak experience<\/strong>\u00a0is a matter of definition. \u00a0Mystic experiences are viewed as gifts from God, something reserved for special or deserving (i.e., faithful) servants. \u00a0Maslow, however, believed that this was a natural occurrence that could happen for anyone, and to some extent probably did. \u00a0He assigned the psychological term of peak experiences. \u00a0Such experiences tend to be sudden feelings of limitless horizons opening up to one\u2019s vision, simultaneous feelings of great power and great vulnerability, feelings of ecstasy, wonder and awe, a loss of the sense of time and place, and the feeling that something extraordinary and transformative has happened. \u00a0Self-actualizers who do not typically experience these peaks, the so-called \u201c<strong>non-peakers<\/strong>,\u201d are more likely to become direct agents of social change, the reformers, politicians, crusaders, and so on. \u00a0The more transcendent \u201c<strong>peakers<\/strong>,\u201d in contrast, become the poets, musicians, philosophers, and theologians.<\/p>\n<p>Maslow devoted a great deal of attention to peak experiences, including their relationship to religion. \u00a0At the core of religion, according to Maslow, is the private illumination or revelation of spiritual leaders. \u00a0Such experiences seem to be very similar to peak experiences, and Maslow suggests that throughout history these peak experiences may have been mistaken for revelations from God. \u00a0In his own studies, Maslow found that people who were spiritual, but not religious (i.e., not hindered by the doctrine of a specific faith or church), actually had more peak experiences than other people. \u00a0Part of the explanation for this, according to Maslow, is that such people need to be more serious about their ethics, values, and philosophy of life, since their guidance and motivation must come from within. \u00a0Individuals who seek such an appreciation of life may help themselves to experience an extended form of peak experience that Maslow called the\u00a0<strong>plateau experience<\/strong>. \u00a0Plateau experiences always have both noetic and cognitive elements, whereas peak experiences can be entirely emotional (Maslow, 1964). \u00a0Put another way, plateau experiences involve serene and contemplative\u00a0<strong>Being-cognition<\/strong>, as opposed to the more climactic peak experiences (Maslow, 1971).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Gemeinschaftsgefuhl<\/strong>: \u00a0A word invented by Alfred Adler,\u00a0<strong>gemeinschatfsgefuhl<\/strong>\u00a0refers to the profound feelings of identification, sympathy, and affection for other people that are common in self-actualization individuals. \u00a0Although self-actualizers may often feel apart from others, like a stranger in a strange land, becoming upset by the shortcomings of the average person, they nonetheless feel a sense of kinship with others. \u00a0These feelings lead to a sincere desire to help the human race.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Interpersonal Relations<\/strong>: \u00a0Maslow believed that self-actualizers have deeper and more profound personal relationships than other people. \u00a0They tend to be kind to everyone, and are especially fond of children. \u00a0Maslow described this characteristic as \u201ccompassion for all mankind,\u201d a perspective that would fit well with Buddhist and Christian philosophies.<\/p>\n<p><strong>The Democratic Character Structure<\/strong>: \u00a0Self-actualizing people are typically friendly with anyone, regardless of class, race, political beliefs, or education. \u00a0They can learn from anyone who has something to teach them. \u00a0They respect all people, simply because they are people. \u00a0They are not, however, undiscriminating:<\/p>\n<p>The careful distinction must be made between this democratic feeling and a lack of discrimination in taste, of an undiscriminating equalizing of any one human being with any other. \u00a0These individuals, themselves elite, select for their friends elite, but this is an elite of character, capacity, and talent, rather than of birth, race, blood, name, family, age, youth, fame, or power. (pg. 168; Maslow, 1970)<\/p>\n<p><strong>Discrimination Between Means and Ends, Between Good and Evil<\/strong>: \u00a0Self-actualizers know the difference between right and wrong. \u00a0They are ethical, have high moral standards, and they do good things while avoiding doing bad things. \u00a0They do not experience the average person\u2019s confusion or inconsistency in making ethical choices. \u00a0They tend to focus on ends, rather than means, although they sometimes become absorbed in the means themselves, viewing the process itself as a series of ends.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Philosophical, Unhostile Sense of Humor<\/strong>: \u00a0The sense of humor shared by self-actualizers is not typical. \u00a0They do not laugh at hostile, superior, or rebellious humor. \u00a0They do not tell jokes that make fun of other people. \u00a0Instead, they poke fun at people in general for being foolish, or trying to claim a place in the universe that is beyond us. \u00a0Such humor often takes the form of poking fun at oneself, but not in a clown-like way. \u00a0Although such humor can be found in nearly every aspect of life, to non-self-actualizing people the self-actualizers seem to be somewhat sober and serious.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Creativeness<\/strong>: \u00a0According to Maslow, self-actualizing people are universally creative. \u00a0This is not the creativity associated with genius, such as that of Mozart or Thomas Edison, but rather the fresh and naive creativity of an unspoiled child. \u00a0Maslow believed that this creativity was a natural potential given to all humans at their birth, but that the constraints on behavior inherent in most cultures lead to its suppression.<\/p>\n<p>As desirable as self-actualization may seem, self-actualizing individuals still face problems in their lives. \u00a0According to Maslow, they are typically not well adjusted. \u00a0This is because they resist being enculturated. \u00a0They do not stand out in grossly abnormal ways, but there is a certain inner detachment from the culture in which they live. \u00a0They are not viewed as rebels in the adolescent sense, though they may be rebels while growing up, but rather they work steadily toward social change and\/or the accomplishment of their goals. \u00a0As a result of their immersion in some personal goal, they may lose interest in or patience with common people and common social practices. \u00a0Thus, they may seem detached, insulting, absent-minded, or humorless. \u00a0They can seem boring, stubborn, or irritating, particularly because they are often superficially vain and proud only of their own accomplishments and their own family, friends, and work. \u00a0According to Maslow, outbursts of temper are not rare. \u00a0Maslow argued that there are, in fact, people who become saints, movers and shakers, creators, and sages. \u00a0However, these same people can be irritating, selfish, angry, or depressed. \u00a0No one is perfect, not even those who are self-actualizing (Maslow, 1950\/1973, 1970).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Discussion Question:<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0Consider Maslow\u2019s characteristics of self-actualizing people. \u00a0Which of those characteristics do you think are part of your personality? \u00a0Are there any characteristics that you think may be particularly difficult for you to achieve?<\/p>\n<h4>Obstacles to Self-Actualization<\/h4>\n<p>In\u00a0<em>The Farther Reaches of Human Nature<\/em>\u00a0(Maslow, 1971), which was completed by Maslow\u2019s wife and one of his colleagues shortly after Maslow\u2019s death, Maslow described self-actualization as something that one does not obtain or fulfill at a specific point in time. \u00a0Rather, it is an ongoing process of self-actualizing, characterized for some by brief periods of self-actualization (the peak experiences, for example). \u00a0Maslow also described two major obstacles to achieving self-actualization: \u00a0<strong>desacralizing<\/strong>\u00a0and the\u00a0<strong>Jonah complex<\/strong>. \u00a0The Jonah complex, a name suggested by Maslow\u2019s friend Professor Frank Manuel, refers to being afraid of one\u2019s own greatness, or evading one\u2019s destiny or calling in life. \u00a0Maslow specifically described this as a non-Freudian defense mechanism in which a person is as afraid of the best aspects of their psyche as they are afraid of the worst aspects of their psyche (i.e., the socially unacceptable id impulses). \u00a0He described the process of this fear as a recognition, despite how much we enjoy the godlike possibilities revealed by our finest accomplishments, of the weakness, awe, and fear we experience when we achieve those accomplishments. \u00a0According to Maslow, \u201cgreat emotions after all can in\u00a0<em>fact<\/em>\u00a0overwhelm us\u201d (Maslow, 1971). \u00a0Nonetheless, he encouraged people to strive for greatness, within a reasonable sense of their own limitations.<\/p>\n<p>A very important defense mechanism, which affects young people in particular, is what Maslow called desacralizing. \u00a0The source of this problem is usually found within the family:<\/p>\n<p>These youngsters mistrust the possibility of values and virtues. \u00a0They feel themselves swindled or thwarted in their lives. \u00a0Most of them have, in fact, dopey parents whom they don\u2019t respect very much, parents who are quite confused themselves about values and who, frequently, are simply terrified of their children and never punish them or stop them from doing things that are wrong. \u00a0So you have a situation where the youngsters simply despise their elders \u2013 often for good and sufficient reason. (pg. 49; Maslow, 1971)<\/p>\n<p>As a result, children grow up without respect for their elders, or for anything their elders consider important. \u00a0The values of the culture itself can be called into question. \u00a0While such a situation may sometimes be important for changing social conventions that unfairly discriminate against some people, can we really afford to live in a society in which\u00a0<em>nothing<\/em>\u00a0is sacred? \u00a0Indeed, can such a society or culture continue to exist? \u00a0Thus, Maslow emphasized a need for\u00a0<strong>resacralizing<\/strong>. \u00a0Maslow noted that he had to make up the words desacralizing and resacralizing \u201cbecause the English language is rotten for good people. \u00a0It has no decent vocabulary for the virtues\u201d (Maslow, 1971). \u00a0Resacralizing means being willing to see the sacred, the eternal, the symbolic. \u00a0As an example, Maslow suggested considering a medical student dissecting a human brain. \u00a0Would such a student see the brain simply as a biological organ, or would they be awed by it, also seeing the brain as a sacred object, including even its poetic aspects? \u00a0This concept is particularly important for counselors working with the aged, people approaching the end of their lives, and may be critical for helping them move toward self-actualization. \u00a0According to Maslow, when someone asks a counselor for help with the self-actualizing process, the counselor had better have an answer for them, \u201cor we\u2019re not doing what it is our job to do\u201d (Maslow, 1971).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Discussion Question:<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0Maslow believed that desacralizing was particularly challenging for young people. \u00a0Do you think our society has lost its way, have we lost sight of meaningful values? \u00a0Is nothing sacred anymore? \u00a0Is there anything that you do in your life to recognize something as sacred in a way that has real meaning for your community?<\/p>\n<p>Maslow had something else interesting to say about self-actualization in\u00a0<em>The Farther Reaches of Human Nature<\/em>: \u00a0\u201cWhat does self-actualization mean in moment-to-moment terms? \u00a0What does it mean on Tuesday at four o\u2019clock?\u201d (pg. 41). \u00a0Consequently, he offered a preliminary suggestion for an operational definition of the process by which self-actualization occurs. \u00a0In other words, what are the behaviors exhibited by people on the path toward fulfilling or achieving the fourteen characteristics of self-actualized people described above? \u00a0Sadly, this could only remain a preliminary description, i.e., they are \u201cideas that are in midstream rather than ready for formulation into a final version,\u201d because this book was published after Maslow\u2019s death (having been put together before his sudden and unexpected heart attack).<\/p>\n<p>What does one do when he self-actualizes? Does he grit his teeth and squeeze? \u00a0What does self-actualization mean in terms of actual behavior, actual procedure? \u00a0I shall describe eight ways in which one self-actualizes. (pg. 45; Maslow, 1971)<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0They experience full, vivid, and selfless\u00a0<em>concentration<\/em>\u00a0and total absorption.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Within the ongoing process of self-actualization, they make\u00a0<em>growth choices<\/em>\u00a0(rather than fear choices; progressive choices rather than regressive choices).<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0They are aware that there is a\u00a0<em>self\u00a0<\/em>to be actualized.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0When in doubt, they choose to be\u00a0<em>honest\u00a0<\/em>rather than dishonest.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0They trust their own\u00a0<em>judgment,<\/em>\u00a0even if it means being different or unpopular (being courageous is another version of this behavior).<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0They put in the effort necessary to improve themselves, working regularly toward\u00a0<em>self-development\u00a0<\/em>no matter how arduous or demanding .<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0They embrace the occurrence of\u00a0<em>peak experiences<\/em>, doing what they can to facilitate and enjoy more of them (as opposed to denying these experiences as many people do).<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0They identify and\u00a0<em>set aside their ego defenses<\/em>\u00a0(they have \u201cthe courage to give them up\u201d). \u00a0Although this requires that they face up to painful experiences, it is more beneficial than the consequences of defenses such as repression.<\/p>\n<h4>Being and Transcendence<\/h4>\n<p>Maslow had great hope and optimism for the human race. \u00a0Although self-actualization might seem to be the pinnacle of personal human achievement, he viewed Humanistic Psychology, or\u00a0<strong>Third Force Psychology<\/strong>, as just another step in our progression:<\/p>\n<p>I should say also that I consider Humanistic, Third Force Psychology to be transitional, a preparation for a still \u201chigher\u201d Fourth Psychology, transpersonal, transhuman, centered in the cosmos rather than in human needs and interest, going beyond humanness, identity, self-actualization, and the like\u2026These new developments may very well offer a tangible, usable, effective satisfaction of the \u201cfrustrated idealism\u201d of many quietly desperate people, especially young people. \u00a0These psychologies give promise of developing into the life-philosophy, the religion-surrogate, the value-system, the life-program that these people have been missing. \u00a0Without the transcendent and the transpersonal, we get sick, violent, and nihilistic, or else hopeless and apathetic. \u00a0We need something \u201cbigger than we are\u201d to be awed by and to commit ourselves to in a new, naturalistic, empirical, non-churchly sense, perhaps as Thoreau and Whitman, William James and John Dewey did. (pp. iii-iv; Maslow, 1968)<\/p>\n<p>Although Maslow wrote about this need for a\u00a0<strong>Fourth Force Psychology<\/strong>\u00a0in 1968, it was not until the year 1998 that APA President Martin Seligman issued his call for the pursuit of positive psychology as an active force in the field of psychology. \u00a0Maslow believed that all self-actualizing people were involved in some calling or vocation, a cause outside of themselves, something that fate has called them to and that they love doing. \u00a0In so doing, they devote themselves to the search for\u00a0<strong>Being-values<\/strong>\u00a0(or B-values; Maslow, 1964, 1967\/2008, 1968). \u00a0The desire to attain self-actualization results in the B-values acting like needs. \u00a0Since they are higher than the basic needs, Maslow called them\u00a0<strong>metaneeds<\/strong>. \u00a0When individuals are unable to attain these goals, the result can be\u00a0<strong>metapathology<\/strong>, a sickness of the soul. \u00a0Whereas counselors may be able to help the average person with their average problems, metapathologies may require the help of a\u00a0<strong>metacounselor<\/strong>, a counselor trained in philosophical and spiritual matters that go far beyond the more instinctoid training of the traditional psychoanalyst (Maslow, 1967\/2008). \u00a0The B-values identified by Maslow (1964) are an interesting blend of the characteristics of self-actualizing individuals and the human needs described by Henry Murray: \u00a0truth, goodness, beauty, wholeness, dichotomu-transcendence, aliveness, uniqueness, perfection, necessity, completion, justice, order, simplicity, richness, effortlessness, playfulness, self-sufficiency.<\/p>\n<p>Transcendence is typically associated with people who are religious, spiritual, or artistic, but Maslow said that he found transcendent individuals amongst creative people in a wide variety of vocations (including business, managers, educators, and politicians), though there are not many of them in any field. \u00a0Transcendence, according to Maslow, is the very highest and most holistic level of human consciousness, which involves relating to oneself, to all others, to all species, to nature, and to the cosmos as an end rather than as a means (Maslow, 1971). \u00a0It is essential that individuals not be reduced to the role they play in relation to others, transcendence can only be found within oneself (Maslow, 1964, 1968). \u00a0Maslow\u2019s idea is certainly not new. \u00a0Ancient teachings in Yoga tell us that there is a single universal spirit that connects us all, and Buddhists describe this connection as\u00a0<strong>interbeing<\/strong>. \u00a0The Abrahamic religions teach us that the entire universe was created by, and therefore is connected through, one god. \u00a0It was Maslow\u2019s hope that a transcendent Fourth Force in psychology would help all people to become self-actualizing. \u00a0In Buddhist terms, Maslow was advocating the intentional creation of psychological Bodhisattvas. \u00a0Perhaps this is what Maslow meant by the term metacounselor.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Connections Across Cultures: \u00a0Is Nothing Sacred?<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Maslow described some lofty ambitions for humanity in\u00a0<em>Toward a Psychology of Being\u00a0<\/em>(1968) and\u00a0<em>The Farther Reaches of Human Nature<\/em>\u00a0(1971), as well as some challenges we face along the way. \u00a0Transcendence, according to Maslow, is a loss of our sense of Self, as we begin to feel an intimate connection with the world around us and all other people. \u00a0But transcendence is exceedingly difficult when we are hindered by the defense mechanism of desacralization. \u00a0What exactly does the word \u201csacred\u201d mean? \u00a0It is not easily found in psychological works. \u00a0William James often wrote about spiritual matters, but not about what is or is not sacred. \u00a0Sigmund Freud mentioned sacred prohibitions in his final book,\u00a0<em>Moses and Monotheism<\/em>\u00a0(Freud, 1939\/1967), but he felt that anything sacred was simply a cultural adaptation of all children\u2019s fear of challenging their father\u2019s will (and God was created as a symbol of the mythological father). \u00a0A dictionary definition of sacred says that it is \u201cconnected with God (or the gods) or dedicated to a religious purpose and so deserving veneration.\u201d \u00a0However, there is another definition that does not require a religious context: \u00a0\u201cregarded with great respect and reverence by a particular religion, group, or individual\u201d (The Oxford American College Dictionary, 2002). \u00a0Maslow described desacralization as a rejection of the values and virtues of one\u2019s parents. \u00a0As a result, people grow up without the ability to see anything as sacred, eternal, or symbolic. \u00a0In other words, they grow up without meaning in their lives.<\/p>\n<p>The process of resacralization, which Maslow considered an essential task of therapists working with clients who seek help in this critical area of their life, requires that we have some concept of what is sacred. \u00a0So, what is sacred? \u00a0Many answers can be found, but there does seem to be at least one common thread.<\/p>\n<p>Christians have long believed that forgiveness lies at the heart of faith. \u00a0Psychologists have recently found that forgiveness may also lie at the heart of emotional and physical well-being.<\/p>\n<p><em>David Myers &amp; Malcolm Jeeves (2003)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>\u2026Compassion is the wish that others be free of suffering. \u00a0It is by means of compassion that we aspire to attain enlightenment. \u00a0It is compassion that inspires us to engage in the virtuous practices that lead to Buddhahood. \u00a0We must therefore devote ourselves to developing compassion.<\/p>\n<p><em>The Dalai Lama (2001)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>I have been engaged in peace work for more than thirty years: \u00a0combating poverty, ignorance, and disease; going to sea to help rescue boat people; evacuating the wounded from combat zones; resettling refugees; helping hungry children and orphans; opposing wars; producing and disseminating peace literature; training peace and social workers; and rebuilding villages destroyed by bombs. \u00a0It is because of the practice of meditation \u2013 stopping, calming, and looking deeply \u2013 that I have been able to nourish and protect the sources of my spiritual energy and continue this work.<\/p>\n<p><em>Thich Nhat Hanh (1995)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>\u2026Our progress is the penetrating of the present moment, living life with our feet on the ground, living in compassionate, active relationship with others, and yet living in the awareness that life has been penetrated by the eternal moment of God and unfolds in the power of that moment.<\/p>\n<p><em>Fr. Laurence Freeman (1986)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Keep your hands busy with your duties in this world, and your heart busy with God.<\/p>\n<p><em>Sheikh Muzaffer<\/em>\u00a0(cited in\u00a0<em>Essential Sufism<\/em>\u00a0by Fadiman &amp; Frager, 1997)<\/p>\n<p>Forgiveness is a letting go of past suffering and betrayal, a release of the burden of pain and hate that we carry.<\/p>\n<p>Forgiveness honors the heart\u2019s greatest dignity. \u00a0Whenever we are lost, it brings us back to the ground of love.<\/p>\n<p><em>Jack Kornfield<\/em>\u00a0(2002)<\/p>\n<p>And he said to him, \u201cYou shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind. \u00a0This is the great and first commandment. \u00a0And a second is like it, You shall love your neighbor as yourself\u2026\u201d<\/p>\n<p><em>Jesus Christ<\/em>\u00a0(The Holy Bible, 1962)<\/p>\n<p>In examining self-actualizing people directly, I find that in all cases, at least in our culture, they are dedicated people, devoted to some task \u201coutside themselves,\u201d some vocation, or duty, or beloved job. \u00a0Generally the devotion and dedication is so marked that one can fairly use the old words vocation, calling, or mission to describe their passionate, selfless, and profound feeling for their \u201cwork.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>The spiritual life is then part of the human essence. \u00a0It is a defining-characteristic of human nature, without which human nature is not full human nature. \u00a0It is part of the Real Self, of one\u2019s identity, of one\u2019s inner core, of one\u2019s specieshood, of full humanness.<\/p>\n<p><em>Abraham Maslow (1971)<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Christians, Buddhists, Muslims, as well as members of other religions and humanists, all have some variation of what has been called\u00a0<em>The Golden Rule<\/em>: \u00a0treating others as you would like to be treated. \u00a0If that is sacred, then even amongst atheists, young people can evaluate the values and virtues of their parents, community, and culture, and then decide whether those values are right or wrong, whether they want to perpetuate an aspect of that society based on their own thoughts and feelings about how they, themselves, may be treated someday by others. \u00a0This resacralization need not be religious or spiritual, but it commonly is, and some psychologists are comfortable embracing spirituality as such.<\/p>\n<p>Kenneth Pargament and Annette Mahoney (2005) wrote a chapter entitled\u00a0<em>Spirituality: Discovering and Conserving the Sacred<\/em>, which was included in the\u00a0<em>Handbook of Positive Psychology<\/em>\u00a0(Snyder &amp; Lopez, 2005). \u00a0First, they point out that religion is an undeniable fact in American society. \u00a0Some 95 percent of Americans believe in God, and 86 percent believe that He can be reached through prayer and that He is important or very important to them. \u00a0Spirituality, according to Pargament and Mahoney, is the process in which individuals seek both to discover and to conserve that which is sacred. \u00a0It is interesting to note that Maslow and Rogers consider self-actualization and transcendence to be a process as well, not something that one can get and keep permanently. \u00a0An important aspect of defining what is sacred is that it is imbued with divinity. \u00a0God may be seen as manifest in marriage, work can be seen as a vocation to which the person is called, the environment can been seen as God\u2019s creation. \u00a0In each of these situations, and in others, what is viewed as sacred has been sanctified by those who consider it sacred. \u00a0Unfortunately, this can have negative results as well, such as when the Heaven\u2019s Gate cult followed their sanctified leader to their deaths. \u00a0Thus, spirituality is not necessarily synonymous with a good and healthy lifestyle.<\/p>\n<p>Still, there is research that has shown that couples who sanctify their marriage experience greater marital satisfaction, less marital conflict, and more effective marital problem-solving strategies. \u00a0Likewise, mothers and fathers who sanctify the role of parenting report less aggression and more consistent discipline in raising their children. \u00a0For college students, spiritual striving was more highly correlated with well-being than any other form of goal-setting (see Pargament &amp; Mahoney, 2005). \u00a0So there appear to be real psychological advantages to spiritual pursuits. \u00a0This may be particularly true during challenging times in our lives:<\/p>\n<p>\u2026there are aspects of our lives that are beyond our control. \u00a0Birth, developmental transitions, accidents, illnesses, and death are immutable elements of existence. \u00a0Try as we might to affect these elements, a significant portion of our lives remains beyond our immediate control. \u00a0In spirituality, however, we can find ways to understand and deal with our fundamental human insufficiency, the fact that there are limits to our control\u2026 (pg. 655; Pargament &amp; Mahoney, 2005)<\/p>\n<h4>Eupsychian Management and Theory Z<\/h4>\n<p>It is not merely a coincidence that Maslow is well-known in the field of business. \u00a0He spent 3 years as the plant manager for the Maslow Cooperage Corporation, and later he spent a summer studying at an electronics firm in California (Non-Linear Systems, Inc.) at the invitation of the company\u2019s president. \u00a0He became very interested in industrial and managerial psychology, and the journal he kept in California was published as\u00a0<em>Eupsychian Management<\/em>\u00a0(Maslow, 1965). \u00a0<strong>Eupsychia<\/strong>\u00a0refers to real possibility and improvability, and a movement toward psychological health, as opposed to the vague fantasies of proposed Utopian societies. \u00a0More precisely, though this is something of a fantasy itself, Maslow described Eupsychia as the culture that would arise if 1,000 self-actualizing people were allowed to live their own lives on a sheltered island somewhere. \u00a0\u00a0Maslow applied his psychological theories, including both the hierarchy of needs and self-actualization, to a management style that takes advantage of this knowledge to maximize the potential of the employees in a company (also see the collection of Maslow\u2019s unpublished papers by Hoffman, 1996).<\/p>\n<p>Maslow introduced a variety of terms related to his theories on management, one of the most interesting being\u00a0<strong>synergy<\/strong>. \u00a0Having borrowed the term from Ruth Benedict, synergy refers to a situation in which a person pursuing their own, selfish goals is automatically helping others, and a person unselfishly helping others is, at the same time, helping themselves. \u00a0According to Maslow, when selfishness and unselfishness are mutually exclusive, it is a sign of mild psychopathology. \u00a0Self-actualizing individuals are above the distinction between selfishness and unselfishness; they enjoy seeing others experience pleasure. \u00a0Maslow offered the personal example of feeding strawberries to his little daughter. \u00a0As the child smacked her lips and thoroughly loved the strawberries, an experience that thrilled Maslow, what was he actually giving up by letting her eat the strawberries instead of eating them himself? \u00a0In his experience with the Blackfoot tribe, a member named Teddy was able to buy a car. \u00a0He was the only one who had one, but tradition allowed anyone in the tribe to borrow it. \u00a0Teddy used his car no more often than anyone else, but he had to pay the bills, including the gas bill. \u00a0And yet, everyone in the tribe was so proud of him that he was greatly admired and they elected him chief. \u00a0So, he benefited in other ways by following tradition and letting everyone use his car (Maslow, 1965). \u00a0In the business field, when managers encourage cooperation and communication, everyone benefits from the healthy growth and continuous improvement of the company. \u00a0And this leads us to\u00a0<strong>Theory Z<\/strong>\u00a0(which is Eupsychian management).<\/p>\n<p>Douglas McGregor, a professor of industrial relations at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, was greatly impressed with Maslow\u2019s work, and McGregor had used\u00a0<em>Motivation and Personality<\/em>\u00a0as a textbook in his business classes. \u00a0Based on Maslow\u2019s theories, McGregor published a book in 1960 in which he outlined two managerial models,\u00a0<strong>Theory X<\/strong>\u00a0and\u00a0<strong>Theory Y<\/strong>\u00a0(Gabor, 2000; Hoffman, 1996). \u00a0Maslow described the two theories as follows:<\/p>\n<p>\u2026To put it succinctly,\u00a0<em>Theory Y<\/em>\u00a0assumes that if you give people responsibilities and freedom, then they will like to work and will do a better job. \u00a0Theory Y also assumes that workers basically like excellence, efficiency, perfection, and the like.<\/p>\n<p><em>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Theory X<\/em>, which still dominates most of the world\u2019s workplace, has a contrasting view. \u00a0It assumes that people are basically stupid, lazy, hurtful, and untrustworthy and, therefore, that you have got to check everything constantly because workers will steal you blind if you don\u2019t. (pg. 187; Maslow, 1996a)<\/p>\n<p>The Theory X\/Theory Y strategy was intentionally put into practice at Non-Linear Systems, hence Maslow\u2019s invitation to study there. \u00a0Maslow concluded, however, that even Theory Y did not go far enough in maximizing people\u2019s potential. \u00a0People have metaneeds(the need for B-values), needs that go beyond simply offering higher salaries. \u00a0When employees have their basic needs met, but recognize inefficiency and mismanagement in the company, they will still complain, but these higher level complaints can now be described as\u00a0<strong>metagrumbles\u00a0<\/strong>(as opposed to the lower level grumbles about lower level needs). \u00a0Theory Z attempts to transcend Theory Y and actively facilitate the growth of a company\u2019s employees toward self-actualization (Hoffman, 1996; Maslow, 1971; Maslow 1996b).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Discussion Question:<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0How\u2019s your job (or any job you have had)? \u00a0Would you describe your supervisor or boss as someone who uses Eupsychian or Theory Z management? \u00a0Does the workplace foster synergy amongst the employees? \u00a0If not, can you imagine how the job would be different if they did?<\/p>\n<h3><strong>Henry Murray and Personology<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p>Henry Murray was primarily psychodynamic in his orientation. \u00a0However, the fundamental aspect of his theory is the presence of needs in our lives, and there was a distinctly humanistic aspect to his theories as well (Maddi &amp; Costa, 1972). \u00a0Thus, it seems appropriate to include Murray alongside Maslow\u2019s discussion of human needs. \u00a0In addition, Murray developed a practical application of his famous test, the\u00a0<strong>Thematic Apperception Test<\/strong>\u00a0(or\u00a0<strong>TAT<\/strong>), for screening candidates for special work assignments. \u00a0Once again, this is similar to Maslow\u2019s forays into the field of industrial\/organizational psychology. \u00a0Although it is common to present different fields as fundamentally opposed, such as humanistic psychology\u00a0<strong>vs.<\/strong>\u00a0psychodynamic psychology, Murray and Maslow provide an ideal opportunity to see the commonalities that often exist between different areas in psychology. \u00a0It must also be remembered that Murray was no strict adherent to the dogmatic view of psychoanalysis presented by Freud:<\/p>\n<p>\u2026psychoanalysis stands for a conceptual system which explains, it seems to me, as much as any other. \u00a0But this is no reason for going in blind and swallowing the whole indigestible bolus, cannibalistically devouring the totem father in the hope of acquiring his genius, his authoritative dominance, and thus rising to power in the psychoanalytic society, that battle-ground of Little Corporals. \u00a0No; I, for one, prefer to take what I please, suspend judgment, reject what I please, speak freely. \u00a0(pg. 31; Murray, 1940\/2008).<\/p>\n<h4>Brief Biography of Henry Murray<\/h4>\n<p>Henry Alexander Murray, Jr. was born in 1893 in New York City. \u00a0He had many nicknames, and typically asked his friends to call him Harry. \u00a0His family was quite wealthy, and had a noble history. \u00a0He was a descendant of John Murray, the fourth Earl of Dunmore, the last Royal Governor of Virginia, and his mother\u2019s great-grandfather, Colonel Harry Babcock, had served on General George Washington\u2019s staff during the Revolutionary War. \u00a0Murray lived a life of luxury, spending the summers on Long Island and often traveling throughout Europe. \u00a0He was educated at exclusive private schools. \u00a0However, his childhood was not without challenges. \u00a0He felt abandoned by his mother, who suffered from depression much of her life, when Murray was quite young. \u00a0He stuttered, and was cross-eyed. \u00a0The operation to help cure his internal strabismus accidentally left him with an external strabismus. \u00a0This created problems for Murray when it came to competing in athletics, but Murray worked hard to overcome his difficulties and he excelled at sports. \u00a0He became the quarterback of his football team and won a featherweight boxing championship at school. \u00a0In college, he made the rowing team at Harvard University (Maddi &amp; Costa, 1972; Robinson, 1992).<\/p>\n<p>In spite of his athletic success at Harvard, or perhaps because of it, he did not do well academically, receiving below average grades. \u00a0Nonetheless, he earned a degree in history in 1915. \u00a0While at Harvard he also married Josephine Rantoul, after a lengthy courtship. \u00a0Despite his mediocre grades at Harvard, Murray was accepted into the Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons, and graduated first in his class in 1919. \u00a0He then completed a surgical internship at Presbyterian Hospital in New York, where he once treated the future president Franklin D. Roosevelt, followed by a period of research at the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research and Cambridge University, which culminated in a Ph.D. in biochemistry in 1927. \u00a0He then accepted a position as assistant to Morton Prince, and became the director of Harvard University\u2019s psychology clinic. \u00a0Murray had never taken a psychology course, but he had some interesting experience (Maddi &amp; Costa, 1972; Robinson, 1992).<\/p>\n<p>Murray had a psychiatry course in medical school, and had read Freud\u2019s\u00a0<em>Interpretation of Dreams<\/em>. \u00a0He also had a research assistant from Vienna, Alma Rosenthal, who had been a long-time friend of Anna Freud. \u00a0While both working together and having an intimate love affair, Rosenthal introduced Murray to the deeper dimensions of the unconscious mind. \u00a0However, it was Murray\u2019s lifelong mistress, Christiana Morgan, who introduced him to Jung\u2019s book\u00a0<em>Psychology Types<\/em>. \u00a0Murray was deeply impressed by Jung\u2019s book, but even more by Jung himself. \u00a0Murray was troubled by the intense love affair he had developed with Morgan, so he went to Zurich in order to be psychoanalyzed by Jung. \u00a0Jung managed to help Murray understand his stuttering and accept having his affair with Morgan. \u00a0After all, Jung had maintained a mistress of his own for many years. \u00a0Jung also managed to convince Murray\u2019s wife and Morgan\u2019s husband to accept the affair as well, and Christiana Morgan remained a very important colleague throughout Murray\u2019s life. \u00a0It has been suggested that she played a far more important role in his theories, and in the development of the TAT, than she has been given credit for (Maddi &amp; Costa, 1972; Robinson, 1992). \u00a0Partly because Jung had directly helped him with a psychological problem, and partly because of the extraordinary range of ideas that Jung was open to, Murray always spoke highly of Jung (though he believed that Jung tended toward being psychotic, just as Freud tended toward being neurotic; see Brian, 1995).<\/p>\n<p>Initially, Murray\u2019s reappointment as clinic director was challenged by the experimental psychologists Edwin Boring and Karl Lashley, but he was supported by the clinical psychologists, who were led by Gordon Allport (Stagner, 1988). \u00a0As his work continued he was quite productive (it was during this time that he developed the TAT), and many important clinicians passed through the clinic. \u00a0Included among them was Erik Erikson, who came to the clinic after having been psychoanalyzed by Anna Freud in Vienna. \u00a0Murray also spent a great deal of time traveling and studying in Europe, and enjoyed a memorable evening with Sigmund and Anna Freud. \u00a0As he was preparing to return to the clinic, World War II began. \u00a0Murray joined the Army Medical Corps, and eventually worked for the Office of Strategic Services (OSS). \u00a0Of particular interest was his use of the TAT to screen OSS agents for sensitive missions (the OSS was the precursor to the CIA, so in peacetime these agents would be called spies). \u00a0He was in China studying errors they had made in their assessments when the atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima. \u00a0Murray was shocked, and devoted the rest of his life to seeking alternatives to war (Maddi &amp; Costa, 1972; Robinson, 1992).<\/p>\n<p>As his career and life approached their ends, Murray received the\u00a0<em>Distinguished Scientific Contribution Award<\/em>\u00a0from the American Psychological Association, and the\u00a0<em>Gold Medal Award<\/em>\u00a0from the American Psychological Foundation. \u00a0He received numerous honorary degrees, and collections of papers have been published in his honor (e.g., White, 1963; Zucker, Rabin, Aronoff, &amp; Frank, 1992). \u00a0In June, 1988, Murray told his nurse that he was dead. \u00a0She disagreed with him, and pinched him gently on the cheek to prove her point. \u00a0He curtly disagreed with her, declaring that he was the doctor, she was the nurse, and he was dead. \u00a0A few days later he was right (Robinson, 1992).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Placing Murray in Context: \u00a0A Challenging Task<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>There does not seem to be a consensus on where Murray fits within the field of personality theory. \u00a0Trained as a Freudian psychoanalyst, he is often grouped with the neo-Freudians. \u00a0However, he has also been placed with the trait theorists, and he was a colleague of Gordon Allport. \u00a0However, many personality theory textbooks don\u2019t consider Murray worthy of significant attention. \u00a0He is included alongside Maslow in this textbook because his work focused primarily on needs. \u00a0In addition, the practical application of his Thematic Apperception Test in screening candidates for OSS assignments was similar to Maslow\u2019s application of psychological principles in the business field.<\/p>\n<p>The Thematic Apperception Test is certainly Murray\u2019s claim to fame. \u00a0It remains one of the best-known tests in psychology, having been applied in research, business, and therapeutic settings. \u00a0Since Murray used the TAT in combination with the Rorschach Inkblot Test, he maintained his ties to traditional psychoanalysis and helped to advance the fame of the other renowned projective test. \u00a0As such, his practical contributions to psychology seem to outweigh his theoretical contributions.<\/p>\n<p>It has been said that the value of a theory can be measured by the research that follows. \u00a0David McClelland\u2019s use of the TAT to study the need for achievement is a common topic in introductory psychology textbooks. \u00a0Thus, Murray\u2019s contributions have inspired classic research in psychology. \u00a0That alone should ensure a place of significance for Murray in the history of personality theory.<\/p>\n<h4>Human Needs<\/h4>\n<p>In\u00a0<em>Explorations in Personality<\/em>\u00a0(Murray, 1938), Murray describes people as \u201ctoday\u2019s great problem\u201d. \u00a0What can we know about someone, and how can we describe it in a way that has clear meaning? \u00a0Nothing is more important in the field of psychology:<\/p>\n<p>The point of view adopted in this book is that personalities constitute the subject matter of psychology, the life history of a single man being a unit with which this discipline has to deal\u2026 \u00a0Our guiding thought was that personality is a temporal whole and to understand a part of it one must have sense, though vague, of the totality. \u00a0(pgs. 3-4; Murray, 1938)<\/p>\n<p>Thus, Murray and his colleagues sought to understand the nature of personality, in order to help them understand individuals. \u00a0He referred to this direct study of personality as\u00a0<strong>personology<\/strong>, simply because he considered it clumsy to refer to \u201cthe psychology of personality\u201d instead.<\/p>\n<p>Murray described the very elegant process by which the Harvard Clinic group systematically approached their studies, and then presented a lengthy series of propositions regarding a theory of personality. \u00a0The primary focus of these propositions came down to what Murray called a press-need combination. \u00a0A\u00a0<strong>need<\/strong>, according to Murray, is a hypothetical process that is imagined to occur in order to account for certain objective and subjective facts. \u00a0In other words, when an organism reliably acts in a certain way to obtain some goal, we can determine that the organism had a need to achieve that goal. \u00a0Needs are often recognized only after the fact, the behavior that satisfies the need may be a blind impulse, but it still leads toward satisfying the needed goal. \u00a0<strong>Press<\/strong>\u00a0is the term Murray applied to environmental objects or situations that designate directional tendencies, or that guide our needs. \u00a0Anything in the environment, either harmful or beneficial to the organism, exerts press. \u00a0Thus, our current needs, in the context of current environmental press, determine our ongoing behavior (Murray, 1938).<\/p>\n<p>Like Maslow, Murray separated needs into biological and psychology factors based on how essential they were to one\u2019s survival. \u00a0The primary, or\u00a0<strong>viscerogenic needs<\/strong>, include air, water, food, sex, harm-avoidance, etc. \u00a0The secondary or\u00a0<strong>psychogenic needs<\/strong>, which are presumed to derive from the primary needs, are common reaction systems and wishes. \u00a0Although Murray organizes the psychogenic needs into groups, they are not rank-ordered as was Maslow\u2019s hierarchy, so we will not consider the groups any further. \u00a0Individually, there are a total of twenty-eight human needs (Murray, 1938). \u00a0A partial list, with definitions, includes the following:<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Acquisition: \u00a0the need to gain possessions and property<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Retention: \u00a0the need to retain possession of things, to refuse to give or lend<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Order: \u00a0the need to arrange, organize, put away objects, to be tidy and clean<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Construction: \u00a0the need to build things<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Achievement: \u00a0the need to overcome obstacles, to exercise power, to strive to do something difficult as well and as quickly as possible<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Recognition: \u00a0the need to excite praise and commendation, to demand respect<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Exhibition: \u00a0the need to attract attention to oneself<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Defendance: \u00a0the need to defend oneself against blame or belittlement<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Counteraction: \u00a0the need to proudly overcome defeat by restriving and retaliating, to defend one\u2019s honor<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Dominance: \u00a0the need to influence or control others<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Deference: \u00a0the need to admire and willingly follow a superior<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Aggression: \u00a0the need to assault or injure another, to harm, blame, accuse, or ridicule a person<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Abasement: \u00a0the need to surrender, to comply and accept punishment<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Affiliation: \u00a0the need to form friendships and associations, to greet, join, and live with others, to love<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Rejection: \u00a0the need to snub, ignore, or exclude others<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Play: \u00a0the need to relax, amuse oneself, seek diversion and entertainment<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Cognizance: \u00a0the need to explore, to ask questions, to satisfy curiosity<\/p>\n<p>According the Murray, in the course of daily life these needs are often interrelated. \u00a0When a single action can satisfy more than one need, we can say that the needs are fused. \u00a0However, needs can also come into conflict. \u00a0For example, an individual\u2019s need for dominance may make it difficult to satisfy their need for affiliation, unless they can find someone with a powerful need for abasement. \u00a0Such a situation is one of the ways in which psychologists have tried to understand abusive relationships. \u00a0In other words, when someone with a strong need for affiliation and debasement becomes involved with someone with a strong need for affiliation and dominance (particularly in a pathological sense), the results can be very unfortunate.<\/p>\n<p>Any object, or person, that evokes a need is said to \u201cbe cathected\u201d by the person being studied. \u00a0In other words, they have invested some of their limited psychic energy (libido) into that object. \u00a0Murray believed that an individual\u2019s personality is revealed by the objects to which that person is attached by the cathexis of libido, especially if you can recognize the intensity, endurance, and rigidity of the cathexis. \u00a0This process not only applies to individuals, but institutions and cultures also have predictable patterns in terms of their cathected objects. \u00a0Put more simply, we can strive to understand individuals, including doing so from a cross-cultural perspective, by examining the nature and pattern of needs they seek to satisfy in their daily lives (Murray, 1938).<\/p>\n<p>Morris Stein, who worked with Murray in the OSS and then earned a Ph.D. at the Harvard Clinic, combined Murray\u2019s work on identifying human needs and Jung\u2019s concept of psychological types. \u00a0By looking at patterns in the rank-order of needs among industrial chemists and Peace Corps volunteers, Stein was able to divide each group into separate psychological types (Stein, 1963). \u00a0For example, there were five basic types of industrial chemists: \u00a0Type A was achievement oriented but still worked well with others; Type B focused on pleasing others, often at the expense of their own ideas; Type C was achievement oriented, but more driven and hostile than Type A; Type D was motivated by achievement and affiliation, but with an emphasis on order that protected them from criticism or blame; and Type E was particularly focused on relationships marked by cooperation and trust. \u00a0As interesting as these types may be, they are quite different than the personality types identified amongst the Peace Corps volunteers (Stein, 1963). \u00a0Thus, although Stein\u2019s investigation suggests that personality types can be identified based on patterns of need, this approach probably would not provide a general theory of personology that could be applied to anyone.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Discussion Question:<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0Consider Murray\u2019s list of psychogenic needs. \u00a0Which needs are the ones that affect you the most? \u00a0Are you able to fulfill those needs?<\/p>\n<h4>The TAT and the OSS<\/h4>\n<p>Murray is typically credited with the development the TAT. \u00a0However, the original article has Christiana Morgan as the first author (Morgan &amp; Murray, 1935), and in\u00a0<em>Explorations in Personality<\/em>\u00a0most of the TAT work is described by Morgan (Murray, 1938). \u00a0Apparently, when the test was revised and republished in 1943, Murray did most of the revision, partly because Morgan was quite ill at the time. \u00a0The TAT consists of a series of pictures depicting potentially dramatic events (although the pictures are actually rather vague). \u00a0The person taking the test is asked to provide a story that relates events preceding the picture to some final outcome of the situation. \u00a0It is expected that the subject will project their own thoughts and feelings into the picture as they create their story. \u00a0In order for this to be possible, Morgan and Murray made sure that in most pictures there was at least one person with whom the subject could easily empathize and identify themselves. \u00a0The TAT became one of the most popular projective tests ever developed, and continues to be widely used today.<\/p>\n<p>The TAT has been used in two particularly interesting settings outside of clinical psychology: to study the need for achievement (see the next section), and to screen agents for the Office of Strategic Services during World War II. \u00a0Murray used the TAT as part of a program to help select members of the OSS for critical, dangerous missions. \u00a0Even before joining the OSS, Murray worked for the government in support of the war effort. \u00a0In conjunction with Gordon Allport, he provided an analysis of the personality of Adolf Hitler, along with predictions as to how Hitler might react after Germany was defeated. \u00a0He also helped to develop a series of questions for the crew of a captured German U-boat. \u00a0The OSS program involved assessing candidate\u2019s responses to highly stressful situations. \u00a0In addition to psychological testing, using instruments such as the TAT, the candidates were put into highly stressful situations. \u00a0For example, they were told to pick two men to help them put together a five-foot cube with wooden poles, blocks, and pegs. \u00a0However, the available men were all secretly on Murray\u2019s staff. \u00a0One of them would act helpless and passive, whereas the other made stupid suggestions and constantly criticized the recruit. \u00a0The task was, of course, never completed, but it provided Murray with the information he needed on how the candidate performed under stress (Brian, 1995; Robinson, 1992).<\/p>\n<p>In the next chapter we will see that the existential psychologist Rollo May talked about our need for myths, in order to make sense out of our often senseless world. \u00a0Although this was not a need included by Murray, he did have an interest in mythology. \u00a0The imagination that is necessary to create a story around a picture in the TAT often involves symbolism that arises from the depths of the whole self (Murray, 1960). \u00a0In this regard, Murray sounds quite similar to Jung and his theory of archetypes, and Murray discussed some classic images from our historical mythology. \u00a0Of particular interest to Murray, however, is whether or not we will establish new myths in the future. \u00a0There are older myths that remain oriented to our future, such as the apocalyptic myths or the myth of the Promised Land (Murray, 1960). \u00a0The existential philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre lamented the demythologizing of the universe by science, and he advocated a remythologizing of the self (see McAdams, 1992). \u00a0Given that Murray did include a need for cognizance, the need to explore, to ask questions, and to satisfy curiosity, perhaps there will be new myths created in our future. \u00a0If so, psychologists will need to keep current with the cultural phenomena that influence people\u2019s unconscious projections onto the TAT and other projective tests.<\/p>\n<h4>David McClelland and the Need for Achievement<\/h4>\n<p>David McClelland, who joined the faculty of Harvard University a few years before Murray retired, conducted some well-known research utilizing the TAT to examine the\u00a0<strong>need for achievement<\/strong>. \u00a0The research began shortly after World War II, and was supported by the Office of Naval Research. \u00a0McClelland and his colleagues made an interesting point, in the preface to their book\u00a0<em>The Achievement Motive<\/em>\u00a0(McClelland, Atkinson, Clark, &amp; Lowell, 1953), about studying just one of Murray\u2019s needs: \u00a0\u201cconcentration on a limited research problem is not necessarily narrowing; it may lead ultimately into the whole of psychology.\u201d \u00a0Indeed, they felt that they learned a great deal about personality by studying one of the most important of human needs.<\/p>\n<p>McClelland and his colleagues used the TAT and borrowed heavily from Murray\u2019s procedures and scoring system. \u00a0However, they made a number of modifications. \u00a0They used additional pictures of their own, they often presented the pictures on a screen to a group of subjects, those subjects were all male college students, and some of their experimental conditions were designed to evoke achievement-oriented responses, or responses based on success or failure. \u00a0An important aspect of this study was that the TAT (and similar pictures developed by McClelland) requires writing imaginative stories of what the subject projects onto the picture. \u00a0Therefore, situations that stimulate achievement-oriented imagination can result in higher scores on the need for achievement, something that McClelland and his colleagues confirmed in Navaho children during the course of their research (suggesting it is a universal phenomenon). \u00a0Overall, they found that individuals who are high in their need for achievement perform more tasks during timed tests, improve more quickly in their ability to perform those tasks, set higher levels of aspirations, remember more of the tasks they failed to perform, and they are more future-oriented and recognize achievement-oriented situations (McClelland et al., 1953). \u00a0In addition, they found a positive correlation between the need for achievement and cultures and families in which there is an emphasis on the individual development of children, with early childhood being of particular importance. \u00a0After examining eight Native American cultures (Navaho, Ciricahua-Apache, Western Apache, Hopi, Comanche, Sanpoil, Paiute, and Flatheads), McClelland and his colleagues determined that the need for achievement in each culture (measured from classic legends involving the archetypal trickster \u201ccoyote\u201d) correlates highly with both an early age onset and the severity of independence training (McClelland et al., 1953). \u00a0In summary, the need for achievement is a motivational force that develops in early childhood, and which pushes individuals toward accomplishing life\u2019s tasks.<\/p>\n<p>An excellent essay on the need for achievement, which addresses some of the criticism this concept has endured, was written by McClelland in a new introduction for the second printing of his book\u00a0<em>The Achieving Society<\/em>\u00a0(McClelland, 1976). \u00a0This book also adds to the cross-cultural reach of McClelland\u2019s work, since as he extends his theory on the need for achievement to the societies in which individuals live he also extends his theory to other societies around the world. \u00a0First, the concept itself has typically been misunderstood:<\/p>\n<p>\u2026the word \u201cachievement\u201d cues all sorts of surplus meanings that the technically defined\u00a0<em>n<\/em>\u00a0Achievement variable does not have. \u00a0It refers specifically to the desire to do something better, faster, more efficiently, with less effort. \u00a0It is not a generalized desire to succeed\u2026 (pg. A; McClelland, 1976)<\/p>\n<p>In studying the role of need for achievement within societies, McClelland focused on business and economic development as one of the most easily compared aspects of different cultures. \u00a0He believed that nations possess something like a \u201cgroup mind,\u201d which can lead the nation in certain directions. \u00a0Again using literary sources as examples of cultural perspectives on the need for achievement, McClelland found support for his theory that high need for achievement preceded dramatic societal development in ancient Greece, pre-Incan Peru, Spain in the late middle ages, England leading up to the industrial revolution, and during the development of the United States (particularly in the 1800s). \u00a0Once again, McClelland cautions against over-generalizing the meaning of need for achievement:<\/p>\n<p>It is a very specific, rather rare, drive which focuses on the goal of efficiency and which expresses itself in activities available in the culture which permit or encourage one to be more efficient; and across cultures the most common form such activity takes is business. (pg. B; McClelland, 1976)<\/p>\n<p>The question of where the need for achievement comes from continued to perplex McClelland. \u00a0Although early childhood appears to be when a lasting need for achievement develops, the need for achievement can be enhanced in adults through training seminars. \u00a0More importantly, however, is the question of where need for achievement comes from in the first place, how does it develop within a society? \u00a0When McClelland was working in Ethiopia with the Peace Corps, he studied the Gurage. \u00a0This small tribal group was treated with disdain by both the dominant Christian Amhara and the Muslim Galla tribes. \u00a0And yet the Gurage were recognized for their clever business strategies, and their children wrote stories filled with imagery indicative of a high need for achievement. \u00a0Since the Gurage had developed without contact with Western Christian, Muslim, or Greco-Roman cultures, they seemed to have developed their own need for achievement. \u00a0Unfortunately, so little is known about their history, that McClelland was unable to identify the source of their motivation (McClelland, 1976).<\/p>\n<p>In support of the contention that studying the need for achievement could provide insights into many aspects of personality, McClelland pursued a number of interesting topics throughout his career, including how societies can motivate economic growth and identify talent (McClelland, Baldwin, Bronfenbrenner, &amp; Strodtbeck, 1958; McClelland &amp; Winter, 1969), the power motive (McClelland, 1975), the development of social maturity and values (McClelland, 1982a; McClelland, 1982b), and a cross-cultural study on the role of alcohol in society (McClelland, Davis, Kalin, &amp; Wanner, 1972). \u00a0Moving in a quite different direction, McClelland also wrote a book entitled\u00a0<em>The Roots of Consciousness<\/em>\u00a0(McClelland, 1964), in which he argues that Sigmund Freud\u2019s psychoanalysis is really an expression of Jewish spiritual mysticism known as Kabbalah. \u00a0We will examine Kabbalah, as well as Christian and Islamic mysticism, as a positive approach to one\u2019s lifestyle in Chapter 18.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Discussion Question:<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0McClelland found support for his ideas on the development of the need for achievement amongst Native Americans, but he did not find that same support among the Gurage tribe in Ethiopia (they had a strong need for achievement, but the source was unclear). \u00a0How important do you think it is for us to re-examine psychological theories in multiple cultures, and what would it mean for psychology if we often find contradictions?<\/p>\n<h3><strong>A Final Note: \u00a0Humanistic or Existential?<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p>In this chapter we have examined the humanistic theories of Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow. \u00a0In the next chapter we will examine the existential theories of Viktor Frankl and Rollo May. \u00a0What really is the difference? \u00a0The distinction is subtle, based on definition, and may seem nonexistent at first glance. \u00a0Indeed, both the humanistic and existential theorists have been influenced by the likes of Adler, Horney, Fromm, and Otto Rank, and Rogers in particular often writes about existential choices in his books. \u00a0Even the cognitive therapist Albert Ellis, himself profoundly influenced by Adler, considered Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy to be distinctly humanistic (see\u00a0<em>Humanistic Psychotherapy<\/em>; Ellis, 1973). \u00a0In 1986, the Saybrook Institute republished a series of essays, which had appeared in the\u00a0<em>Journal of Humanistic Psychology<\/em>, under the title\u00a0<em>Politics and Innocence: A Humanistic Debate<\/em>\u00a0(May, Rogers, Maslow, et al., 1986). \u00a0In this volume, Rogers refers to May as \u201cthe leading scholar of humanistic psychology.\u201d \u00a0May, for his part, concluded an open letter to Rogers in which he expressed \u201cprofound respect for you and your contribution in the past to all of us.\u201d \u00a0May also maintained a friendship and correspondence with Maslow (May, 1991). \u00a0Clearly, the humanistic and existential psychologists have much in common, and the important figures here in America communicated actively and with respect for the contributions of each other.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Personality Theory in Real Life: \u00a0Seeking Self-Actualization<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Carl Rogers described the actualizing tendency as something that exists within every living organism. \u00a0It is a tendency to grow, develop, and realize one\u2019s full potential. \u00a0It can be thwarted, but it cannot be destroyed without destroying the organism itself. \u00a0His person-centered approach was based on this belief, and the resulting trust that one can place in each person. \u00a0In other words, we can trust that each person is driven forward by this actualizing tendency, and that under the right conditions it will flourish (Rogers, 1977, 1986\/1989).<\/p>\n<p>According to Abraham Maslow, life is a process of choices. \u00a0At each point, we must choose between a progression choice and a regression choice. \u00a0Although many people make safe, defensive choices, self-actualizing people regularly make\u00a0<strong>growth choices<\/strong>\u00a0(Maslow, 1971). \u00a0Each growth choice moves the person closer to self-actualization, and the process continues throughout life.<\/p>\n<p>So, consider your own life. \u00a0Do you feel the actualizing tendency within you? \u00a0Do you aspire to accomplish something great, or simply to be a good person in whatever path you choose? \u00a0Think about your educational and\/or career plans. \u00a0Think about your life plans, and whether they include a family or special friends. \u00a0Do you feel a calling that is pulling in one direction or another? \u00a0The drive to accomplish, to make a contribution to your community or society, the belief that you are meant for great things, or simply that you are meant to be a source of support for others, all of these might be aspects of your actualizing tendency. \u00a0Or are you moving through life without a plan, without goals? \u00a0Do you skate along from day to day, with no destination in mind?<\/p>\n<p>If you do feel your actualizing tendency, consider how you are living your life. \u00a0Are you pursuing the steps necessary to accomplish your goals? \u00a0Have you made choices, perhaps difficult choices, which have moved you forward toward those goals?<\/p>\n<p>Basically, do you feel that you are on a path toward self-actualization, and do you think you should be? \u00a0Is it reasonable to expect, or hope, that everyone might become self-actualized?<\/p>\n<p>What might it be like to live a fully transcendent, self-actualized life? \u00a0Although there are many different, and individual, answers to that question, we can find one example in the remarkable life of Peace Pilgrim (Friends of Peace Pilgrim, 1982). \u00a0No one knows her original name, or exactly where or when she was born (other than it was on a small farm in the Eastern United States in the early 1900s). \u00a0Her family was poor, but happy, and she enjoyed her childhood. \u00a0Her life was fruitful, but eventually she found the world\u2019s focus on self-centeredness and material goods to be unfulfilling. \u00a0In 1953, she chose to leave her life behind. \u00a0She adopted the name Peace Pilgrim, and began walking across America as a prayer for peace.<\/p>\n<p>A pilgrim is a wanderer with a purpose\u2026Mine is for peace, and that is why I am a Peace Pilgrim\u2026My pilgrimage covers the entire peace picture: \u00a0peace among nations, peace among groups, peace within our environment, peace among individuals, and the very, very important inner peace \u2013 which I talk about most often because that is where peace begins\u2026I have no money. \u00a0I do not accept any money on my pilgrimage. \u00a0I belong to no organization\u2026I own only what I wear and carry. \u00a0There is nothing to tie me down. \u00a0I am as free as a bird soaring in the sky.<\/p>\n<p>I walk until given shelter, fast until given food. \u00a0I don\u2019t ask \u2013 it\u2019s given without asking. \u00a0Aren\u2019t people good! \u00a0There is a spark of good in everybody, no matter how deeply it may be buried, it is there. \u00a0It\u2019s waiting to govern your life gloriously. \u00a0(pg. 25; Peace Pilgrim cited in Friends of Peace Pilgrim, 1982)<\/p>\n<p>Between 1953 and her death in 1981, she walked, and walked, and walked. \u00a0By 1964, she had walked 25,000 miles, including walking across the United States twice and through every Canadian province. \u00a0After that, she no longer kept track of her mileage, but she completed at least four more pilgrimages, including Alaska, Hawaii, and a pilgrimage in Mexico. \u00a0Among the many friends and admirers she met along the way, there are two notable people (whom psychology students should be familiar with) who provided comments for the cover of her book: \u00a0Elisabeth Kubler-Ross called her \u201ca wonderful lady,\u201d and the popular author\/counselor Wayne Dyer said \u201cshe is my hero.\u201d \u00a0As for your own life, Peace Pilgrim has some simple advice:<\/p>\n<p>There is no glimpse of the light without walking the path. \u00a0You can\u2019t get it from anyone else, nor can you give it to anyone. \u00a0Just take whatever steps seem easiest for you, and as you take a few steps it will be easier for you to take a few more. (pg. 91; Peace Pilgrim cited in Friends of Peace Pilgrim, 1982).<\/p>\n<h3><strong>Review of Key Points<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p>\u00b7 Rogers began his clinical career searching for effective ways of conducting psychotherapy, since the techniques he had been taught were not providing adequate results.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Rogers believed that each person exists in their own, unique experiential field. \u00a0Only they can see that field clearly, although even they may not perceive it accurately (incongruence).<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Everyone has an actualizing tendency, according to Rogers. \u00a0The term commonly applied to this tendency is self-actualization.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 The self is that portion of the experiential field that is recognized as \u201cI\u201d or \u201cme.\u201d \u00a0It is organized into a self-structure.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Rogers used the term personal power to describe each person\u2019s ability to make choices necessary for the actualization of their self-structure and to then fulfill those choices or goals.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 In order for a person to grow, they must fulfill a need for positive regard. \u00a0This can only come from receiving unconditional positive regard from important family members and friends (typically beginning with the parents).<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 When people receive only conditional positive regard, they develop conditions of worth. \u00a0Their self-regard then becomes tied to those conditions of worth.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 When an individual\u2019s self-regard and positive regard are closely related, the person is said to be congruent. \u00a0If not, they are said to be incongruent.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Congruence and incongruence can be measured by understanding the gap between a person\u2019s real self and their ideal self.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Rogers described individuals who are congruent and continuing to grow as fully functioning persons.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Relationships can serve to mirror our true personality, and to reveal incongruence we are unaware of ourselves.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Successful marriages, according to Rogers, seem to be based on dedication\/commitment, communication, dissolution of roles, and maintaining each person\u2019s separate self.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Rogers identified six necessary and sufficient conditions for positive therapeutic change, conditions that can exist in any interpersonal relationships (not just in therapy). \u00a0The key factor in these relationships may be empathic understanding.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Rogers extended his study of clinical psychology into other groups designed to help all people grow and self-actualize, such as T-groups and encounter groups. \u00a0He described his shift from purely clinical work to fostering growth in all people as a person-centered approach.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Maslow worked with an amazing range of people, from the renowned experimental psychologists Harry Harlow and Edward Thorndike, to the Gestalt psychologist Max Wertheimer and the personality theorists\/clinicians Alfred Adler, Karen Horney, and Erich Fromm.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Values were very important to Maslow in his approach to psychology. \u00a0He did not, however, advocate his own values. \u00a0He reached beyond humanistic psychology to include areas of study such as existential psychology, existential theology, and Zen Buddhism.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Maslow described a hierarchy of needs, as follows: \u00a0physiological needs, safety needs, belongingness and love needs, esteem needs, and the need for self-actualization. \u00a0Lower needs must be largely satisfied before the individual begins to focus on higher needs.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 The lower needs can be described as deficiency-needs, whereas self-actualization is a Being-need.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 In addition to the basic needs, there are also cognitive needs and aesthetic needs.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Maslow described fourteen characteristics of self-actualizing people. \u00a0He developed his list by studying both contemporary and historical people who seemed to him to be self-actualizing.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Perhaps the best know characteristic of self-actualizing is the peak experience. \u00a0This experience is often described in mystical terms, and Maslow believed it may have provided a basis for the creation of religion in the early history of the human species.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Maslow described two defense mechanisms that interfere with the process of self-actualizing: \u00a0desacralizing and the Jonah complex.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Maslow proposed a Fourth Force Psychology based on Being-values and metaneeds. \u00a0He felt that some people could suffer from a sickness of the soul, a so-called metapathology, and Maslow suggested a need for metacounselors.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Some individuals experience profound peak experiences, which Maslow described as transcendent. \u00a0His concept of transcendence seems very close to the Buddhist perspective of interbeing.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Maslow proposed that organizations should seek Eupsychia, a realistically attainable environment in which the actualizing tendency of all the organization\u2019s members are supported.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 When Eupsychian management does support self-actualization, the actualization of each person benefits the others around them. \u00a0The process is known as synergy.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Based on a management model that described Theory X and theory Y management styles, Maslow proposed Theory Z. \u00a0Theory Z management seeks a transcendent management style that encourages and maximizes self-actualization and synergy in the work place.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Murray based \u201cpersonology\u201d on the study of needs. \u00a0He distinguished between viscerogenic needs and psychogenic needs.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Christiana Morgan and Murray developed the Thematic Apperception Test, a famous projective psychological test. \u00a0Murray used the test during World War II to select special agents for highly sensitive, dangerous missions.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Murray believed that a person\u2019s ability to create a story around a picture in the TAT was based in large part on their personal mythology. \u00a0He shared this interest in myth, and its role in psychology, with Carl Jung and Rollo May.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 McClelland used the TAT to study the need for achievement. \u00a0Initially, McClelland considered parental influence very important for the development of the achievement need, a finding he confirmed in Native Americans. \u00a0However, he found contradictory evidence when he studied the Gurage tribe in Ethiopia. \u00a0Thus, he considered the true source of the achievement need as something needing further research.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 The distinction between humanistic psychology and existential psychology is not clear, and there is significant overlap in the thinking of representatives from both fields. \u00a0In addition, there is a distinct humanistic element in the psychodynamic theories of Adler, Horney, Fromm, Murray, and others.<\/p>\n<h2>Personality Theory<\/h2>\n<p><em>Created\u00a0<\/em><em><strong>July 7, 2017<\/strong><\/em><em>\u00a0by\u00a0<\/em><a href=\"https:\/\/www.oercommons.org\/profile\/140438\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow noopener noreferrer\"><em>userMark Kelland<\/em><\/a><\/p>\n<p>Man is nothing else but what he makes of himself. \u00a0Such is the first principle of Existentialism\u2026For we mean that man first exists, that is, that man first of all is the being who hurls himself toward a future and who is conscious of imagining himself as being in the future\u2026Thus, Existentialism\u2019s first move is to make every man aware of what he is and to make the full responsibility of his existence rest on him. \u00a0(pg. 456; Jean-Paul Sartre, 1947\/1996)<\/p>\n<p><strong>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Existential psychology<\/strong>\u00a0is the area within psychology most closely linked to the field of philosophy. \u00a0Curiously, this provides one of the most common complaints against existential psychology. \u00a0Many historians identify the establishment of Wilhelm Wundt\u2019s experimental laboratory in Germany in 1879 as the official date of the founding of psychology. \u00a0Sigmund Freud, with his strong background in biomedical research, also sought to bring scientific methodology to the study of the mind and mental processes, including psychological disorders and psychotherapy. \u00a0Shortly thereafter, Americans such as Edward Thorndike and John Watson were establishing behaviorism, and its rigorous methodology, as the most influential field in American psychology. \u00a0So, as existential psychology arose in the 1940s and 1950s it was viewed as something of a throwback to an earlier time when psychology was not distinguished from philosophy (Lundin, 1979).<\/p>\n<p>However, as with those who identify themselves as humanistic psychologists, existential psychologists are deeply concerned with individuals and the conditions of each unique human life. \u00a0The detachment that seems so essential to experimental psychologists is unacceptable to existential psychologists. \u00a0The difference can easily be seen in the titles of two influential books written by the leading existential psychologists: \u00a0<em>Man\u2019s Search for Meaning<\/em>\u00a0by Viktor Frankl (1946\/1992) and\u00a0<em>Man\u2019s Search for Himself<\/em>\u00a0by Rollo May (1953). \u00a0Existential psychology differs significantly from humanistic psychology, however, in focusing on present existence and the fear, anguish, and sorrow that are so often associated with the circumstances of our lives (Lundin, 1979).<\/p>\n<h3><strong>Understanding the Philosophy of Existentialism<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p>The roots of\u00a0<strong>existentialism<\/strong>\u00a0as a philosophy began with the Danish philosopher S\u00f8ren Kierkegaard (1813-1855). \u00a0Kierkegaard was intensely interested in man\u2019s relationship with God, and its ultimate impossibility. \u00a0Man is finite and individual, whereas God is infinite and absolute, so the two can never truly meet. \u00a0In pursuing the relationship, however, man goes through three stages or modes of existence: \u00a0the\u00a0<strong>aesthetic mode<\/strong>, the\u00a0<strong>ethical mode<\/strong>, and the\u00a0<strong>religious mode<\/strong>. \u00a0The aesthetic mode is concerned with the here and now, and focuses primarily on pleasure and pain. \u00a0Young children live primarily in this mode. \u00a0The ethical mode involves making choices and wrestling with the concept of responsibility. \u00a0An individual in the ethical mode must choose whether or not to live by a code or according to the rules of society. \u00a0This submission to rules and codes may prove useful in terms of making life simple, but it is a dead end. \u00a0In order to break out of this dead end, one must live in the religious mode by making a firm commitment to do so. \u00a0While this may lead to the recognition that each of us is a unique individual, it also brings with it the realization of our total inadequacy relative to God. \u00a0As a result, we experience loneliness, anxiety, fear, and dread. \u00a0All of this anguish, however, allows us to know what is really true, and for Kierkegaard truth was synonymous with faith (in God). \u00a0However, as important as man\u2019s relationship to God was for Kierkegaard, he was adamantly opposed to organized religion. \u00a0Kierkegaard rejected objective, so-called\u00a0<strong>\u201ctruth\u201d<\/strong>\u00a0in the form of religious dogma in favor of the subjective \u201ctruth\u201d that each person \u201cknows\u201d within themselves. \u00a0While this subjective, personal truth brings with it the responsibility that leads to anxiety, it can also elevate a person to an authentic existence (Breisach, 1962; Frost, 1942).<\/p>\n<p>Another philosopher considered essential to the foundation of existentialism was the enigmatic German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900). \u00a0A key element of Nietzsche\u2019s philosophy is the\u00a0<strong>will-to-power<\/strong>. \u00a0He believed this will-to-power is the fundamental force in the universe (Alfred Adler considered it fundamental to personality development). \u00a0Ironically, according to Nietzsche, the universe has no regard for humanity. \u00a0Natural forces (such as disaster and disease) destroy people, life is extremely difficult, and even those who struggle on attempting to realize their will eventually succumb to death. \u00a0There is no hope to be found in an afterlife, since Nietzsche is famous for declaring that God is dead! \u00a0Neither is there much hope within society for many people. \u00a0Nietzsche believed that inequality was the natural state of humanity, so he considered slavery to be perfectly understandable and he felt that women (who are physically weaker than men) should never expect the same rights as men. \u00a0Nonetheless, Nietzsche saw a great future for humanity, in the belief, indeed the faith, that we would create a\u00a0<strong>superman\u00a0<\/strong>(or superwoman, as the case may be). \u00a0It is the creation of the superman that gives purpose to existence. \u00a0Although the concept of the superman helped to fuel Nazi views on creating a German master race, it also made its way into American comic books as the great hero Superman (Fritzsche, 2007; Frost, 1942; Jaspers, 1965). \u00a0In perhaps Nietzsche\u2019s most famous work,\u00a0<em>Thus Spoke Zarathustra<\/em>, the would-be prophet Zarathustra encouraged people to seek a better future for humanity:<\/p>\n<p><em>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0I will teach you about the superman<\/em>. \u00a0Man is something that should be overcome. \u00a0What have you done to overcome him? (pg. 81, Nietzsche, quoted in Fritzsche, 2007)<\/p>\n<p>The German existentialists Martin Heidegger (1889-1976) and Karl Jaspers (1883-1969) focused on human existence itself and our role in the world. \u00a0In a sense, Heidegger trivialized the nature of God, equating God with little more than the greatest being in the world, but a being nonetheless (just as humans are). \u00a0Jaspers was not an atheist, but still his existential theory focused on the human journey toward a\u00a0<strong>freedom<\/strong>\u00a0that has meaning only when it reveals itself in union with God (Breisach, 1962; Lescoe, 1974). \u00a0Heidegger considered individuals as beings who are all connected in\u00a0<strong>Being<\/strong>, thus distinguishing between mere beings (including other animals) and the nature of truth or Being. \u00a0Only humans are capable of understanding this connection between all beings, and Heidegger referred to this discovery as\u00a0<strong>Dasein<\/strong>\u00a0(\u201cbeing here,\u201d or existence). \u00a0On one level, Dasein is common to all creatures, but the possibility of being aware of one\u2019s connection to Being is uniquely human. \u00a0For those who ask the big questions, Dasein can become authentic existence. \u00a0This experience comes in the fullness of life, but only if one adopts the mode of existence known as\u00a0<strong>being-in-the-world<\/strong>. \u00a0Heidegger insisted that Dasein and being-in-the-world are equal. \u00a0Being-in-the-world is an odd concept, however, since Heidegger believed that Being can only arise from nothingness, and so we ourselves arise as\u00a0<strong>being-thrown-into-this-world<\/strong>. \u00a0Having been thrown into this mysterious world we wish to make it our own, but our desire for connection with Being leads to anxiety. \u00a0This anxiety cannot be overcome, because we are aware that we will die! \u00a0Surprisingly, however, Heidegger considers death to be something positive. \u00a0It is only because we are going to die that some of us strive to experience life fully. \u00a0If we can accept that death will come, and nothing will follow, we can be true to ourselves and live an authentic life (Breisach, 1962; Lundin, 1979).<\/p>\n<p>Finally we come to the French existentialist Jean-Paul Sartre (1905-1980). \u00a0Sartre was an extraordinary author and one of the most important philosophers of the twentieth century. \u00a0He was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1964, but chose to reject it. \u00a0More importantly for us, however, is the fact that he carried existential philosophy directly into psychology, with books such as\u00a0<em>The Transcendence of the Ego<\/em>\u00a0(Sartre, 1937\/1957) and a section entitled \u201cExistential Psychoanalysis\u201d in his extraordinary work\u00a0<em>Being and Nothingness\u00a0<\/em>(Sartre, 1943). \u00a0Whereas Kierkegaard believed that man could never truly be one with God, and Heidegger trivialized God, Sartre simply stated that God does not exist. \u00a0But this is not inconsequential:<\/p>\n<p>The Existentialist, on the contrary, thinks it very distressing that God does not exist, because all possibility of finding values in a heaven of ideas disappears along with Him; there can no longer be an\u00a0<em>a priori<\/em>\u00a0Good, since there is no infinite and perfect consciousness to think it. \u00a0(pg. 459; Sartre, 1947\/1996).<\/p>\n<p>If one looks at the title of Sartre\u2019s most famous philosophical work,\u00a0<em>Being and Nothingness\u00a0<\/em>(Sartre, 1943), you might get the impression that Sartre followed in the footsteps of Heidegger. \u00a0However, Sartre did not agree with Heidegger (see Sartre, 1943). \u00a0Sartre divided the world into\u00a0<strong>en-soi<\/strong>\u00a0(the in-itself) and\u00a0<strong>pour-soi<\/strong>\u00a0(the for-itself). \u00a0Pour-soi can be defined as conscious beings, of which there is only one kind: \u00a0human beings. \u00a0Everything else is en-soi, things (including non-human animals) that are silent and dead, and from which come no meaning, they only are (Breisach, 1962). \u00a0For Sartre, there is no mystery, no Being, tying all of creation together. \u00a0Man\u2019s consciousness is not a connection to God that can be realized, it is simply a unique characteristic of the human species. \u00a0The nothingness to which Sartre refers is a shell around the pour-soi, the individual, which separates it from the en-soi. \u00a0People who try to deny living authentically, those who try to deny the responsibility that comes with being conscious and settle into being nothing more than en-soi will have a shattering experience and be totally destroyed (since there is no Being, as described by Heidegger, beyond the shell surrounding the pour-soi; Breisach, 1962). \u00a0This establishes critical ethical implications for the individual, since their life will be what they make of it, and nothing more.<\/p>\n<p>Unfortunately, many people do reject their unique consciousness and desire to be en-soi, just letting life happen around them. \u00a0As the en-soi closes in around them, they begin to experience nausea, forlornness, anxiety, and despair. \u00a0Herein lays the need for\u00a0<strong>existential psychoanalysis<\/strong>:<\/p>\n<p>Existential psychoanalysis is going to reveal to man the real goal of his pursuit, which is being as a synthetic fusion of the in-itself with the for-itself; existential psychoanalysis is going to acquaint man with his passion\u2026Many men, in fact, know that the goal of their pursuit is being; and \u2026 they refrain from appropriating things for their own sake and try to realize the symbolic appropriations of their being-in-itself\u2026existential psychoanalysis\u2026must reveal to the moral agent that he is\u00a0<em>the being by whom values exist<\/em>. \u00a0It is then that his freedom will become conscious of itself\u2026 \u00a0(pg. 797; Sartre, 1943)<\/p>\n<p>Sartre proposed that individuals become conscious, and through that consciousness create the world itself, but also that we are \u201ccondemned to despair\u201d and \u201cdoomed to failure\u201d when we realize that all human activities are merely equivalent. \u00a0This philosophical approach leads into Sartre\u2019s criticism of the psychology of his time. \u00a0Sartre believed that psychologists, and even most philosophers, stopped short of really understanding people:<\/p>\n<p>For most philosophers the ego is an \u201cinhabitant\u201d of consciousness\u2026Others \u2013 psychologists for the most part \u2013 claim to discover its material presence, as the center of desires and acts, in each moment of our psychic life. \u00a0We should like to show here that the ego is neither formally nor materially\u00a0<em>in\u00a0<\/em>consciousness: \u00a0it is outside,\u00a0<em>in the world<\/em>. \u00a0It is a being of the world, like the ego of another. \u00a0(pg. 31; Sartre, 1937\/1957)<\/p>\n<p>So, Sartre believed that an existential psychoanalysis was needed to go beyond the limits of Freudian psychoanalysis. \u00a0It is not enough, according to Sartre, to stop at describing mere patterns of desires and tendencies (Sartre, 1943). \u00a0In critiquing the psychoanalytic biography of a famous author named Flaubert, Sartre asked very meaningful questions about this individual\u2019s life: \u00a0why did Flaubert become a writer instead of a painter, why did he come to feel exalted and self-important instead of gloomy, why did his writing emphasize violence, or amorous adventures, etc.? \u00a0Sartre\u2019s point is a common criticism of Freudian psychoanalytic theory. \u00a0If most any result can come from an individual\u2019s experiences, then what does psychoanalysis really tell us about anyone? \u00a0Sartre proposed a deeper form of psychoanalysis:<\/p>\n<p>This comparison allows us to understand better what an existential psychoanalysis must be if it is entitled to exist. \u00a0It is a method destined to bring to light, in a strictly objective form, the subjective choice by which each living person makes himself a person; that is, makes known to himself what he is. \u00a0Since what the method seeks is a\u00a0<em>choice of being<\/em>\u00a0at the same time as a\u00a0<em>being<\/em>, it must reduce particular behavior patterns to fundamental relations \u2013 not of sexuality or of the will-to-power, but\u00a0<em>of being<\/em>\u00a0\u2013 which are expressed in this behavior. \u00a0It is then guided from the start toward a comprehension of being and must not assign itself any other goal than to discover being and the mode of being of the being confronting this being. \u00a0It is forbidden to stop before attaining this goal\u2026This psychoanalysis has not yet found its Freud. \u00a0(pp. 733-734; Sartre; 1943)<\/p>\n<p><strong>Placing Existential Psychology in Context: \u00a0Height Psychology<\/strong><br \/>\n<strong>Goes Deeper Than Depth Psychology<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The two theorists highlighted in this chapter were truly extraordinary individuals. \u00a0Both Viktor Frankl (who coined the term \u201cheight psychology\u201d) and Rollo May were well immersed in existential thought and its application to psychology when they faced seemingly certain death. \u00a0For Frankl, who was imprisoned in the Nazi concentration camps, death was expected. \u00a0For May, who was confined to a sanitarium with tuberculosis, death was a very real possibility (and indeed many died there). \u00a0But Frankl and May were intelligent, observant, and thoughtful men. \u00a0They watched as many died, while some lived, and they sought answers that might explain who was destined for each group. \u00a0Both men observed that for those who resigned themselves to death, death came soon. \u00a0But for those who chose to live, they had a real chance to survive despite the terrible conditions in which they existed.<\/p>\n<p>Frankl and May also shared their training in traditional psychoanalysis, and both had studied with Alfred Adler, at least somewhat. \u00a0However, they found the so-called depth psychology as lacking, since it did not address the true potential for humans to rise above their conditions. \u00a0In this regard, existential psychologists have typically been viewed as belonging within the humanistic psychology camp. \u00a0However, both Frankl and May considered humanistic psychology to also be lacking, in that it neglected the true potential for humans to make bad choices, and to harm both themselves and others. \u00a0So for existential psychologists, the center of their focus is on the immediate existence of the individual, in the context of their relationship to others. \u00a0It is this seeming paradox, and the drive to resolve it, that provides the motivation and energy for life.<\/p>\n<p>There is also a natural connection between existentialism and Eastern schools of thought, including yoga, Buddhism, and Taoism. \u00a0Some of the comparisons are so striking that, shortly after discussing Taoism, May wrote \u201cone gets the same shock of similarity in Zen Buddhism\u201d (May, 1983). \u00a0And so, this chapter should provide an interesting transition to the final section of this text, in which we will examine both Eastern and Western spiritual approaches to making positive choices in one\u2019s life.<\/p>\n<h3><strong>Viktor Frankl and Logotherapy<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p>Viktor Frankl (1905-1997) was truly an extraordinary man. \u00a0His first paper was submitted for publication by Sigmund Freud; his second paper was published at the urging of Alfred Adler. \u00a0Gordon Allport was instrumental in getting Frankl\u2019s book\u00a0<em>Man\u2019s Search for Meaning\u00a0<\/em>(Frankl, 1946\/1992) published in English, a book that went on to be recognized by the Library of Congress as one of the ten most influential books in America. \u00a0He lectured around the world, and received some thirty honorary doctoral degrees in addition to the medical degree and the Ph.D. he had earned as a student. \u00a0He was invited to a private audience with Pope Paul VI, even though Frankl was Jewish. \u00a0All of this was accomplished in spite of, and partly because of, the fact that he spent several years in Nazi concentration camps during World War II, camps where his parents, brother, wife, and millions of other Jews died.<\/p>\n<h4>A Brief Biography of Viktor Frankl<\/h4>\n<p>Viktor Frankl was born in Vienna, Austria on March 26, 1905. \u00a0Although his father had been forced to drop out of medical school for financial reasons, Gabriel Frankl held a series of positions with the Austrian government, working primarily with the department of child protection and youth welfare. \u00a0He instilled in his son the importance of being intensely rational and having a firm sense of social justice, and Frankl became something of a perfectionist. \u00a0Frankl described his mother Elsa as a kindhearted and deeply pious woman, but during his childhood she often described him as a pest, and she even changed the words of Frankl\u2019s favorite childhood lullaby to include calling him a pest. \u00a0This may have been due to the fact that Frankl was often asking questions, so much so that a family friend nicknamed him \u201cThe Thinker\u201d (Frankl, 1995\/2000). \u00a0From his mother, Frankl inherited a deep emotionality. \u00a0One aspect of this emotionality involved a deep attachment to his childhood home, and he often felt homesick as his responsibilities kept him away. \u00a0And those responsibilities began at an early age (Frankl, 1995\/2000; Pattakos, 2004).<\/p>\n<p>Even in high school Frankl was developing a keen interest in existential philosophy and psychology. \u00a0At the age of 16 he delivered a public lecture \u201cOn the Meaning of Life\u201d and at 18 he wrote his graduation essay \u201cOn the Psychology of Philosophical Thought.\u201d \u00a0Throughout his high school years he maintained a correspondence with Sigmund Freud (letters that were later destroyed by the Gestapo when Frankl was deported to his first concentration camp). \u00a0When Frankl was just 19, Freud submitted one of Frankl\u2019s papers for publication in the\u00a0<em>International Journal of Psychoanalysis<\/em>, afterward hoping that Frankl would agree and give his belated consent. \u00a0Despite having impressed Freud, Frankl himself was already impressed by Alfred Adler. \u00a0Frankl became active in Adler\u2019s individual psychology group, and as he began medical school he was urged by Adler to publish a paper in the\u00a0<em>International Journal of Individual Psychology<\/em>. \u00a0It is hard to imagine that many people could have come into the favor of both Freud and Adler by such a young age, even before having begun medical school or a career in psychiatry. \u00a0Despite Frankl\u2019s young age and somewhat limited experience, the paper published by Adler was dealing with difficult material, specifically the \u201cborder area that lies between psychotherapy and philosophy, with special attention to the problems of meanings and values in psychology\u201d (Frankl, 1995\/2000). \u00a0Eventually, however, Frankl fell out of favor with Adler. \u00a0Frankl had been impressed with two men, Allers and Schwarz, whose views were at odds with Adler. \u00a0On the evening when Allers and Schwarz announced to the society that they could not agree with Adler, Adler challenged Frankl and a friend to speak up. \u00a0Frankl chose to do so, and he defended Allers and Schwarz, believing that a middle ground could be found. \u00a0Adler never spoke to Frankl again, even when Frankl said hello in the local coffee shop. \u00a0For a few months Adler had other people suggest to Frankl that he should quit the society. \u00a0When Frankl did not, he was expelled by Adler (Frankl, 1995\/2000; Pattakos, 2004).<\/p>\n<p>Frankl proceeded to develop his own practice and his own school of psychotherapy, known as\u00a0<strong>logotherapy<\/strong>\u00a0(the therapy of meaning, as in finding meaning in one\u2019s life). \u00a0As early as 1929, Frankl had begun to recognize three possible ways to find meaning in life: \u00a0a deed we do or a work we create; a meaningful human encounter, particularly one involving\u00a0<strong>love<\/strong>; and choosing one\u2019s attitude in the face of unavoidable suffering. \u00a0Logotherapy eventually became known as the third school of Viennese psychotherapy, after Freud\u2019s psychoanalysis and Adler\u2019s individual psychology. \u00a0During the 1930s Frankl did much of his work with suicidal patients and teenagers. \u00a0He had extensive talks with Wilhelm Reich in Berlin, who was also involved in youth counseling by that time. \u00a0As the 1930s came to an end, and Austria had been taken over by the Nazis, Frankl sought a visa to emigrate to the United States, which was eventually granted. \u00a0However, Frankl\u2019s parents could not get a visa, so he chose to remain in Austria with them. \u00a0He also began work on his first book, eventually published in English under the title\u00a0<em>The Doctor and the Soul<\/em>\u00a0(Frankl, 1946\/1986), which provided the foundation for logotherapy. \u00a0He fell in love with Tilly Grosser, and they were married in 1941, the last legal Jewish marriage in Vienna under the Nazis.<\/p>\n<p>Shortly thereafter, the realities of Nazi Germany overcame what little privilege Frankl had enjoyed as a doctor at a major hospital. \u00a0Since it was illegal for Jews to have children, Tilly Frankl was forced to abort their first child. \u00a0Frankl later dedicated\u00a0<em>The Unheard Cry for Meaning\u00a0<\/em>\u201cTo Harry or Marion an unborn child\u201d (Frankl, 1978). \u00a0Then the entire Frankl family, except for his sister who had gone to Australia, was deported to the Theresienstadt concentration camp (the same camp from which Anna Freud cared for orphans after the war). \u00a0As they marched into the camp with hundreds, perhaps thousands, of other prisoners, his father tried to calm those who panicked by saying again and again: \u201cBe of good cheer, for God is near.\u201d \u00a0Frankl\u2019s parents, his only brother, and his wife Tilly died in the concentration camps. \u00a0Most tragically, Frankl believed that his wife died after the war, but before the liberating Allied forces could care for all of the many, many suffering people (Frankl, 1995\/2000).<\/p>\n<p>When Frankl was deported, he tried to hide and save his only copy of\u00a0<em>The Doctor and the Soul<\/em>\u00a0by sewing it into the lining of his coat. \u00a0However, he was forced to trade his good coat for an old one, and the manuscript was lost. \u00a0While imprisoned, he managed to obtain a few scraps of paper on which to make notes. \u00a0Those notes later helped him to recreate his book, and that goal gave such meaning to his life that he considered it an important factor in his will to survive the horrors of the concentration camps. \u00a0It would be difficult to adequately describe the conditions of the concentration camps, or how they affected the minds of those imprisoned, especially since the effects were quite varied. \u00a0Frankl describes those conditions in\u00a0<em>Man\u2019s Search for Meaning<\/em>. \u00a0The book is rather short, but its contents are deep beyond comprehension. \u00a0Frankl himself, however, might take exception to referring to his book as \u201cdeep.\u201d \u00a0Depth psychology was a term used for psychodynamically-oriented psychology. \u00a0In 1938 Frankl coined the term\u00a0<strong>\u201cheight psychology\u201d<\/strong>\u00a0in order to supplement, but not replace, depth psychology (Frankl, 1978).<\/p>\n<p>After the war, Frankl\u2019s life was nothing less than amazing. \u00a0He returned to his home city of Vienna, married Eleonore Katharina, n\u00e9e Schwindt, and raised a daughter named Gabriele, whose husband and the Frankl\u2019s grandchildren all lived in Vienna. \u00a0He lectured around the world, received many honors, wrote numerous books, all while continuing to practice psychiatry and teach at the University of Vienna, Harvard, and elsewhere. \u00a0He had a great interest in humor and in cartooning. \u00a0Throughout his life, Frankl steadfastly refused to acknowledge the validity of collective guilt toward the German people. \u00a0When asked repeatedly how he could return to Vienna, after all that happened to him and his family, Frankl replied:<\/p>\n<p>\u2026I answered with a counter-question: \u00a0\u201cWho did what to me?\u201d \u00a0There had been a Catholic baroness who risked her life by hiding my cousin for years in her apartment. \u00a0There had been a Socialist attorney (Bruno Pitterman, later vice chancellor of Austria), who knew me only casually and for whom I had never done anything; and it was he who smuggled some food to me whenever he could. \u00a0For what reason, then, should I turn my back on Vienna? \u00a0(pp. 101-102; Frankl, 1995\/2000)<\/p>\n<p>Viktor Frankl died peacefully on September 2, 1997. \u00a0He was 92 years old. \u00a0During his life, his work influenced many people, from the ordinary to the famous and influential. \u00a0\u201cViktor Frankl, to be sure, leaves a profound legacy\u201d (pg. 24; Pattakos, 2004).<\/p>\n<h4>The Theoretical Basis for Logotherapy<\/h4>\n<p>While Frankl was in medical school, he considered specializing in dermatology or obstetrics. \u00a0A fellow student who was aware of Frankl\u2019s wide-ranging interests, however, introduced Frankl to the works of Kierkegaard. \u00a0This friend had been reminded of Kierkegaard\u2019s emphasis on living an authentic life, and he urged Frankl to pursue his interest in psychiatry. \u00a0While still in medical school Frankl delivered a lecture to the Academic Society for Medical Psychology, of which Frankl was the founding vice-president, and used the term logotherapy for the first time (a few years later he first used the alternative term existential analysis; Frankl, 1995\/2000). \u00a0The word logos is Greek for \u201cmeaning,\u201d and this third Viennese school of psychotherapy focuses on the meaning of human existence and man\u2019s search for such a meaning. \u00a0Logotherapy, therefore, focuses on man\u2019s\u00a0<strong>will-to-meaning<\/strong>, in contrast to Freud\u2019s\u00a0<strong>will-to-pleasure<\/strong>\u00a0(the drive to satisfy the desires of the id, the pleasure principle) or Adler\u2019s\u00a0<strong>will-to-power<\/strong>\u00a0(the drive to overcome inferiority and attain superiority; adopted from Nietzsche) (Frankl, 1946\/1986, 1946\/1992).<\/p>\n<p>The will-to-meaning is, according to Frankl, the primary source of one\u2019s motivation in life. \u00a0It is not a secondary rationalization of the instinctual drives, and meaning and values are not simply defense mechanisms. \u00a0As Frankl eloquently points out:<\/p>\n<p>\u2026as for myself, I would not be willing to live merely for the sake of my \u201cdefense mechanisms,\u201d nor would I be ready to die merely for the sake of my \u201creaction formations.\u201d \u00a0Man, however, is able to live and even to die for the sake of his ideals and values! \u00a0(pg. 105; Frankl, 1946\/1992)<\/p>\n<p>Unfortunately, one\u2019s search for meaning can be frustrated. \u00a0This\u00a0<strong>existential frustration<\/strong>\u00a0can lead to what Frankl identified as a\u00a0<strong>noogenic neurosis\u00a0<\/strong>(a neurosis of the mind or, in other words, the specifically human dimension). \u00a0Frankl suggested that when neuroses arise from an individual\u2019s inability to find meaning in their life, what they need is logotherapy, not psychotherapy. \u00a0More specifically, they need help to find some meaning in their life, some reason to be. \u00a0When reading Frankl\u2019s examples of how he helps such people, and Frankl offers many of these examples in his writings, it seems so simple. \u00a0But it must be remembered that it takes a great deal of experience, knowledge, and maturity, as well as an ability to put oneself in another\u2019s shoes, in order to creatively think of how another person can find meaning in their life. \u00a0It would be safe to say that many of us find it difficult to find meaning in our own lives, and research has indeed shown that the will-to-meaning is a significant concern throughout the world (Frankl, 1946\/1992). \u00a0In order to make sense of this problem, Frankl has suggested that we should not ask what we expect from life, but rather, we should understand that life expects something from us:<\/p>\n<p>A colleague, an aged general practitioner, turned to me because he could not come to terms with the loss of his wife, who had died two years before. \u00a0His marriage had been very happy, and he was now extremely depressed. \u00a0I asked him quite simply: \u00a0\u201cTell me what would have happened if you had died first and your wife had survived you?\u201d \u00a0\u201cThat would have been terrible,\u201d he said. \u00a0\u201cHow my wife would have suffered?\u201d \u00a0\u201cWell, you see,\u201d I answered, \u201cyour wife has been spared that, and it was you who spared her, though of course you must now pay by surviving and mourning her.\u201d \u00a0In that very moment his mourning had been given a meaning \u2013 the meaning of a sacrifice. \u00a0(pg. xx; Frankl, 1946\/1986)<\/p>\n<p>The latter point brings us back to Frankl\u2019s discussion of how one can find meaning in life: \u00a0through creating a work or doing a deed; by experiencing something or encountering someone, particularly when love is involved; or by choosing one\u2019s attitude toward unavoidable suffering. \u00a0Those of us who have lost someone dear know how easily it leads to deep suffering. \u00a0Frankl had already written the first version of\u00a0<em>The Doctor and the Soul\u00a0<\/em>when he entered the Theresienstadt concentration camp, so his views on how one should choose their attitude toward unavoidable suffering were put to a test that no research protocol could ever hope to achieve! \u00a0His observations form the basis for much of\u00a0<em>Man\u2019s Search for Meaning<\/em>. \u00a0Both his observations of others and his own reactions in this unimaginably horrible and tragic situation are quite fascinating:<\/p>\n<p>\u2026as we stumbled on for miles, slipping on icy spots, supporting each other time and again, dragging one another up and onward, nothing was said, but we both knew: \u00a0each of was thinking his wife\u2026my mind clung to my wife\u2019s image\u2026Real or not, her look was then more luminous than the sun\u2026A thought transfixed me: \u00a0for the first time in my life I saw the truth as it is set into song by so many poets, proclaimed as the final wisdom by so many thinkers. \u00a0The truth \u2013 that love is the ultimate and the highest goal to which man can aspire. \u00a0Then I grasped the meaning of the greatest secret that human poetry and human thought and belief have to impart: \u00a0<em>The salvation of man is through love and in love<\/em>. (pp. 48-49; Frankl, 1946\/1992)<\/p>\n<p>\u2026One evening, when we were already resting on the floor of our hut, dead tired, soup bowls in hand, a fellow prisoner rushed in and asked us to run out to the assembly grounds and see the wonderful sunset. \u00a0Standing outside we saw sinister clouds glowing in the west and the whole sky alive with clouds of ever-changing shapes and colors, from steel blue to blood red\u2026Then, after minutes of moving silence, one prisoner said to another, \u201cHow beautiful the world\u00a0<em>could<\/em>\u00a0be!\u201d \u00a0(pg. 51; Frankl, 1946\/1992)<\/p>\n<p>\u2026The experiences of camp life show that man does have a choice of action. \u00a0There were enough examples, often of a heroic nature, which proved that apathy could be overcome, irritability suppressed. \u00a0Man\u00a0<em>can<\/em>\u00a0preserve a vestige of spiritual freedom, of independence of mind, even in such terrible conditions of psychic and physical stress.<\/p>\n<p>We who lived in concentration camps can remember the men who walked through the huts comforting others, giving away their last piece of bread. \u00a0They may have been few in number, but they offer sufficient proof that everything can be taken from a man but one thing: \u00a0the last of the human freedoms \u2013 to choose one\u2019s attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one\u2019s own way. \u00a0(pp. 74-75; Frankl, 1946\/1992)<\/p>\n<p><strong>Discussion Question:<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0Frankl considered the most important aspect of survival to be the ability to find meaning in one\u2019s life. \u00a0Have you found meaning in your life? \u00a0Are there goals you have that you believe might add meaning to your life? \u00a0Do you know anyone personally whose life seems to be filled with meaning, and if so, how does it appear to affect them?<\/p>\n<h4>Logotherapy as a Technique<\/h4>\n<p>Unfortunately, as noted by Frankl, not everyone can successfully accomplish the will-to-meaning. \u00a0Those who rapidly declined toward death itself had lost the ability to have faith in the future; they could not identify any goal that provided meaning for their future. \u00a0Such individual\u2019s exist in what Frankl called an existential vacuum. \u00a0We have no instincts that tell us what we have to do, fewer and fewer traditions that tell us what we should do, and we often don\u2019t even know what we want to do. \u00a0Therein lays the need for logotherapy. \u00a0As a technique, logotherapy relies primarily on\u00a0<strong>paradoxical intention\u00a0<\/strong>and\u00a0<strong>dereflection<\/strong>\u00a0(Frankl, 1946\/1986, 1946\/1992). \u00a0Paradoxical intention is based on a simple trap in which neurotic individuals often find themselves. \u00a0When a person thinks about or approaches a situation that provokes a neurotic symptom, such as fear, the person experiences\u00a0<strong>anticipatory anxiety<\/strong>. \u00a0This anticipatory anxiety takes the form of the symptom, which reinforces their anxiety. \u00a0And so on\u2026 \u00a0In order to help people break out of this negative cycle, Frankl recommends having them focus intently on the very thing that evokes their symptoms, even trying to exhibit their symptoms more severely than ever before! \u00a0As a result, the patient is able to separate themselves from their own neurosis, and eventually the neurosis loses its potency.<\/p>\n<p>Similar to anticipatory anxiety, people often experience a compulsive inclination to observe themselves, resulting in hyper-reflection. \u00a0For example, people who suffer from insomnia focus on their efforts to sleep, or people who cannot enjoy a sexual relationship often focus on their physical, sexual responses. \u00a0Because of this intense focus on sleep, or having an orgasm, these very things are unattainable. \u00a0In dereflection, patients are taught not to pay attention to what they desire. \u00a0A person who cannot sleep might read in bed, they will eventually fall asleep. \u00a0A person who cannot enjoy intimate sexuality could focus on their partner, and as a result they should experience satisfaction that they did not expect. \u00a0In essence, whereas paradoxical intention teaches the patient to ridicule their symptoms, dereflection teaches the patient to ignore his or her symptoms (Frankl, 1946\/1986).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Discussion Question:<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0Logotherapy relies on paradoxical intention and dereflection to break the anticipatory anxiety that often leads to failure (and then, more anxiety). \u00a0Are there situations where you find yourself getting anxious or nervous even before the situation begins? \u00a0What steps, if any, have you taken to break out of that pattern?<\/p>\n<h4>The Search for Ultimate Meaning<\/h4>\n<p>Kierkegaard believed that man could never truly be in contact with the infinite and absolute God. \u00a0Similarly, Frankl talked about a\u00a0<strong>super-meaning<\/strong>\u00a0to life, something that goes far deeper than logic. \u00a0When Frankl told his daughter that the\u00a0<em>good\u00a0<\/em>Lord had cured her measles, his daughter reminded him that the\u00a0<em>good\u00a0<\/em>Lord had given her the measles in the first place. \u00a0Since children may not benefit from the challenges of suffering as adults might, and even adults find it difficult to find meaning in truly horrible situations like the concentration camps of Nazi Germany or the gulags of the former Soviet Union, the meaning of life in the greater context of human societies is often not readily apparent. \u00a0But as Frankl says:<\/p>\n<p>This ultimate meaning necessarily exceeds and surpasses the finite intellectual capacities of man; in logotherapy, we speak in this context of a super-meaning. \u00a0What is demanded of man is not, as some existential philosophers teach, to endure the meaninglessness of life, but rather to bear his incapacity to grasp its unconditional meaningfulness in rational terms. \u00a0<em>Logos<\/em>\u00a0is deeper than logic. \u00a0(pg. 122; Frankl, 1946\/1992)<\/p>\n<p>In discussing the value of logotherapy, Frankl offered critiques of other popular fields in psychology and psychiatry. \u00a0His most serious critique was of the deterministic nature of psychoanalysis. \u00a0Frankl fervently believed in an individual\u2019s freedom to transcend their self and choose to make the best of any situation. \u00a0And he had plenty of experience to back up his opinion: \u00a0\u201c\u2026I am a survivor of four camps \u2013 concentration camps, that is \u2013 and as such I also bear witness to the unexpected extent to which man is capable of defying and braving even the worst conditions conceivable\u201d (pg. 47; Frankl, 1978). \u00a0He did not, however, reject determinism entirely. \u00a0Instead, he attributed determinism to the psychological dimension, whereas freedom exists within the no\u00f6logical dimension. \u00a0He acknowledged Freud and Adler for teaching us to \u201cunmask the neurotic.\u201d \u00a0As for behaviorism, Frankl acknowledged that it helped to \u201cdemythologize\u201d neurosis, by pointing out that not every psychological problem is due to unconscious forces from early childhood, and he included Pavlov, Watson, and Skinner as great pioneers. \u00a0Still, both psychoanalysis and behaviorism ignore the essential humanness of the individual.<\/p>\n<p>Despite his emphasis on the individual human, Frankl did not consider logotherapy as belonging within humanistic psychology (or at least not within what he called pseudo-humanism; Frankl, 1978). \u00a0He believed that humanistic psychology focused so much on the humanity of individuals, that they did not quite appreciate the uniqueness of each person. \u00a0It is not enough to merely encounter another person. \u00a0In order to be moved on the personal level there must be an element of love (love for another person, if not a more intimate and personal love as for a spouse or a child). \u00a0As we will see below, Rollo May also considered love to be of great importance to our lives. \u00a0The emphasis that Frankl placed on love may have something to do with his deep spirituality. \u00a0Frankl believed in a spiritual unconscious, separate from the instinctual unconscious described by Freud (Frankl, 1948\/2000). \u00a0In order for an individual to experience an authentic existence, they must determine whether a given phenomenon (thoughts, feelings, impulses, etc.) is instinctual or spiritual, and then freely choose how to behave or respond. \u00a0Frankl returned to Heidegger\u2019s concept of Dasein, living according to the understanding that one is connected to Being. \u00a0Although this concept may seem reminiscent of Jung\u2019s collective unconscious, nothing could be further from the truth:<\/p>\n<p>\u2026It cannot be emphasized strongly enough that not only is the unconscious neither divine nor omniscient, but above all man\u2019s unconscious relation to God is profoundly personal. \u00a0The \u201cunconscious God\u201d must not be mistaken as an impersonal force operant in man. \u00a0This understanding was the great mistake to which C. G. Jung fell prey. \u00a0Jung must be credited with having discovered distinctly religious elements within the unconscious. \u00a0Yet he misplaced this unconscious religiousness of man, failing to locate the unconscious God in the personal and existential region. \u00a0Instead, he allotted it to the region of drives and instincts, where unconscious religiousness no longer remained a matter of choice and decision. \u00a0According to Jung, something within me is religious, but it is not I who then is religious; something within me drives me to God, but it is not I who makes the choice and takes the responsibility. \u00a0(pg. 70; Frankl, 1948\/2000)<\/p>\n<p>According to Frankl, the most human of all human phenomena is the will-to-meaning. \u00a0Religion, or spirituality, seeks a\u00a0<strong>will-to-ultimate-meaning<\/strong>. \u00a0Once again, Frankl believed that Freudian psychoanalysis and Adlerian individual psychology had failed to sufficiently credit the self-transcendent quality of individuals who live authentic lives. \u00a0It is in the study of authentic lives that \u201cheight psychology,\u201d as Frankl called it, can address the higher aspirations of the human psyche. \u00a0In other words, beyond seeking pleasure and\/or power, there is man\u2019s search for meaning (Frankl, 1948\/2000).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Discussion Question:<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0Frankl was a very spiritual man. \u00a0He talked about super-meaning and a will-to-ultimate-meaning. \u00a0Are you a spiritual and\/or religious person? \u00a0If yes, does your faith help to give meaning to your life?<\/p>\n<h3><strong>Rollo May and Existential Psychology<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p>Rollo May (1909-1994) introduced existentialism to American psychologists, and has remained the best known proponent of this approach in America. \u00a0Trained in a fairly traditional format as a psychoanalyst, May considered the detachment with which psychoanalysts approached their patients as a violation of social ethics. \u00a0For example, if a psychoanalyst helps a patient to be the best they can be, and the person happens to earn their living in an unseemly or criminal way, it hardly seems proper (Stagner, 1988). \u00a0On the other hand, who is to decide which values should be preferred in a particular society? \u00a0In the pursuit of freedom, May suggested that sometimes individuals might reasonably oppose the standards or morality of their society. \u00a0Politics, a wonderful topic for lively debates, is dependent on opposing viewpoints. \u00a0Only when an individual lives an authentic life, however, should their opinion be considered valid, and existential psychology seeks to help individuals live authentic lives.<\/p>\n<h4>A Brief Biography of Rollo May<\/h4>\n<p>Rollo Reese May was born on April 21, 1909, in Ohio, and grew up in Marine City, Michigan. \u00a0He attended Oberlin College in Ohio, graduating in 1930. \u00a0Having always been interested in art and artistic creativity, he joined with a small group of artists and traveled to Europe, where they studied the local art of Poland. \u00a0In order to remain in Europe, May took a teaching position with the American College at Salonika in Greece. \u00a0When not teaching, he traveled widely throughout Greece, Poland, Romania, and Turkey. \u00a0He attended the summer school taught by Alfred Adler. \u00a0Deeply impressed by Adler (as Frankl had been), he nonetheless considered Adler\u2019s theories overly simplistic and too general. \u00a0This may well have been due to his awakening awareness of the tragic side of human life, keeping in mind that much of Europe suffered greatly during the depression between World War I and World War II (Reeves, 1977).<\/p>\n<p>Upon returning to the United States, May worked as a student advisor and the editor of a student magazine at Michigan State University. \u00a0In 1936, he enrolled at Union Theological Seminary in New York, with the intention of asking, and most likely hoping to find answers to, the ultimate questions about human life. \u00a0Despite having no particular desire to become a minister, he did serve in a parish in Montclair, New Jersey for a while. \u00a0While at the seminary, he became a lifelong friend of Paul Tillich, a well-known existential theologian. \u00a0Tillich, whose classes May regularly attended, introduced May to the works of Kierkegaard and Heidegger. \u00a0May also met Kurt Goldstein during this time, and became acquainted with Goldstein\u2019s theories of self-actualization and anxiety as a reaction by organisms to catastrophic events. \u00a0Regarding his time as a minister, May reflected that the only events which seemed to include an element of reality were the funerals (Reeves, 1977).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after graduating from the seminary, May began writing books on counseling and creative living. \u00a0He worked as a counselor at the College of the City of New York, and trained as a psychoanalyst at the William Alanson White Institute of Psychiatry, Psychoanalysis, and Psychology in New York. \u00a0His time at the training institute overlapped with Harry Stack Sullivan being the president of the William Alanson White Foundation, and Erich Fromm as a fellow associate. \u00a0In 1946, May began a private practice in psychoanalysis, in 1948 he became a faculty member at the institute, and in 1949 he received the first Ph.D. in clinical psychology at Columbia University. \u00a0His doctoral dissertation was published as\u00a0<em>The Meaning of Anxiety\u00a0<\/em>(May, 1950), a book that heavily cites the work of Freud and Kierkegaard on anxiety, as well as Fromm, Horney, and Tillich (May, 1950; Reeves, 1977).<\/p>\n<p>Similar to Viktor Frankl, May\u2019s life had taken a dramatic turn during this time, an uncontrollable event that threatened his life: \u00a0May contracted tuberculosis. \u00a0At the time, there were no effective treatments for this contagious disease, many people died from it, and like many others May had to spend several years at a sanitarium (Saranac Sanitarium in upstate New York). \u00a0It was during his time in the sanitarium that May theorized about anxiety and came to one of the most important conclusions in his career. \u00a0He determined that although Freud had done a masterful job of characterizing the effects of anxiety on the individual, it was Kierkegaard who had truly identified what anxiety is: \u00a0the threat of becoming nothing. \u00a0From this point on May could clearly be identified as an existential psychologist. \u00a0He collaborated with Abraham Maslow, Carl Rogers, and Gordon Allport to present a symposium on existential psychology, in conjunction with the 1959 annual convention of American Psychological Association, which led to the publication of a book on the subject (Reeves, 1977).<\/p>\n<p>As May\u2019s career continued, he became a supervisory and training analyst at the William Alanson White Institute, and an adjunct professor of psychology in the graduate school at New York University. \u00a0He gave a series of radio talks on existential psychology on a Canadian Broadcasting Corporation show, he served as a visiting professor at Harvard and Princeton, and he continued writing. \u00a0His later books include works on dreams, symbolism, religion, and love. \u00a0He eventually settled in California, where he died in 1994.<\/p>\n<h4>Anxiety<\/h4>\n<p>May considered\u00a0<strong>anxiety<\/strong>\u00a0to be the underlying cause of nearly every crisis, whether domestic, professional, economic, or political. \u00a0He described the world we live in as an age of anxiety. \u00a0Even though May published\u00a0<em>The Meaning of Anxiety<\/em>\u00a0in 1950, it is safe to say that his concerns are even more relevant today, particularly with the advent of the depersonalization of our world due to the computer age (Reeves, 1977). \u00a0May considered a wide range of theories on anxiety, including philosophers, neurologists (Kurt Goldstein), and the major psychodynamic theorists (including Freud, Adler, Jung, Horney, Sullivan, and Fromm). \u00a0He came to the conclusion that Freud had done the best job of explaining anxiety, but it was Kierkegaard who best understood anxiety. \u00a0May was particularly impressed by Kierkegaard\u2019s idea that anxiety must be understood in the context of an orientation toward freedom. \u00a0Freedom is the goal of personality development, and although this freedom brings with it anxiety, it is through facing this anxiety that the possibility of freedom arises (May, 1950). \u00a0In praise of Kierkegaard, May wrote:<\/p>\n<p>\u2026Kierkegaard is proclaiming that \u201cself-strength\u201d develops out of the individual\u2019s successful confronting of anxiety-creating experiences; this is the way one becomes educated to maturity as a self. \u00a0What is amazing in Kierkegaard is that despite his lack of the tools for interpreting unconscious material \u2013 which tools have been available in their most complete form only since Freud \u2013 he so keenly and profoundly anticipated modern psychoanalytic insight into anxiety; and that at the same time he placed these insights in the broad context of a poetic and philosophical understanding of human experience. \u00a0(pg. 45; May, 1950)<\/p>\n<p>In defining anxiety, May distinguished between anxiety and fear, and between\u00a0<strong>normal anxiety<\/strong>\u00a0and\u00a0<strong>neurotic anxiety<\/strong>. \u00a0According to May, \u201canxiety is the apprehension cued off by a threat to some value which the individual holds essential to his existence as a personality\u201d (pg. 191; May, 1950). \u00a0The threat may be either physical or psychological, such as facing death from tuberculosis or being imprisoned in a concentration camp (which, of course, brought the threat of death in addition to the loss of freedom), or the threat may challenge some other value that the individual identifies with their existence or personal identity (such as the loss of a career, a divorce, a challenge to patriotism in time of war, etc.). \u00a0What differentiates anxiety from fear, is that fear is a reaction to a specific event, whereas anxiety is vague and diffuse. \u00a0For example, during a robbery you may fear a man with a gun, but in America today many people are anxious about terrorism. \u00a0No one can tell when or where terrorists may strike, or even whether they will be foreign terrorists (such as in the World Trade Center attacks) or American terrorists (such as the bombing of the federal building in Oklahoma City or the D.C. sniper killings). \u00a0May carefully pointed out that using the terms \u201cvague\u201d and \u201cdiffuse\u201d to describe anxiety should in no way diminish our understanding of the intensity and painfulness that anxiety can bring. \u00a0Therein lies the difference between normal vs. neurotic anxiety (May, 1950).<\/p>\n<p>Everyone faces challenges in life, but not everyone sees the same challenges as actual threats. \u00a0Losing one\u2019s job can be an opportunity to begin a new career, perhaps to go back to school to pursue that new career. \u00a0However, the transition is often difficult, especially when one is used to being the primary wage earner in the family, and also if the family has to cut back on items they can no longer afford. \u00a0So anxiety would be a reasonable reaction. \u00a0That anxiety is considered normal if it is 1) not disproportionate to the objective threat, 2) does not involve mechanisms of intrapsychic conflict, and 3) does not require defense mechanisms for its management (May, 1950). \u00a0Normal anxiety is often overlooked in adults since it is not particularly intense, especially compared to neurotic anxiety, and it can be managed constructively. \u00a0It does not show itself in panic or other dramatic symptoms. \u00a0Neurotic anxiety is, simply, the opposite of normal anxiety. \u00a0It is disproportionate to the objective threat, it does require intrapsychic defense mechanisms, and it results in neurotic symptoms in spite of those defense mechanisms. \u00a0It is important to keep in mind that we should not consider individuals who suffer from neurotic anxiety as suffering from objective weaknesses, but rather they suffer from inner psychological patterns and conflicts that prevent them from using their powers to cope.<\/p>\n<p>True to his training in psychodynamic theory, May believed that the psychological patterns resulting in the inability to cope have their origin in childhood, particularly due to poor early relations between the infant and its parents, since an infant\u2019s essential values arise from the security patterns established between the infant and its caregivers (as in Erikson\u2019s first psychosocial crisis: \u00a0trust vs. mistrust, see Chapter 7). \u00a0One of the most important factors seems to be the infant\u2019s subjective interpretation of rejection by its primary caregiver, and that subjectivity is influenced by expectations that form later in life (e.g., middle- and upper-class children, who expect more support from their parents, are especially prone to react to rejection with neurotic anxiety; May, 1950).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Discussion Question:<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0May felt that we must understand anxiety in relation to freedom, or rather, as the fear that we will lose our freedom. \u00a0He said that some of this anxiety is normal, and only in extreme cases does it become neurotic anxiety. \u00a0What are some of the situations in your life that make you anxious, and how might they be a threat to your personal freedom? \u00a0Do you think the level of these anxieties is normal, or is it severe enough to perhaps be considered neurotic?<\/p>\n<h4>Culture, Anxiety, and Hostility<\/h4>\n<p>May also addressed the effects of culture on anxiety, and the close interrelationship between anxiety and\u00a0<strong>hostility<\/strong>. \u00a0Culture affects both the kinds and the quantities of anxiety experienced by individuals. \u00a0Beyond the essential relationship between infant and caregiver, the determinants of personality that each of us consider essential to our existence as a personality are largely cultural. \u00a0Indeed, even the nature of the infant\/caregiver relationship is subject to cultural influence. \u00a0The amount of anxiety most people are likely to experience is determined, in part, by the stability of the culture. \u00a0For example, if a culture is relatively stable and unified, there will be less anxiety throughout that culture (May, 1950). \u00a0Today, however, many societies are in dramatic flux, due in large part to the powerful trend toward globalization.<\/p>\n<p>As psychologists have begun to examine anxiety in different groups around the world, a variety of interesting, and sometimes disturbing, results have been found. \u00a0Keep in mind, however, that these are generalities, and do not necessarily apply to each individual within any group. \u00a0Generally, Asians are more anxious than Europeans and White Americans, who are more anxious than Black Americans and Africans, and there may be a neurological basis for these relative anxiety levels (Rushton, 1999). \u00a0However, when looking at the specific form of anxiety related to taking academic tests, Black Americans and Chilean students demonstrate higher levels of test anxiety than White Americans (Clawson, Firment, &amp; Trower, 1981; Guida &amp; Ludlow, 1989). \u00a0One suggestion for the higher levels of anxiety among Blacks in America is that our society is much less sociocentric than most African cultures. \u00a0Thus, Blacks in America, even if they have lived here for generations, still experience the effects of their displacement from Africa when the culture they carried with them is at odds with Western cultural expectations (Okeke at al., 1999), and even more so when an individual seems to be at odds with most members of their own cultural group (Copeland, 2006). \u00a0Indeed, the greater the discrepancy between one\u2019s individual cultural expectations and the cultural expectations of the majority of society, the greater the anxiety an individual experiences. \u00a0This is particularly true during attempts at intercultural communication (Matsumoto &amp; Juang, 2004). \u00a0Any subsequent breakdown of intercultural communication, which is more likely during periods of high anxiety, can either lead to or enhance pre-existing hostility, prejudice, discrimination, and scapegoating (Whitley &amp; Kite, 2006). \u00a0One important challenge to intercultural communication in psychology is the need for clinical psychologists to recognize the growing number of anxiety disorders unique to non-Western cultures, such as: \u00a0<strong>hwa-bung<\/strong>\u00a0(Korea),\u00a0<strong>koro<\/strong>\u00a0(Malaysia and Southern China),\u00a0<strong>nervios<\/strong>\u00a0(Latin America),\u00a0<strong>dhat syndrome<\/strong>\u00a0(India),\u00a0<strong>susto<\/strong>\u00a0(Latin America), and\u00a0<strong>taijin kyofusho\u00a0<\/strong>(Japan) (Castillo, 1997).<\/p>\n<p>Culture can influence individuals in a wide variety of ways. \u00a0May (1950) used the example of competitive individual success in the Western world as his main example, which he considered to be\u00a0<em>the<\/em>\u00a0dominant goal in America. \u00a0There are many negative effects of this competition, including the high incidences of gastric ulcers and heart disease in our society. \u00a0Less than a decade later, Freidman and Rosenman (1959) published their classic study on the relationship between Type A behavior (studied in highly competitive businessmen) and cardiovascular disease. \u00a0Subsequent studies have shown that the key component of Type A behavior predictive of heart disease is hostility, which we will discuss in more detail below (Dembrowski et al., 1985; Lachar, 1993; MacDougal et al., 1985). \u00a0There has also been a great deal of discussion in our society about media influences on body image, the relationship between unreasonable expectations for women to be thin and the incidence of eating disorders in girls and women, and the repression of female sexuality in many cultures. \u00a0Goldenberg (2005) recently presented an existential perspective on the body itself as a threat. \u00a0Cultural beliefs often help to overcome fears of mortality by convincing individuals that they are of greater value than other, lower animals. \u00a0However, despite the beliefs of many that only humans have a soul, our body is still a mortal animal. \u00a0As a reaction to the anxiety presented by the reality of our mortal body, many people act in a hostile fashion toward their own bodies, ranging from denying themselves healthy physical relationships with others (e.g., sexual repression) to outright self-destructive behavior (e.g., anorexia nervosa). \u00a0The problem reaches its extreme, however, when one powerful group directs its hostility in an organized fashion toward another group.<\/p>\n<p>The relationship between anxiety and hostility, according to May, involves a vicious circle. \u00a0Anxiety gives rise to hostility, and hostility gives rise to increased anxiety. \u00a0But which comes first? \u00a0May believed that it was anxiety that underlies hostility, and the evidence can be found in clinical cases involving repressed hostility:<\/p>\n<p>Granted the interrelation between hostility and anxiety, which affect is generally basic? \u00a0There is ground for believing that, even though hostility may be the specific affect present in many situations, anxiety is often present below the hostility\u2026For one example, in some of the psychosomatic studies of patients with hypertension\u2026it has been found that the reason the patients repressed their hostility was that they were anxious and dependent\u2026The hostility would not have to be repressed in the first place except that the individual is anxious and fears counter-hostility or alienation\u2026 \u00a0(pg. 223; May, 1950)<\/p>\n<p>In Reeves\u2019 analysis of May\u2019s theory (1977), Reeves discusses one of the most important social issues to have faced the United States: \u00a0the civil rights movement of the 1960s. \u00a0When an individual\u2019s sense of selfhood is challenged by dramatic changes in society, it can be a very painful experience. \u00a0And one is likely to resent those responsible for those changes. \u00a0While it is true that many White people in America supported the civil rights movement, White people in the Deep South (and elsewhere, of course) turned their anxiety, and its associated hostility, toward Blacks. \u00a0It should not be necessary here to describe the many terrible acts of violence that followed. \u00a0Suffice it to say that the federal government had to use military troops to intervene in some of the worst cases. \u00a0Today, we face a similar problem in the war on terrorism. \u00a0Given the often unequal and unfair manner in which globalization brings vastly different cultures into conflict, and the ease with which so many people can travel the globe, perhaps we should not be surprised at the dramatic level of terrorism in the world today.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Connections Across Cultures: \u00a0Terrorists and Terrorism<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Since September 11, 2001, when agents of the terrorist organization Al Qaeda destroyed the World Trade Center in New York City and killed some 3,000 people, the United States has been involved in what has been called an international war on terrorism. \u00a0As the war on terrorism developed, it had two main goals: \u00a0to capture Osama bin Laden, leader of Al Qaeda and mastermind of the World Trade Center bombings, and to overthrow Saddam Hussein, the dictator of Iraq (for his alleged role in supporting international terrorism). \u00a0To date, this war has lasted\u00a0<em>much<\/em>\u00a0longer than World War II, we have spent hundreds of billions of dollars, and thousands more young American men and women have died fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq. \u00a0Many Iraqi and Afghan civilians, as well as additional coalition military personnel, have also died. \u00a0Saddam Hussein was removed from power in Iraq; he was also tried, convicted, and executed. \u00a0It took nearly 10 years, but Osama bin Laden was finally tracked down and killed in a raid in Pakistan by U.S. Navy Seals. \u00a0However, Al Qaeda is still committing acts of terrorism, Iraq is descending once again into bitter sectarian violence (rising to the level of civil war), and Americans continue to die fighting in Afghanistan as our intended date for withdrawal slowly draws near (after 13 years!). \u00a0One thing that will not be addressed in this section, because it does not exist, is an easy answer to these problems.<\/p>\n<p>Please allow me to share a little personal history here. \u00a0When the Iranian revolution under Ayatollah Khomeini overthrew the Shah of Iran, and the revolutionaries captured the American embassy in Tehran and took sixty-six people hostage (fifty-two of those hostages were held for well over a year before being released), I was in the United States Marine Corps Reserve. \u00a0I received a phone call at 2:00 a.m. on a Friday morning at my apartment in Cambridge, MA. \u00a0By midnight, that same day, my reserve unit was in Camp Lejeune, NC, with full combat gear, ready to go to war in Iran. \u00a0We spent the weekend preparing, though President Carter ultimately chose not to send us overseas. \u00a0Approximately 10 years later, when the first Gulf War erupted after Iraq invaded Kuwait, my sister took part in Operation Desert Storm. \u00a0As an Air Force nurse, she was sent to England to help prepare a hospital for wounded military personnel being evacuated from the Middle East (fortunately casualties were minimal). \u00a0I considered re-enlisting in the Marine Corps at that time, since I certainly wasn\u2019t going to sit at home while my own sister \u201cfought\u201d for our country and our allies. \u00a0Thankfully, that first Gulf War was brief and, seemingly, simple. \u00a0So I have followed events in the Middle East carefully ever since, and when Al Qaeda attacked us in New York, I saw it as the latest in a continuation of events in my own life since 1979. \u00a0For people in the Middle East, however, it was a continuation of events that have lasted for thousands of years.<\/p>\n<p>What I believe matters most for Americans today is to begin to make an honest effort to understand terrorism, its causes, its goals, and how best to deal with it around the world. \u00a0First, we must dispense with misconceptions. \u00a0Terrorism and Islam are\u00a0<strong>not<\/strong>\u00a0one and the same. \u00a0In an insightful and easily readable book entitled\u00a0<em>Islam versus Terrorism<\/em>, Firooz Zadeh (2002) discusses how Islam opposes violence and murder, especially of innocent women and children. \u00a0He also attempts to identify what is and is not terrorism, and in that effort he identifies eight types of terrorism: \u00a0state terrorism, religious terrorism, criminal terrorism, terrorism by those who are mentally sick, political terrorism, oppositional terrorism, copy cat terrorism, and victim terrorism. \u00a0According to Zadeh, the highest cost to society results from state terrorism. \u00a0When the United States supports corrupt, terrorist governments in other parts of the world, our credibility as a nation fighting terrorism is suspect at best. \u00a0Has this been the case? \u00a0Yes, and in the worst possible way: \u00a0we switch sides as it serves our political and economic interests. \u00a0The United States helped to train Osama bin Laden and the Taliban fighters in Afghanistan when we wanted them to fight the Russians. \u00a0Now we call them enemies. \u00a0We provided weapons and training to Saddam Hussein\u2019s army when they were fighting the Iranians, because of the hostages taken in Tehran. \u00a0Now we have deposed Hussein. \u00a0We also sold weapons to Iran, and used the money to help support the Contras (freedom fighters or terrorists, depending on your point of view) trying to overthrow the leftist Sandinista government of Nicaragua. \u00a0Zadeh proposes that people in the Middle East cannot trust the United States, except in one area: \u00a0our support of Israel. \u00a0And since other Middle Eastern countries see Israel as the one obstacle to a Palestinian homeland, they disapprove of that support. \u00a0It does not matter whether the actions of the United States were right or wrong, whether they really were in our best interests or not. \u00a0What matters is how the rest of the world sees us now, and whether our top government officials are willing to consider how we are viewed globally and to act responsibly in terms of foreign policy in order to ensure what is best for all people around the world. \u00a0In addressing the Middle East in particular, Fathali Moghaddam wrote:<\/p>\n<p>Islamic communities in many parts of the world are experiencing a profound and historic identity crisis, one tragic manifestation of which is terrorism. \u00a0In order to understand and avert this destructive trend, we must come to grips with the monumental crisis of identity that is paralyzing moderate movements but energizing fanatic forces in Islamic communities.<\/p>\n<p>\u2026Why do we need to understand how the terrorists see the world? \u00a0Because this is the best way for us to find an effective means to end terrorism\u2026Seeing the world from the terrorists\u2019 point of view does not mean condoning terrorism; rather, it means better understanding terrorism so as to end it. \u00a0(pg. ix; Moghaddam, 2006)<\/p>\n<p>As mentioned above, there are many different forms of terrorism, so it is difficult to define exactly what it is. \u00a0Nevertheless, in an effort to do so, Moghaddam (2005) defines terrorism as \u201cpolitically motivated violence, perpetrated by individuals, groups, or state-sponsored agents, intended to instill feelings of terror and helplessness in a population in order to influence decision making and to change behavior.\u201d \u00a0Moghaddam suggests that psychologists need to play an important role in understanding terrorism for two main reasons: \u00a0the basis for terrorist actions is typically subjectively interpreted values and beliefs, and the actions of terrorists are designed to cause specific psychological experiences, i.e., terror and helplessness. \u00a0Moghaddam (2005, 2006) proposes a metaphor for how one becomes a terrorist, based on climbing a staircase, in which options are perceived to become more and more limited as one climbs the stairs. \u00a0The most significant factor is the condition in which many people live on the ground floor, before they even consider climbing that staircase. \u00a0Many people in this world live in abject poverty, under repressive governments that are unjust. \u00a0When individuals see no hope within the system, and they lack any political means to effect change, then a path toward terrorism becomes perhaps the only reasonable possibility. \u00a0Still, very few people are likely to become suicide bombers.<\/p>\n<p>Individuals living in desperate conditions may move to the first floor on the staircase toward terrorism, where they evaluate their perceived options to fight unfair treatment. \u00a0If there appear to be no options for justice within one\u2019s society, no opportunity to be heard, and no opportunity for personal mobility, the individual may then move to the second floor. \u00a0Here the individual begins to displace their aggression. \u00a0This often involves education\/propaganda that identifies a clear target, for example the United States, also known as the \u201cGreat Satan.\u201d \u00a0This is the important beginning of an us-versus-them mentality. \u00a0On the third floor, individuals become morally engaged with the terrorist organization. \u00a0While we may see terrorists as immoral, they are beginning to believe that they are fighting for a just cause, against the immoral repression of their chosen target. \u00a0As they move to the fourth floor, they solidify their categorical thinking (the us-versus-them mentality) and begin to see the terrorist organization, and terrorist acts, as legitimate. \u00a0At this point there is little chance that they can leave the terrorist organization alive. \u00a0For specific individuals, the training necessary to carry out a terrorist act takes place, often very quickly. \u00a0Not only does a terrorist need to learn about weapons and tactics, they must also be trained to sidestep the natural, biological inhibition against killing other human beings. \u00a0Two factors in helping to prepare people to kill are the intense indoctrination in the belief that their actions are for a greater good and secrecy. \u00a0If an attack is done suddenly and without warning, victims have no opportunity to submit or to beg for mercy. \u00a0The act occurs before the terrorist might become compassionate as he or she faces their intended victims (Moghaddam, 2005, 2006). \u00a0Based on this model, Moghaddam proposes four steps that are necessary to stop terrorism by interrupting the formation of new terrorists. \u00a0First, there must be prevention. \u00a0Unfortunately, our government has a long history of choosing short-term fixes, rather than long-term preventative measures. \u00a0Case in point: America\u2019s failure in the war on drugs. \u00a0Aggressive responses aimed at individuals only provide an opening for someone new to step in and continuing using and\/or selling drugs, and the same is true of terrorists. \u00a0We need to work toward eliminating the pathway to terrorism, so we will not need to use the military and\/or FBI to track down individuals (except, of course, in extreme cases such as terrorism that results from psychological disorder \u2013 e.g., consider the case of Theodore Kaczynski, the Unabomber). \u00a0In addition, Moghaddam suggests supporting contextualized democracy, educating against categorical thinking, and promoting interobjectivity and justice. \u00a0In order for there to be a long-term solution, there must be international dialogue and improved intercultural understanding (Moghaddam, 2005).<\/p>\n<p>Returning to the misconception in the minds of many Americans that terrorism is synonymous with Islam, let\u2019s examine where known terrorist organizations are located around the world. \u00a0Fairly notorious organizations have come from Northern Ireland (e.g., the Irish Republican Army and the Ulster Defense Association), throughout mainland Europe (e.g., the Red Army Faction in Germany, the Red Brigades in Italy, and Action Directe in France), throughout the Middle East (e.g., Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Palestinian group Hamas, the Stern Gang that fought for the establishment of Israel, and Al Qaeda), Africa, Asia, Latin America, Canada, and the United States (e.g., the Animal Liberation Front, Aryan Nations, the Black Panthers, and the Ku Klux Klan). \u00a0As of 1999, at least twenty-eight well-organized terrorist groups existed, and when one takes into account factions within those groups and smaller, yet still identifiable, groups, as many as eighty-three terrorists groups have been identified around the world (Henderson, 2001). \u00a0Some are primarily political, and some are primarily religious. \u00a0Some are global, and some are more local. \u00a0They include people and cultures of great diversity: \u00a0Black, White, Asian, Latin, Catholic, Protestant, Muslim, Hindu, etc. \u00a0Although terrorism appears to arise out of poverty and desperation, terrorists themselves, or at least the leaders, tend to be better educated than most and they are well versed in propaganda and well trained in weapons and tactics (Moghaddam, 2005; Zadeh, 2002). \u00a0The only characteristic that all terrorists seem to share is an extreme commitment to violence, which arises out of desperation and perceived injustice, and is viewed as the only means to be heard and to effect change.<\/p>\n<p>So can terrorism effect change, is terrorism effective? \u00a0One can easily find authors who argue that it does indeed work (Dershowitz, 2002) or that it always fails (Carr, 2002). \u00a0Alan Dershowitz (2002) argues that the very reason terrorism works is everything we have looked at so far: \u00a0an effort to understand the root causes of terrorism and the terrorists themselves. \u00a0Accordingly, he says:<\/p>\n<p>We must take precisely the opposite approach to terrorism. \u00a0We must commit ourselves\u00a0<em>never to try to understand or eliminate its alleged root causes<\/em>, but rather to place it beyond the pale of dialogue and negotiation. \u00a0Our message must be this: \u00a0even if you have legitimate grievances, if you resort to terrorism as a means toward eliminating them we will simply not listen to you, we will not try to understand you, and we will certainly never change any of our policies toward you. \u00a0Instead, we will hunt you down and destroy your capacity to engage in terror. \u00a0(pp. 24-25; Dershowitz, 2002)<\/p>\n<p>As a case in point, Dershowitz cites the awarding of observer status at the United Nations to the Palestinian Liberation Organization only after Palestinian terrorists began hijacking commercial airliners. \u00a0Prior to the hijackings, 20 years of pleading their case to the United Nations had little effect. \u00a0Dershowitz then offers a timeline that appears to clearly establish an effective relationship in which terrorism became more and more effective over time (from 1968-1999) in eliciting international recognition and support for the Palestinian cause. \u00a0In contrast, Caleb Carr (2002) views terrorism entirely within the discipline of military history. \u00a0He considers today\u2019s terrorism to be nothing more than a modern permutation of warfare against civilians in order to break their support for either leaders or policies that the terrorists oppose, the origins of which are as old as human conflict itself. \u00a0Viewing terrorism as warfare has certain interesting implications. \u00a0Throughout history, those who wage war against civilians ultimately defeated themselves by turning sentiment against them. \u00a0On 9\/11, Al Qaeda attacked civilians to a degree that has not been seen in ages:<\/p>\n<p>\u2026In so doing, the organizers, sponsors, and foot soldiers of every terrorist group involved in the September 11 attacks have unwittingly ensured that their extremist cause will be discredited among many of their sympathizers, disowned by most of their former sponsors, and finally defeated by their enemies: \u00a0two thousand years of the lessons of terror dictate that this is the ultimate fate that awaits the attackers, no matter how many noncombatants they manage to kill along the way. (pp. 223-224; Carr, 2002).<\/p>\n<p>Carr also addresses the other most important implication of treating terrorism as warfare: \u00a0it must be met with warfare, but that warfare must not be excessive, such that it might also be viewed as terrorism. \u00a0If our response to terrorism is excessive military might, then the tide of public opinion can swing back in favor of Al Qaeda, especially in Muslim countries where the United States is not trusted.<\/p>\n<p>Echoing Carr\u2019s concerns about the extent and nature of our military actions in the war on terror, one way in which terrorism might work against us, without seeming to have gained what was intended (if we can even know what was intended), is if our fundamental democratic principles change. \u00a0In\u00a0<em>The Lesser Evil: Political Ethics in an Age of Terror<\/em>, Michael Ignatieff (2004) argues that terrorism must be met with force, and that such force is a lesser evil than the terrorism that necessitated the response. \u00a0The danger lies in succumbing to the greater evil of seeking revenge. \u00a0Dershowitz (2002) provides a compelling case for how an amoral society could control and possibly eliminate all terrorism, but America is not an amoral society. \u00a0Our responses are constrained by the constitution and by the political debate that forms the very basis of our democracy. \u00a0When we respond to terrorist acts, we must consider what we want that response to accomplish:<\/p>\n<p>Terrorism requires us to think carefully about who we are as free peoples and what we need to do in order to remain so. \u00a0When we are confronted with terrorist violence, we cannot allow the claims of national security to trump the claims of liberty, since what we are trying to defend is our continued existence as a free people. \u00a0Freedom must set a limit to the measures we employ to maintain it. \u00a0(pg. 145; Ignatieff, 2004)<\/p>\n<p>Finally, can the ultimate answer to terrorism be found in promoting democratic governments in every nation? \u00a0The war on terror has led us to depose both Saddam Hussein in Iraq and the Taliban in Afghanistan, and to replace them with democratically elected governments. \u00a0Only time will tell whether those governments will survive, but there is reason for caution. \u00a0Religious turmoil continues in the Middle East. \u00a0In America, our constitution provides for separation of church and state, and that separation has become an important tradition. \u00a0But for Muslims, the idea of a secular democracy, one that is not guided by Allah, is simply inconceivable. \u00a0They are not opposed to democracy per se, indeed it has been argued that Islam is likely to eventually lead to pluralist democracies (Aslan, 2005). \u00a0But to pressure Islamic countries into accepting the secular democracy that we hold so dear is, according to Robert Shedinger (2004), equivalent to declaring war on Islam. \u00a0So what appears to be essential to promoting stability in the Middle East, and elsewhere, is an effort to support contextual democracy, that is, forms of democracy that fit with the culture of the people who will create and participate in that democracy (Aslan, 2005; Moghaddam, 2005, 2006; Shedinger, 2004; Zadeh, 2002).<\/p>\n<h4>Integration and the Human Dilemma<\/h4>\n<p>In the preface to\u00a0<em>Man\u2019s Search for Himself<\/em>\u00a0(May, 1953), May presents the existential philosophy that there is meaning to be found in challenges and suffering, and that psychologists in particular may find a special opportunity in such circumstances:<\/p>\n<p>When our society, in its time of upheaval in standards and values, can give us no clear picture of \u201cwhat we are and what we ought to be,\u201d\u2026we are thrown back on the search for ourselves. \u00a0The painful insecurity on all sides gives us new incentive to ask, Is there perhaps some important source of guidance and strength we have overlooked?\u2026How can anyone undertake the long development toward self-realization in a time when practically nothing is certain, either in the present or the future?\u2026The psychotherapist has no magic answers\u2026But there is something in addition to his technical training and his own self-understanding\u2026This something is the wisdom the psychotherapist gains in working with people who are striving to overcome their problems. \u00a0He has the extraordinary, if often taxing, privilege of accompanying persons through their intimate and profound struggles to gain new integration. \u00a0(pg. 7; May, 1953)<\/p>\n<p><strong>Integration<\/strong>, according to May, is similar to Heidegger\u2019s concept of Dasein (being-in-the-world). \u00a0As conscious, free, and responsible beings our goal should be to separate ourselves from the conformist, automaton masses (the en-soi, according to Sartre) and progressively integrate with others in freely chosen love and creative work (May, 1953), or as Clement Reeves puts it: \u00a0\u201cTo understand and elucidate the specific, distinguishing characteristics of the human being, and to grasp what it is to achieve courageous, decisive, integrated response to the challenge inherent in existence\u2026\u201d (Reeves, 1977). \u00a0The process of integration is lifelong, and should be appropriate for whatever age each one of us happens to be right now. \u00a0May suggests that a healthy child of eight, who is fulfilling his capacity of self-conscious choice for a child of eight years old, is more of a person than a neurotic adult who is 30 years old. \u00a0Likewise, a person who can face death courageously at the age of thirty is more mature than someone 80 years old who \u201ccringes and begs still to be shielded from reality\u201d (May, 1953). \u00a0Thus, it is important to live each moment with freedom, honesty, and responsibility. \u00a0If each of us lives within the present moment, working to fulfill our potential, being true to whom we are and the situations within which we live, May proposes that we will experience joy and gratification:<\/p>\n<p>\u2026<em>Does not the uncertainty of our time teach us the most important lesson of all \u2013 that the ultimate criteria are the honesty, integrity, courage and love of a given moment of relatedness?<\/em>\u00a0\u00a0If we do not have that, we are not building for the future anyway; if we do have it, we can trust the future to itself. \u00a0(pg. 276; May, 1953)<\/p>\n<p>One of the challenges to living an integrated life is seen in what May described as the\u00a0<strong>human dilemma<\/strong>\u00a0(May, 1967). \u00a0Are we the subject of our lives, or are we an object in our world? \u00a0When we become absorbed in the details of our responsibilities and actions, when we allow ourselves to be controlled and directed in order to accomplish our assigned tasks, when we become slaves to the clock, doing this and that, going here and there, as others expect us to, we are viewing ourselves as objects. \u00a0This is reminiscent of what Karen Horney called the tyranny of the should. \u00a0On the other hand, when we consider our feelings, wishes, and desires, when we are true to ourselves, or living authentically, then we are viewing ourselves as subjects, as active participants in our own lives. \u00a0According to May (1967), the human dilemma arises out of our capacity to experience ourselves as\u00a0<em>both<\/em>\u00a0subject and object at the same time. \u00a0But how can opposite poles of the human experience both be true? \u00a0It is in the process between the two poles that development of human consciousness develops, both deepening and widening that consciousness. \u00a0This is essentially the same idea, though in different form, used by Heidegger and Sartre in describing the unique nature of human beings. \u00a0For Heidegger this nothingness was the undefined distinction between Being and beings, for Sartre it was the shell that surrounded the pour-soi.<\/p>\n<p>May believed that existential psychology occupied a space somewhere between the two extremes that existed, and continue to exist, in psychology: \u00a0behaviorism vs. humanism. \u00a0May rejected Skinner\u2019s arguments that all human behavior can be understood in terms of stimuli and responses, declaring that there is ample evidence in both clinical practice and everyday life of people being active participants in their view of, actions in, and reactions to their world. \u00a0He was equally critical of Carl Rogers, believing that humanistic psychologists no longer recognized very real irrational behavior, as well as aggression and hostility (May, 1967). \u00a0He believed that psychology had become trapped in a misguided desire to define everything scientifically, and according to rules that then determined each psychologist\u2019s view of the world and their patients. \u00a0As a caution to those psychologists who cannot see beyond their theories, May wrote:<\/p>\n<p>Now I am certainly aware, if I may say so without sounding patronizing, that the compelling need for honesty is one of the motives which leads psychologists to seek quantitative measures\u2026I am also aware that research in our day has to be carefully set up so that the results are teachable and can be built upon by others. \u00a0The compelling drive to get at the truth is what improves us all as psychologists, and is part and parcel of intellectual integrity. \u00a0But I do urge that we not let the drive for honesty put blinders on us and cut off our range of vision so that we miss the very thing we set out to understand \u2013 namely, the living human being. \u00a0(pg. 14; May, 1967)<\/p>\n<p><strong>Discussion Question:<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0May suggested that we need to separate ourselves from the conformist masses, and then integrate ourselves with others in free and responsible ways. \u00a0Are you a follower, or a leader? \u00a0Either way, do you consciously choose the role you play, thereby living an authentic life?<\/p>\n<h4>Love and Intentionality<\/h4>\n<p><strong>Love\u00a0<\/strong>was a very important topic for May. \u00a0Simply put, \u201cTo be capable of giving and receiving mature love is as sound a criterion as we have for the fulfilled personality\u201d (May, 1953). \u00a0He was certainly not alone. \u00a0Harry Harlow, best known for his studies on\u00a0<strong>contact comfort<\/strong>, described love as \u201ca wondrous state, deep, tender, and rewarding,\u201d and Abraham Maslow said \u201cWe\u00a0<em>must<\/em>\u00a0understand love; we must be able to teach it, to create it, to predict it, or else the world is lost to hostility and to suspicion\u201d (Harlow, 1975; Maslow, 1975). \u00a0However, there are \u201ca million and one\u201d types of relationships that people call love, so it remains a perplexing issue (May, 1953).<\/p>\n<p>May talked about four types of love in Western tradition: \u00a0<strong>sex, eros, philia<\/strong>, and\u00a0<strong>agape<\/strong>\u00a0(May, 1969). \u00a0Sex and eros are closely related, but they are different. \u00a0Sex is what we also call lust or libido, whereas eros is the drive of love to procreate or create. \u00a0As changes in society allowed the more open study of sex, prompted by the work of people like Sigmund Freud and Wilhelm Reich, May noted three particular paradoxes. \u00a0First, our so-called enlightenment has not removed the sexual problems in our culture. \u00a0In the past, an individual could refrain from sexual activity using the moral guidelines of society as an explanation. \u00a0As casual sex became common, even expected, individuals had to face expressing their own morality as just that: \u00a0their own! \u00a0This also created a new source of anxiety for some, namely the possibility that their personal relationships might carry an expectation of sexual activity, and that if they did not comply they might not be able to continue dating someone they liked. \u00a0The second paradox is that \u201c<em>the new emphasis on technique in sex and love-making backfires<\/em>\u201d (May, 1969). \u00a0Emphasizing technique (or prowess) can result in a mechanistic attitude toward making love, possibly leading to alienation, feelings of loneliness, and depersonalization. \u00a0This can lead to the anticipatory anxiety described by Frankl. \u00a0Finally, May believed that our sexual freedom was actually a new form of Puritanism. \u00a0There is a state of alienation from the body, a separation of emotion from reason, and the use of the body as a machine. \u00a0Whereas in the Victorian era people tried to be in love without falling into sex, today many people try to have sex without falling in love.<\/p>\n<p>Philia and agape are also related to one another, as with sex and love. \u00a0Philia refers to feelings of friendship or brotherly love, whereas agape is the love devoted to caring for others. \u00a0Friendship during childhood is very important, and May believed it was essential for meaningful and loving relationships as adults, including those involving eros. \u00a0Indeed, the tension created by eros in terms of continuous attraction and continuous passion would be unbearable if philia did not enter into the equation and allow one to relax in the pleasant and friendly company of the object of one\u2019s desires. \u00a0Harry Harlow, once again, showed that the opportunity to make friends was as essential in the development of young monkeys as it appears to be in humans (cited in May, 1969). \u00a0In the West, however, given our highly individualistic and competitive society, deep, meaningful friendships seem to be something of the past, especially among men. \u00a0May cautions, however, that since the evidence shows the importance of friendship during development perhaps we should remember the value of having good friends.<\/p>\n<p>Finally we have agape, a selfless love beyond any hope of gain for oneself. \u00a0May compared this love to the biological aspect of nature in which a parent will fight to the death in defense of their offspring. \u00a0With agape, we run the risk of being like God, in the sense that we know others never act without some degree of their own interests in mind. \u00a0Similarly, we don\u2019t want to be loved in an ethereal sense, or on the other hand only for our body. \u00a0We want to be loved completely. \u00a0So, all true love involves some element of the other types of love, no matter how little or how obscured it may be (May, 1969).<\/p>\n<p>In the foreword to\u00a0<em>Love and Will<\/em>\u00a0(May, 1969) May acknowledged that some of his readers might find it odd that he combined the two topics in one book, but he felt strongly that the topics belong together. \u00a0He considered both love and will to be interdependent, they are processes in which people reach out to influence others, to help to mold and create the consciousness of others. \u00a0Love without will is sentimental and experimental, whereas will without love is manipulative. \u00a0Only by remaining open to the influence of others can we likewise influence them, so love must have an honest purpose, and purpose must be taken with care.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Will<\/strong>, or\u00a0<strong>will power<\/strong>\u00a0as it is more commonly known, was one of the earliest subjects in American psychology, having been examined in detail by William James as early as 1890 (see James, 1892\/1992) and again in 1897 in\u00a0<em>The Will to Believe<\/em>\u00a0(James, 1897\/1992). \u00a0May considered Sigmund Freud\u2019s greatest discovery to be the uncovering of unconscious desires and motives. \u00a0Although many people may believe themselves to be acting out of higher ideals, most of us are, in reality, acting according to psychologically determined factors of which we are unaware. \u00a0Nonetheless, May considered this to be one of the most unfortunate results of Freud\u2019s work. \u00a0By accepting determinism, we undermine the influence of will and making decisions. \u00a0As May put it, Freud\u2019s theory suggests that we are \u201cnot\u00a0<em>driving<\/em>\u00a0any more, but\u00a0<em>driven<\/em>\u201d (May, 1969).<\/p>\n<p>The suggestion that we are no longer in charge of our own lives, that we are driven by psychological determinism, seems strange to those who believe that never before have people had such power, both in terms of individual freedom and in the collective conquest of nature. \u00a0But May referred to a\u00a0<strong>contradiction in will<\/strong>, the contrast between our feelings of powerlessness and self-doubt and the societal assurances that we can do anything we set our minds to. \u00a0May believed that we exist in a \u201ccurious predicament,\u201d in that the technical wonders that make us feel so powerful are the very same processes that overwhelm us (May, 1969):<\/p>\n<p>Thus, the crisis in will does not arise from either the presence or absence of power in the individual\u2019s world. \u00a0It comes from the contradiction between the two \u2013 the result of which is a paralysis of will. \u00a0(pg. 189; May, 1969)<\/p>\n<p>Will alone is not the driving force that leads us to responsible and authentic lives. \u00a0Underlying will is something May called\u00a0<strong>intentionality<\/strong>. \u00a0Intentionality is the structure that gives meaning to experience, it is both how we perceive the world and how the world can be perceived by us. \u00a0In other words, through our perceptual processes we influence the world around us; we affect the very things that we perceive. \u00a0Intentionality is a bridge between subject and object (May, 1969). \u00a0Compare this once again to the nothingness between beings and Being (\u00e0 la Heidegger), or between the en-soi and the pour-soi (\u00e0 la Sartre). \u00a0Still, our ability to reach and form the very objects that we perceive, in other words, to participate actively in our lives, can be dramatically curtailed by the problem addressed by May early in his career, anxiety:<\/p>\n<p>Overwhelming anxiety destroys the capacity to perceive and conceive one\u2019s world, to reach out toward it to form and re-form it. \u00a0In this sense, it destroys intentionality. \u00a0We cannot hope, plan, promise, or create in severe anxiety; we shrink back into a stockade of limited consciousness hoping only to preserve ourselves until the danger is past. \u00a0(pp. 244; May, 1969)<\/p>\n<p><strong>Discussion Question:<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0Consider the different loves in your life. \u00a0How do they differ? \u00a0How have they brought meaning to your life? \u00a0Has your view of what love is changed during your life, in either good or bad ways?<\/p>\n<h4>The Daimonic: \u00a0Source of Violence and Creativity<\/h4>\n<p>The\u00a0<strong>daimonic<\/strong>, according to May, is \u201cany natural function which has the power to take over the whole person\u201d (May, 1969). \u00a0It can be either destructive or creative, and is often both. \u00a0In this way it is similar to Jung\u2019s concept of the shadow, and May himself made that comparison (May, 1991; see also Diamond, 1996, Reeves, 1977). \u00a0In fact, it is the mixture of good and evil in the daimonic that protects us from the dangers of excess, whether excess good or the passivity of feeling powerless. \u00a0When May did not know whether he would live or die from tuberculosis, he realized that his feelings of helplessness were turning into passivity, and that this was sure to lead to his death (as he had seen with others). \u00a0He described this experience as the product of his innocence, and that because he was innocent he allowed the bacteria infecting his body to do violence to him. \u00a0However, when he chose to fight the disease, when he asserted his will to live, he began to make steady progress and, indeed, he recovered. \u00a0In this sense, May had chosen to allow the daimonic to take over his self in the interest of self preservation. \u00a0In each instance, how one allows the daimonic to take over is influenced by personal responsibility (Reeves, 1977).<\/p>\n<p>When the daimonic takes over without one having made a responsible choice, however, it can lead to violence toward others. \u00a0Our lives often involve conflict between those who have power and those who do not. \u00a0When a person feels powerless, helpless, insignificant, they can lash out under the control of the daimonic. \u00a0According to May, violence is bred in impotence and apathy (May, 1972). \u00a0This can be particularly important for those who have little or no advantage in our society. \u00a0In\u00a0<em>Power and Innocence<\/em>\u00a0(May, 1972), May described a patient who was a young, Black woman. \u00a0Being both Black and female, born before the civil rights movement, she was about as powerless as one could be in America. \u00a0Her stepfather had forced her to serve as a prostitute for years. \u00a0Although quite intelligent, and successful in school and college, she felt so helpless that May described her as having \u201cno active belief that she deserved to be helped.\u201d \u00a0An important aspect of therapy for this patient was to get in touch with her anger, to get in touch with the violence that had been done to her and that she wished to do to others.<\/p>\n<p>In considering the case of this young woman, May concluded that we must not simply condemn all violence and try to eliminate even the possibility of it. \u00a0To do so would be to take away a part of full humanity. \u00a0In this context, May criticizes humanistic psychology and its emphasis on fulfilling self-actualization, an emphasis that May felt moved toward greater moral perfection. \u00a0However, the recognition that we are not perfect, that each of us has good and evil within, prohibits us from moral arrogance. \u00a0Recognizing this leads to the restraint necessary for making forgiveness possible.<\/p>\n<p>Our ability to achieve good is dependent on who we are, and who we are is based partly on our own\u00a0<strong>creativity<\/strong>. \u00a0Since humans are not simply driven by instinct and fixed action patterns, in contrast to every other creature on earth we must create ourselves. \u00a0This creation must take place within the world that exists around us, and must take into account all of the emotions and predispositions that we do carry with us as biological organisms.<\/p>\n<p>Art \u2013 and creative activities of all kinds \u2013 can provide comparatively healthy outlets for the constructive expression of anger and rage. \u00a0Creativity cannot, however, always substitute for psychotherapy. \u00a0Nevertheless, creativity is at the very core of the psychotherapeutic project: \u00a0The patient is encouraged to become more creative in psychologically restructuring his or her\u00a0<em>inner<\/em>\u00a0world, and then to continue this creative process in the\u00a0<em>outer<\/em>\u00a0world, not only by accepting and adjusting to reality, but, whenever possible, by reshaping it\u2026<\/p>\n<p>\u201cCreativity\u201d can be broadly defined as\u00a0<em>the constructive utilization of the daimonic<\/em>. \u00a0Creativity is called forth from each one of us by the inevitable conflicts and chaos inherent in human existence\u2026 (pp. 255-256; Diamond, 1996)<\/p>\n<p>Pursuing this creativity is not easy, however. \u00a0We live in a world that is rapidly changing. \u00a0Since May\u2019s death in 1994 change in the world has probably even accelerated. \u00a0May asked whether we would withdraw in anxiety and panic as our foundations where shaken, or would we actively choose to participate in forming the future (May, 1975). \u00a0Choosing to live in the future requires leaping into the unknown, going where others have not been, and therefore cannot guide us. \u00a0It involves what existentialists call the anxiety of nothingness (May, 1975). \u00a0Making this bold choice requires\u00a0<strong>courage<\/strong>. \u00a0One of the reasons we need to be courageous is that we must fully commit ourselves to pursuing a responsible creation of the future, but at the same time we must recognize that sometimes we will be wrong. \u00a0Those who claim they are absolutely right can be dangerous, since such an attitude can lead to dogmatism, or worse, fanaticism (May, 1975).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, not only must we accept that we might make bad choices, we must also recognize that our creativity is limited. \u00a0In\u00a0<em>The Courage to Create<\/em>\u00a0(May, 1975), May described having attended a conference where the introductory speaker declared that there is no limit to the possibilities of the human being. \u00a0Following this statement, the discussion at the conference was a flop. \u00a0May realized that if there is no limit to what we can accomplish, then there really aren\u2019t any problems any more, we only need to wait until our potentiality catches up with our situation and the problem solves itself. \u00a0May offered a rather amusing example to clarify this point:<\/p>\n<p>\u2026it is like putting someone into a canoe and pushing him out into the Atlantic toward England with the cheery comment, \u201cThe sky\u2019s the limit.\u201d \u00a0The canoer is only too aware of the fact that an inescapably real limit is also the bottom of the ocean. \u00a0(pg. 113, May, 1975)<\/p>\n<p>Another inescapable limit is our death. \u00a0There is no creative act that can change the fact that we will die someday, and that we cannot know when or how it will happen. \u00a0May believed, however, that these limits are valuable, that creativity itself needs limits. \u00a0He proposed that consciousness arises from our awareness of these limits, and from the struggle against these limits. \u00a0May compared this concept to Adler\u2019s theory that much of what we as individuals, and also society as a whole, are arises from our efforts to compensate for inferiority. \u00a0Thus, our limits lead to what May called a\u00a0<strong>passion for form<\/strong>. \u00a0In its passion for form, the mind is actively forming and re-forming the world in which we live (May, 1975).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Discussion Question:<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0May believed that creatively taking charge of your life required courage. \u00a0Have you ever had to make a really difficult decision? \u00a0Did you take the easy way out, or the safe path, or did you make a bold decision that offered great opportunity?<\/p>\n<h4>The Cry for Myth<\/h4>\n<p>As a practicing psychoanalyst I find that contemporary therapy is almost entirely concerned, when all is surveyed, with the problems of the individual\u2019s search for myths. \u00a0The fact that Western society has all but lost its myths was the main reason for the birth and development of psychoanalysis in the first place. \u00a0(pg. 9; May, 1991)<\/p>\n<p>The preceding quote is how May began\u00a0<em>The Cry for Myth<\/em>, the last book of his career (May, 1991). \u00a0According to May, the definition of a\u00a0<strong>myth\u00a0<\/strong>is quite simple: \u00a0it \u201cis a way of making sense in a senseless world.\u201d \u00a0In addition, myths give substance to our existence. \u00a0In a healthy society the myths provide relief from neurotic guilt and excessive anxiety, and so a compassionate therapist will not discourage them. \u00a0In the twentieth century, especially in Western culture, we have lost our myths, and with them we have lost our sense of existence and our direction or purpose in life. \u00a0The danger in this is that people are then susceptible to cults, drugs, superstition, etc., in a vain effort to replace that purpose (May, 1991).<\/p>\n<p>As we pass through the experiences of our lives, our memory is dependent mainly upon myth. \u00a0It is well accepted today that human memory is constructive, and influenced by our expectations of memory. \u00a0As May describes it, the formation of a memory, regardless of whether it is real or fantasy, is molded like clay. \u00a0We then retain it as a myth, and rely on that myth for future guidance in similar situations. \u00a0For example, an infant is fed three times a day and put to bed 365 days a year, and yet they remember only one or two of these events from their years of early childhood. \u00a0For whatever reason, good or bad, these specific events take on mythic proportions and greatly influence the course of our lives. \u00a0May acknowledges the contribution of Alfred Adler in recognizing the value of these early memories, describing Adler as \u201ca perceptive and humble man, he was gifted with unusual sensitivity for children\u201d (May, 1991). \u00a0As we have seen, Adler considered the basis for neurosis to be a lack of social interest. \u00a0In therapy, Adler focused on the \u201cguiding fiction\u201d of a child\u2019s life, something May considered to be synonymous with a \u201cmyth.\u201d \u00a0Since \u201cmemory is the mother of creativity,\u201d and memory depends upon myth, May believed that the myths that form the identity of our culture are essential for the formation of our self.<\/p>\n<p>May ends his final book with a chapter entitled\u00a0<em>The Great Circle of Love<\/em>. \u00a0Having covered a variety of famous myths in the book, including Dante\u2019s\u00a0<em>Divine Comedy<\/em>, Marlow\u2019s\u00a0<em>Faust<\/em>, Captain Ahab in\u00a0<em>Moby Dick<\/em>, and Poe\u2019s\u00a0<em>The Raven<\/em>, May concludes:<\/p>\n<p>In each of these dramas the liberation of both woman and man is possible only when each achieves a new myth of the other sex, leading to a new significant psychological relationship. \u00a0They are both then liberated from their previous empty and lonely existence. \u00a0The woman and the man find their true selves only when they are fully present to each other. \u00a0They find they both need each other, not only physically but psychologically and spiritually as well. \u00a0(pg. 288; May, 1991)<\/p>\n<h4>Existential Psychotherapy<\/h4>\n<p>Existential psychotherapy is not so much a technique as it is an overall approach to understanding the nature of the human being. \u00a0By asking deep questions about the nature of anxiety, loneliness, isolation, despair, etc., as well as about creativity and love, existential psychotherapists seek to avoid the \u201ccommon error of distorting human beings in the very effort of trying to help them\u201d (May &amp; Yalom, 1995). \u00a0May believed that American psychology has had both an affinity for and an aversion to existential psychotherapy. \u00a0The affinity arises from an historical place in American psychology that was very similar to existentialism: \u00a0William James\u2019 emphasis on the immediacy of experience, the importance of will, and the unity of thought and action. \u00a0The aversion arises from the Western tendency to dehumanize people through strict adherence to scientific principles of research, i.e., to reform humans in the image of machines (May, 1983).<\/p>\n<p>An essential aspect of existential psychotherapy is to help individuals realize their own being, their own role in choosing the form that their life will take. \u00a0This is known as the\u00a0<strong>\u201cI-Am\u201d experience<\/strong>. \u00a0It is all too common for us to associate ourselves with external factors: \u00a0I am a professor, I am a student, I work at a store, I run a business, etc. \u00a0We repress our own sense of being. \u00a0To use an example similar to a case described by May: \u00a0I am a professor, but that is not really who I am. \u00a0I am a father and a husband, but that isn\u2019t all that I am. \u00a0I have a family and a career, but that isn\u2019t quite it either. \u00a0What is left, or what is common in each of these statements? \u00a0I am! \u00a0And as May put it, if I am, I have a right to be (example cited in May &amp; Yalom, 1995). \u00a0This realization is not the solution to my problems, but it is a necessary precondition to finding the courage to pursue the rest of my life.<\/p>\n<p>Once an individual finds the courage to recreate their life, the existential therapist will address a variety of issues. \u00a0As discussed above, May placed a great deal of emphasis on anxiety. \u00a0Guilt is also an important issue to be addressed, since we may feel guilty about poor ethical choices or instances when we failed to be responsible with our actions. \u00a0As with anxiety, guilt can be normal (after actually doing something bad) or neurotic (when we fantasize some transgression). \u00a0Both anxiety and guilt affect how we experience Kierkegaard\u2019s concept of being-in-the-world. \u00a0Our world can be viewed in several different ways, however. \u00a0There is the\u00a0<strong>Umwelt<\/strong>\u00a0(the world around), the\u00a0<strong>Mitwelt\u00a0<\/strong>(the with-world), and the\u00a0<strong>Eigenwelt\u00a0<\/strong>(the own-world). \u00a0The Umwelt is the world around us, the natural environment. \u00a0It encompasses our biological needs, and the unavoidable reality that we will die one day. \u00a0The Eigenwelt refers to our self-awareness and our ability to relate to our selves, and it is uniquely human (May &amp; Yalom, 1995).<\/p>\n<p>The Mitwelt bears a special relationship to another important concept in existential psychotherapy: \u00a0<strong>time<\/strong>. \u00a0Because we tend to think about ourselves spatially, as objects within our life, we tend to focus on the past. \u00a0In other words, we focus on what we have become, as opposed to what we might be. \u00a0Moments when we truly encounter ourselves are rare, but it is only when we grasp the moment that we truly experience life. \u00a0Those moments can be positive, such as the experience of love, or negative, such as the experience of depression, but they are real nonetheless. \u00a0The Mitwelt contains the inner meaning of the events that occur in our lives. \u00a0Individuals who suffer from brain damage often cannot think in terms of abstract possibilities, they become trapped in concrete time. \u00a0In order to be fully healthy, and something essential to the growth of humans, is our ability to transcend time:<\/p>\n<p>If we are to understand a given person as existing, dynamic, at every moment becoming, we cannot avoid the dimension of transcendence. \u00a0Existing involves a continual emerging, in the sense of emergent evolution, a transcending of one\u2019s past and present in order to reach the future. \u00a0(pg. 267; May &amp; Yalom, 1995)<\/p>\n<p>Although the content described above might seem very different from the type of psychoanalysis described by Freud, the general process of existential psychotherapy is similar to psychoanalysis. \u00a0It is accepted that the client experiences anxiety, that some of this anxiety is unconscious, and that the client is relying on defense mechanisms in order to cope with the anxiety. \u00a0A fundamental difference, however, is the focus of the therapy. \u00a0Rather than digging into the deep, dark past, the existential psychotherapist strives to understand the meaning of the client\u2019s current experiences, the depth of experience in the given moment. \u00a0For this reason, the therapist-client relationship remains important, but the emphasis is not on transference. \u00a0Rather, the emphasis is on the relationship itself as fundamentally important (May &amp; Yalom, 1995).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Discussion Question:<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0Have you ever had an \u201cI-Am\u201d experience?<\/p>\n<h3><strong>Buddhism and Existentialism: \u00a0The Completion of a Circle?<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p>Buddhism is by far the oldest theory of psychology that we will cover in this book. \u00a0Applied existentialism, particularly the work of Rollo May, is one of the more recent developments in psychology. \u00a0And yet, these two approaches share a great deal in common, a fact readily acknowledged by May:<\/p>\n<p>\u2026The likenesses between these Eastern philosophies and existentialism go much deeper than the chance similarity of words. \u00a0Both are concerned with ontology, the study of being. \u00a0Both seek a relation to reality which cuts below the cleavage between subject and object. \u00a0Both would insist that the Western absorption in conquering and gaining power over nature has resulted not only in the estrangement of man from nature but also indirectly in the estrangement of man from himself. \u00a0The basic reason for these similarities is that Eastern thought never suffered the radical split between subject and object that has characterized Western thought, and this dichotomy is exactly what existentialism seeks to overcome. \u00a0\u00a0(pp. 58-59; May, 1983)<\/p>\n<p>In Japan there is a form of psychotherapy, known as\u00a0<strong>Morita<\/strong>, which emphasizes the treatment of anxiety. \u00a0The treatment consists of acceptance, reattribution, dereflection, and active engagement. \u00a0The dereflection mentioned is the same technique developed by Viktor Frankl. \u00a0The active engagement continues this effort at distracting the client from their anxiety, hopefully breaking them out of the circle of anticipatory anxiety and subsequent failure described by Frankl. \u00a0This procedure has proven both successful and, consequently, influential amongst Japanese psychotherapists. \u00a0A second Japanese technique,\u00a0<strong>Naikan<\/strong>, combines a more traditional Buddhist approach with elements of existential psychology. \u00a0The client is directed to reflect intensely on their past relationships, and then to consider what they have done for others, what others have done for them, and the difficulties they have caused for others. \u00a0The goal is to help the client recognize the interdependence of humans, and to appreciate whether or not they, as well as others, have acted responsibly within the relationships. \u00a0By confronting feelings of guilt and unworthiness, it is hoped that the client will realize that they have been loved and appreciated nonetheless (Walsh, 1995).<\/p>\n<p>Belinda Siew Luan Khong (2003) has examined the role of responsibility in a particular form of existential psychotherapy known as\u00a0<strong>daseinsanalysis<\/strong>\u00a0(developed by the Swiss psychiatrist Medard Boss and grounded in the philosophy of Heidegger) and compared it to Buddhist practice in the Theravadan tradition. \u00a0She found that daseinsanalysis and Buddhist practices share much in common, and that both have something to offer to each other:<\/p>\n<p>\u2026An integration of these two disciplines will make their ideas and practices more accessible to communities outside their traditional domains. \u00a0The daseinsanalytic and Buddhist perspectives relating to personal and social responsibility provide us with valuable philosophical and psychological insights into this very important human phenomenon and show us practically how individuals can be assisted in taking responsibility for every moment of their existence, and to develop a sense of respond-ability to different situations. \u00a0(pg. 158; Khong, 2003)<\/p>\n<p>Stephen Batchelor, a former Buddhist monk turned author and teacher, has presented existentialism as an interesting approach to the primary problem facing Buddhism in America today (Batchelor, 1983). \u00a0According to Batchelor, Buddhism in the west is split between those who wish to follow a traditional path (emphasizing meditation and practice) and those who insist upon an academic approach to the analysis and understanding of Buddhism. \u00a0Between the two approaches lies a great chasm. \u00a0As we have seen, existentialism draws its deepest and most meaningful philosophy from nothingness, be it the distinction between Being and beings (Dasein, according to Heidegger) or the shell separating the pour-soi from the en-soi (as proposed by Sartre). \u00a0Drawing primarily from his Buddhist training and the philosophy of Heidegger and Tillich (see below), Batchelor contrasts\u00a0<strong>being-alone<\/strong>\u00a0and\u00a0<strong>being-with<\/strong>. \u00a0We are essentially alone at birth and at death, in that we cannot share the experience with others, and this leads to unavoidable anxiety throughout our lives (though not necessarily overwhelming anxiety for most people). \u00a0As we will see in the next chapter, the first noble truth of Buddhism is that human life is suffering. \u00a0But just as much as we are alone, we are unavoidably linked to others as well. \u00a0What matters then, is that we experience authentic\u00a0<strong>being-with-others<\/strong>, and the root of authentic being-with is concern for others (as opposed to the inauthentic distortion of self-concern; Batchelor, 1983).<\/p>\n<p>The genuine welfare of man, of both oneself and others, is found in the optimum actualization of the potentialities of his being. \u00a0To exist in the fullest possible way in our aloneness as well as in our relations with others is the fulfillment of the inner aim of human life\u2026(pg. 88; Batchelor, 1983)<\/p>\n<h3><strong>Some Final Thoughts of Existentialism and Existential Psychology<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p>Jean-Paul Sartre\u2019s\u00a0<em>Being and Nothingness<\/em>\u00a0(1943) is considered the defining text of modern existentialism. \u00a0Sartre was an atheist, so the brief introduction to existentialism in this chapter went in the direction of atheism. \u00a0However, Frankl and May were not atheists, and one of May\u2019s most influential mentors, as well as a close personal friend, was Paul Tillich. \u00a0Tillich remains a well-known and respected existential philosopher in the spiritual tradition. \u00a0May went so far as to say that Tillich\u2019 book\u00a0<em>The Courage to Be\u00a0<\/em>might be the best and most understandable presentation of existentialism as an approach to life that has been written in English (May, 1983).<\/p>\n<p>It is also interesting to note that both Frankl and May were significantly influenced by Alfred Adler. \u00a0Frankl worked closely with Adler for a time, and May took a summer course with Adler. \u00a0Both cite Adler regularly in their writings. \u00a0Adler\u2019s focus on the childhood struggle against one\u2019s own inferiority, his emphasis on social interest as a responsible means to superiority, and his recognition of the dangers inherent in seeking superiority at the expense of others, all fit well with the existential perspective on making responsible choices in living one\u2019s life. \u00a0This point emphasizes, once again, the profound influence that Adler has had on psychology, and that he is in all probability the most under-recognized figure in the history of psychology.<\/p>\n<p>In 1897, William James published an essay entitled\u00a0<em>Is Life Worth Living?<\/em>\u00a0(James, 1897\/1992). \u00a0James begins by describing how some people see the value in life, indeed they fully enjoy life, no matter what happens to them or around them. \u00a0However, for most people this is not the case, and there is no magic way to give everyone such an optimistic point of view. \u00a0So, James presents a series of arguments that one might use with suicidal people (that is the term he uses) in order to convince them that life is worth living. \u00a0He relies heavily on religious faith, though not on any particular religion, but also leads into a discussion of existential thought. \u00a0Approximately a decade before Frankl and May were even born, James wrote the following words:<\/p>\n<p>\u2026Suppose, however thickly evils crowd upon you, that your unconquerable subjectivity proves to be their match, and that you find a more wonderful joy than any passive pleasure can bring in trusting ever in the larger whole. \u00a0Have you not now made life worth living on these terms?\u2026This life\u00a0<em>is<\/em>\u00a0worth living, we can say,\u00a0<em>since it is what we make it, from the moral point of view<\/em>, and we are determined to make it from that point of view, so far as we have anything to do with it, a success\u2026These, then, are my last words to you: \u00a0Be not afraid of life. \u00a0Believe that life\u00a0<em>is<\/em>\u00a0worth living, and your belief will help create the fact. \u00a0(pp. 501-503; James, 1897\/1992)<\/p>\n<p>The challenges that we all face in trying to live authentic lives, the challenges of making responsible and ethical choices that are true to who we ourselves are, can be difficult. \u00a0In a fascinating book entitled\u00a0<em>Not a Genuine Black Man<\/em>, Brian Copeland (2006) talks about his family\u2019s racial struggles during the civil rights movement and the difficulties he faces today as a Black man who has adopted many so-called \u201cWhite\u201d cultural values. \u00a0Copeland insists, however, that we cannot so easily claim that any given value or personal interest belongs only to one group of people:<\/p>\n<p>\u2026When all is said and done, I AM indeed a Genuine Black Man \u2013 because I am resilient. \u00a0That\u2019s what being black in America is truly about: \u00a0resilience\u2026I stayed on my feet through taunts and harassment, through police intimidation and bigoted nuns, through schoolyard bullies and Sylvester, through my mother\u2019s death and bouts of sometimes crippling depression. \u00a0I am still standing.<\/p>\n<p>I am black because, as my friend Mr. Wilkins once told me, people should be called what they\u00a0<em>want<\/em>\u00a0to be called. \u00a0I have the right and the ability to determine my identity regardless of what other blacks\u00a0<em>or<\/em>\u00a0whites say. \u00a0I am not an \u201coreo,\u201d nor am I \u201cstill a nigger.\u201d \u00a0I am a man. \u00a0I am a black man.<\/p>\n<p>No one person or group of individuals holds the monopoly on what in this society is the \u201ctrue\u201d black experience. \u00a0My world is as \u201cblack\u201d as that of Malcolm X, Colin Powell, Snoop Dogg, Jesse Jackson, Usher, Bill Cosby, or Diddy. \u00a0As their experiences in America are unique, mine is unique \u2013 yet it is the same. \u00a0It is as valid as that of the poor African American living in \u201cthe \u2018hood,\u201d the rich black rapper balancing a lifestyle of fame and violence, and the black scholar working to better this world through academic dissertation. \u00a0It is as authentic as the experiences of those who marched with Dr. King for civil rights and those who defy the black community by arguing the conservative point of view.<\/p>\n<p>It is the \u201ctrue\u201d black experience because it is\u00a0<em>my<\/em>\u00a0experience\u2026 \u00a0(pp. 243-244; Copeland, 2006)<\/p>\n<p><strong>Discussion Question:<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0Brian Copeland talked about how difficult it can be to live an authentic life when you don\u2019t meet the expectations of others. \u00a0Have you ever gone against the advice of family or friends? \u00a0Did it prove to be the right decision, or did it at least help you to feel better about your own confidence in yourself?<\/p>\n<p><strong>Personality Theory in Real Life: \u00a0The Application<\/strong><br \/>\n<strong>of Frankl\u2019s Theories to the Workplace and Everyday Life<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>In 1989, Stephen Covey published\u00a0<em>The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People<\/em>. \u00a0Covey\u2019s book became very popular, selling millions of copies on the way to becoming a #1 New York Times bestseller. \u00a0If you were to read the first chapter of that book now, it would seem very familiar. \u00a0Covey presents a very existential approach to understanding our lives, particularly with regard to the problems we experience every day. \u00a0Perhaps it should not be surprising, then, that in the chapters describing the first two of these seven habits he cites and quotes Viktor Frankl numerous times. \u00a0Indeed, Covey cites Frankl\u2019s first two books as being profoundly influential in his own life, and how impressed Covey was having met Frankl shortly before Frankl\u2019s death (see Covey\u2019s foreword in Pattakos, 2004).<\/p>\n<p>The first two habits, according to Covey, are: \u00a01) be proactive, and 2) begin with the end in mind. \u00a0He briefly describes Frankl\u2019s experiences in the concentration camps, and refers to Frankl\u2019s most widely quoted saying, that Frankl himself could decide how his experiences would affect him, and that no one could take that freedom away from Frankl! \u00a0People who choose to develop this level of personal freedom are certainly being proactive, as opposed to responding passively to events that occur around them and to them. \u00a0It is not necessary, of course, to suffer such tragic circumstances in order to become proactive in one\u2019s own life:<\/p>\n<p>\u2026It is in the ordinary events of every day that we develop the proactive capacity to handle the extraordinary pressures of life. \u00a0It\u2019s how we make and keep commitments, how we handle a traffic jam, how we respond to an irate customer or a disobedient child. \u00a0It\u2019s how we view our problems and where we focus our energies. \u00a0It\u2019s the language we use. \u00a0(pg. 92; Covey, 1989)<\/p>\n<p>Covey compares his habit of beginning with the end in mind to logotherapy, helping people to recognize the meaning that their life holds. \u00a0Covey works primarily in business leadership training, so the value of working toward a greater goal than simply keeping a company in business from day to day is clear, especially for those who care about employee morale and quality control (see also\u00a0<em>Principle-Centered Leadership<\/em>; Covey, 1990). \u00a0When employees share a sense of purpose in their work, they are likely to have higher intrinsic motivation. \u00a0Think about it for a moment. \u00a0Have you ever had a job you didn\u2019t really understand, and didn\u2019t care about? \u00a0Have you ever been given that sort of homework in school or college? \u00a0So, how much effort did you really put into that job or assignment?<\/p>\n<p>Covey\u2019s remaining habits are: \u00a03) put first things first, 4) think win\/win, 5) seek first to understand, then to be understood, 6) synergize, and 7) sharpen the saw. \u00a0At first glance these principles seem reasonably straight forward, emphasizing practical and responsible actions. \u00a0However, what does \u201csharpen the saw\u201d mean? \u00a0Sharpening the saw refers to keeping our tools in good working order, and we are our most important tool. \u00a0Covey considers it essential to regularly and consistently, in wise and balanced ways, to exercise the four dimensions of our nature: \u00a0physical, mental, social\/emotional, and spiritual. \u00a0By investing in ourselves, we are taking care to live an authentic life.<\/p>\n<p>More recently, Covey has examined his principles beyond the business world. \u00a0In 1997 he published\u00a0<em>The 7 Habits of Highly Effective Families<\/em>, a book in which he applies the same 7 habits to family life. \u00a0Covey certainly has solid credentials as a family man, as father of 9 and grandfather of 43 children, and he won the 2003 Fatherhood Award from the National Fatherhood Initiative. \u00a0Drawing in large part on his own extensive, personal experience, Covey uses many stories, anecdotes, and examples of real-life situations to help provide context to the challenges of raising a family and how we might best work with them. \u00a0But first, he introduces a simple process: \u00a0have a clear vision of what you want to accomplish, have a plan of how you might accomplish it, and use a compass (your own unique gifts that enable you to be an agent of change in your family). \u00a0In essence, Covey is recommending that you prepare yourself to develop the seven habits. \u00a0We all know how difficult it is to establish a new habit or break a bad habit; how is your New Year\u2019s resolution going?<\/p>\n<p>Just as families change, so does the world we live in. \u00a0Recently, Covey addressed this change by proposing an eighth habit (Covey, 2004). \u00a0He says that this was not simply an important habit he had overlooked before, but one that has risen to new significance as we have fully entered the age of information and technology in the twenty-first century. \u00a0As communication has become much easier (e.g., email), it has also become less personal and meaningful. \u00a0Thus the need for the eighth habit: \u00a0find your voice and inspire others to find theirs. \u00a0According to Covey, \u201cvoice is unique personal significance.\u201d \u00a0Essentially, it is the same as finding meaning in one\u2019s life, and then helping others to find meaning in their own lives. \u00a0It is through finding a mission or a purpose in life that we can move \u201cfrom effectiveness to greatness\u201d (Covey, 2004).<\/p>\n<p>Whereas Covey presented an approach to personal and professional effectiveness (and later to greatness as well) that parallels the principles set forth by Viktor Frankl, Alex Pattakos very directly applies Frankl\u2019s theories to both the workplace and one\u2019s everyday life in\u00a0<em>Prisoners of Our Thoughts: \u00a0Viktor Frankl\u2019s Principles at Work\u00a0<\/em>(with a foreword by Stephen Covey; Pattakos, 2004). \u00a0Frankl himself urged Pattakos to publish his book during a meeting in 1996. \u00a0Pattakos, like Covey, has been profoundly influenced by Frankl\u2019s writings throughout Pattakos\u2019 career. \u00a0According to Pattakos, we are creatures of habit, and we prefer a life that is both predictable and within our comfort zone. \u00a0As the world is changing in the twenty-first century, so the conditions under which we work are changing. \u00a0Pattakos believes there is a need for humanizing work. \u00a0More than just balancing one\u2019s personal life and career, humanizing work is an attempt to honor our own individuality and to fully engage our human spirit at work. \u00a0Simply put, it is an effort to apply Frankl\u2019s will-to-meaning in our workplace (Pattakos, 2004).<\/p>\n<p>Like Covey, Pattakos presents seven core principles. \u00a0They are similar to Covey\u2019s seven habits, but in keeping with Pattakos\u2019 intentions they are aligned more directly with the principles of logotherapy and existential psychology described by Frankl. \u00a0The seven core principles are: 1) exercise the freedom to choose your attitude, 2) realize your will-to-meaning, 3) detect the meaning of life\u2019s moments, 4) don\u2019t work against yourself, 5) look at yourself from a distance, 6) shift your focus of attention, and 7) extend beyond yourself. \u00a0These principles include not only the ideas of personal freedom and will-to-meaning, but also dereflection (principles 4 and 6) and the will-to-ultimate-meaning (principle 7). \u00a0Clearly Pattakos has accomplished his goal of applying logotherapy to the workplace, but how well does this application work in real life?<\/p>\n<p>Pattakos describes the case of a probation officer with the state department of corrections. \u00a0Rick, as Pattakos identifies him, was raised in foster care and orphanages. \u00a0However, rather than developing a sense of caring and concern for others who have difficulties in their lives, Rick refers to his clients as \u201cmaggots.\u201d \u00a0Rick has become insensitive and unforgiving, he has also become deeply depressed and anxious. \u00a0Overall, he feels lost, unhappy, and unfulfilled, and he doesn\u2019t know what to do about it. \u00a0According to Pattakos, he has become a prisoner of his own thoughts, and only he has the key to his own freedom. \u00a0Very simply put, he needs to find a new job or find meaning in the one he has now. \u00a0One possibility is for Rick to consider his own life circumstances in relationship to his clients:<\/p>\n<p>\u2026Whenever we stop long enough to connect to ourselves, to our environment, to those with whom we work, to the task before us, to the extraordinary interdependence that is always part of our lives, we experience meaning. \u00a0Meaning is who we are in this world. \u00a0And it is the world that graces us with meaning. \u00a0(pg. 157; Pattakos, 2004)<\/p>\n<p>By making a responsible choice to seek meaning in our lives, to not work against ourselves, we can put ourselves on a path we had not seen before:<\/p>\n<p>When we live and work with meaning, we can choose to make meaning, to see meaning, and to share meaning. \u00a0We can choose our attitudes to life and work; we can choose how to respond to others, how to respond to our jobs, and how to make the very best of difficult circumstances. \u00a0We can transcend ourselves and be transformed by meaning. \u00a0We can find connection to meaning at work, in the most unusual places and with the most unexpected people. \u00a0Meaning is full of surprises. \u00a0(pg. 159; Pattakos, 2004)<\/p>\n<p>And finally, it does not matter what sort of job we have. \u00a0It is our choice, our freedom:<\/p>\n<p>No matter what our specific job might be, it is the\u00a0<em>work<\/em>\u00a0we do that represents who we are. \u00a0When we meet our work with enthusiasm, appreciation, generosity, and integrity, we meet it with meaning. \u00a0And no matter how mundane a job might seem at the time, we can transform it with meaning. \u00a0Meaning is life\u2019s legacy, and it is as available to us at work as it is available to us in our deepest spiritual quests. \u00a0We breathe, therefore we are \u2013 spiritual. \u00a0Life is; therefore it is \u2013 meaningful. \u00a0We do, therefore we work.<\/p>\n<p>Viktor Frankl\u2019s legacy was one of hope and possibility. \u00a0He saw the human condition at its worst, and human beings behaving in ways intolerable to the imagination. \u00a0He also saw human beings rising to heights of compassion and caring in ways that can only be described as miraculous acts of unselfishness and transcendence. \u00a0There is something in us that can rise above and beyond everything we think possible\u2026 \u00a0(pg. 162; Pattakos, 2004)<\/p>\n<p><strong>Discussion Question:<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0Stephen Covey and Alex Pattakos have applied Frankl\u2019s theories to both the workplace and our everyday lives. \u00a0How well do you think the principles of existential psychology can address the problems that you face at work, home, school, etc.? \u00a0Is it ever really as simple as applying one\u2019s will and choosing to act responsibly? \u00a0Do you live an authentic life?<\/p>\n<h3><strong>Review of Key Points<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p>\u00b7 Existentialism focuses on an individual\u2019s subjective \u201ctruth.\u201d \u00a0The freedom and responsibility that come with personal truth lead to anxiety, but they can also elevate the individual to lead an authentic life.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Heidegger believed that all creatures are connected, but that only humans can become aware of this connection. \u00a0Dasein, the realization of this connection, allows us to connect with Being. \u00a0Awareness of our impending death, however, leads to anxiety, but if we accept that truth we can live an authentic life.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Sartre believed that humans were unique, something he called en-soi. \u00a0Awareness of the nothingness that separates the en-soi from the pour-soi is what drives some individuals to make something significant of their lives. \u00a0For those who cannot, Sartre expressed a need for existential psychoanalysis.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Viktor Frankl developed his ideas for logotherapy (an existential psychoanalysis) during his impressive early career. \u00a0He had an extraordinary opportunity to put his ideas to the test while imprisoned in the Nazi concentration camps.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Recognized as the third Viennese school of psychotherapy, logotherapy focuses on one\u2019s will-to-meaning, the desire to find meaning and purpose in one\u2019s life.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 People who cannot find meaning experience existential frustration, which can lead to a noogenic neurosis.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Logotherapy itself relies primarily on the techniques of paradoxical intention and dereflection. \u00a0These techniques are designed to break the cycle of anticipatory anxiety and failure that plague individuals who suffer from existential crises.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Going beyond ordinary, everyday life, Frankl proposed a super-meaning to life, and he suggested that there is also a will-to-ultimate-meaning that can be pursued through religion or spirituality. \u00a0In this light, Frankl referred to logotherapy as \u201cheight psychology\u201d (in contrast to depth psychology, another term for psychoanalysis).<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Rollo May believed that anxiety underlies nearly every crisis. \u00a0He proposed that anxiety must be understood in terms of freedom, and he distinguished between normal anxiety and neurotic anxiety.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Culture has significant effects on the nature and amount of anxiety that people are likely to experience in their lives. \u00a0Since anxiety can lead to hostility, these cultural factors are, and have been throughout history, very important issues (e.g., opposition to the civil rights movement in the United States, and the recent dramatic rise in international terrorism).<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 A critical factor in life, according to May, is our ability to integrate into our world. \u00a0One of the challenges to integration is the human dilemma: \u00a0whether we are the subject or the object in our lives. \u00a0As self-aware beings we can know that we are both subject and object, and so, in psychological terms, we exist in a world between either behaviorism or humanistic psychology.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 There are different types of love, all of which are very important to our lives. \u00a0Love can give meaning to our lives, but it must be honest and responsible love.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Through will and intentionality we can give structure to our lives and meaning to our actions. \u00a0However, overwhelming anxiety can destroy our ability to participate actively in our own lives.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 The daimonic is any function that can take over the whole person. \u00a0It can be a source of violence, but also a source of creativity. \u00a0We can choose how the daimonic takes over, and whether that choice is responsible or not determines whether our actions are violent or creative.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Being creative requires that we live in the future and actively participate in shaping our lives. \u00a0Such bold choices require courage, especially in light of the inescapable reality that we will die.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 May felt that myth provides an important cultural framework within which we can form our lives. \u00a0Unfortunately, the Western world has lost many of its myths, making people susceptible to cults, drugs, superstition, etc.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 According to May, the primary goal of existential psychotherapy is to help the client realize their own being, to have an \u201cI-Am\u201d experience. \u00a0Time is an important aspect of this procedure. \u00a0The client must be helped to shift their focus from the past to the future, and even more so, to transcend time altogether.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Although existential psychology is younger than most other schools of psychology, it has much in common with ancient Eastern philosophies, such as Yoga, Buddhism, and Taoism.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Terrorism is not the result of Islam. \u00a0Terrorists are found all over the world, from many different races, religions, and nationalities. \u00a0Islam opposes violence and murder.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 Terrorism is based on psychological factors (a perception that there are no alternatives, and that terrorism is legitimate), and seeks to cause psychological effects (feelings of terror and helplessness). \u00a0Thus, psychologists have an important role to play in understanding and eliminating terrorism.<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7 One can easily find those who believe that terrorism either never works or always works. \u00a0Some believe that we must respond with understanding to eliminate the root causes of terrorism, whereas others believe we must use force (but not too much force, lest we become terrorists as well). \u00a0Clearly there are no easy answers for dealing with terrorists themselves or terrorism in general.<\/p>\n<h3><strong>Existential Psychology<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p>Existentialism is the part of philosophy that concerns itself with the question of human existence. The being in the world idea of existentialism posits that the person cannot exist without the world and the world cannot exist without a person to see it. Likewise, positivists focus on laws that govern the behavior of entities and articles in the world, non-positivists focus on the subjective nature of the world. They argue that nothing would exist if there were no individuals to see it. Existentialism argues against the idea that people are ruled by some fixed material laws. Because of this belief, the approach encourages theories that study the individual in terms of creativity, ingenuity, and self-fulfillment.<\/p>\n<p>Learn more about Existentialism as an approach and a framework for the study of personality\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=YaDvRdLMkHs\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow noopener noreferrer\"><em>here<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n<h3><strong>Humanistic Approach<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p>Humanism is the term in psychology that applies to an approach which studies the uniqueness, worth and values of the entire person not only from the observer\u2019s perspective but also from the person\u2019s perspective. As we noted in existentialism this system is called phenomenological. Personality is studied from the individual\u2019s particular slant on his experience. This humanistic approach is sometimes called the third force, the first two being psychoanalysis and behaviorism.<\/p>\n<p>The humanistic approach rejects the psychodynamic approach because of its reliance on the unconscious, irrational and instinctive forces as determinants of human behavior and thoughts. The humanists also deny the hypotheses of the behaviorist approach, which concentrates its energies on reinforcement, the stimulus and response paradigm and its strong reliance on animal research. Humanists view these perspectives as basically dehumanizing.<\/p>\n<p>READ MORE<\/p>\n<h3><strong>Humanistic Approach Continued<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p>When we talk about the human potential movement we are talking about psychotherapies follow the humanistic approach and stress the development of individuals through the methods of encounter groups, meditation and sensitivity training, etc. Theorists associated with the humanistic movement are Abraham Maslow, Carl Rogers, and Gordon Allport to name a few.<\/p>\n<p>There are some very important elements from existential and humanistic psychology.<\/p>\n<h4>ELEMENTS OF EXISTENTIAL AND HUMANISTIC PSYCHOLOGY<\/h4>\n<p>\u00b7 CONCEPT OF LOVE<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7\u00a0<u>NOTION OF RESPONSIBILITY<\/u><\/p>\n<p>Erich Fromm always encouraged the importance of personal relationships and commitment to the common good over submission to the state. He believed that love was not something that just happened to the individual but needed attention, knowledge, and struggle. He felt that love allows us to become less alienated while we continue to maintain personal honor. Much of his work is drawn from both religion and mysticism and he incorporates many of their ideas into his understanding of personality.<\/p>\n<h3><strong>Maslow\u2019s Hierarchy of Needs<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p>Instead of focusing on pathology or what goes wrong with people, Abraham Maslow was interested in what goes right with people. Toward that end, he formulated what he called a Hierarchy of Human Needs. It is usually displayed as a pyramid. At the very bottom of his pyramid are the basic survival needs. As we fulfill these needs we work our way up the pyramid to higher aspirations such as security, love and self-esteem needs. At the pinnacle of the pyramid, we find self-actualization. At this point, the individual wants to realize his personal potential. He seeks self-fulfillment, grows spiritually and achieves his greatest potential.<\/p>\n<p>While both Jung and James spoke of self-actualization it is most closely associated with Maslow mainly due to his work on the hierarchy of needs and the ideas of self-actualization, peak experiences, and personal growth. The Personal Orientation Inventory is one scale that attempts to assess self-actualization; it seems to capture at least some aspects of a healthy personality. One parting thought is that later in his life Maslow came to the realization that people had a darker, brittle side but he remained optimistic about the inherent good and potential of all people.<\/p>\n<p>Learn more about Maslow\u2019s theory and other theories of personal motivation as a part of personality and the human condition\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=9hdSLiHaJz8\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow noopener noreferrer\"><em>here<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n<h3><strong>Positive Psychology<\/strong><\/h3>\n<h4>WHO IS HAPPY?<\/h4>\n<p>This seems like a straightforward and even simplistic question and yet it is complex. Let\u2019s take a look at one thing it is not. It is not a function of being in fortunate situations. It appears to symbolize a combination of personal qualities, optimistic cognitions such as things always work out for the best, and internal psychological procedures.<\/p>\n<p>Positive psychology focuses on enhancing the functioning of human beings from the standpoint of mental wellness, not mental illness. It investigates, among other things, what makes individuals happy. It explores the positive strengths of life such as hope, wisdom, inventiveness, and spirituality.<\/p>\n<p>American psychologist David G. Myers is concerned with what he calls the American Paradox. He has found that even though Americans have more in the way of material goods they are less likely to say they are happy. While on one hand, we have an abundance on the other we have more adolescent violence, more people in prisons and more teen suicides, etc. This is often seen as a moral decline.<\/p>\n<p>The interpersonal theory of psychiatry revolves around the notion that personality is influenced by the regular social experiences faced by the individual. Harry Stack Sullivan considered the idea of chumship, and the adolescent social threats of rejection, loneliness, and isolation. Sullivan called the idea that we have one fixed personality the illusion of individuality.<\/p>\n<h3><strong>The Interactionist Approach<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p>Any discussion of the interactionist perspective must center on the social circumstances that surround an individual. The interactionist approach elicits from many other perspectives but in the end, it crafts a more complex view of patterns of behavior.<\/p>\n<p>Henry Murray is a principal founder of the interactionist approach to personality. He developed his theory that he structured in terms of motives, presses, and needs. He was influenced by Lewin\u2019s idea of contemporaneous causation. This means that behavior occurs at the moment due to a variety of influences in both the person and the environment.<\/p>\n<p>In Murray\u2019s lexicon, a press was an environmental push on the personality. He felt some needs change and are transitory while other needs are more ingrained in us. He believed that the psychogenic needs, though mostly unconscious in their operation, play a key role in our personality. He called his theory a personological system because it focused on personality as a vigorous process that integrated the individual\u2019s responsiveness to the pressures of the environment.<\/p>\n<p>A combination of needs and presses are what Murray termed thema which he measured with the Thematic Apperception Test or TAT. An outgrowth of Murray\u2019s work can be seen in the work of Dan P. McAdams. He and his colleagues try to study the entire person through biographies. His ideas of internal needs and external presses work in harmony.<\/p>\n<p>In summary, Murray took unconscious motivation proposed by Freud, Jung, and Adler; environmental pressures of Lewin indicated by the equation B=f(P, E) or behavior is a function of personality and environment; concepts of traits developed by Gordon Allport; the idea of chums and the psychosocial threats of adolescence proposed by Sullivan; Mead\u2019s concept of the social self; and Sapir\u2019s assessments of the importance of culture and combined them into a study of personality and the aspects that influence an individual\u2019s life course.<\/p>\n<h4>TYPES OF NEEDS<\/h4>\n<p>\u2039\u00a0<em>1\/2<\/em>\u00a0\u203a<\/p>\n<p>The first he identified were primary needs. These are similar to Maslow\u2019s survival needs.<\/p>\n<h3><strong>Walter Mishel<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p>Walter Mischel\u2019s argument that the idea of personality traits makes hardly any sense is predicated on his notion that behavior varies so greatly by situation. He argued that correlations involving traits predicting behavior had a correlation coefficient of .30 which he considered too small to assume a personality\/behavior relationship. He posits what is more important is the situation. He believes that a person\u2019s behavior is influenced by two factors; one of these is the features of the situation the person is focusing on and the second is how the person perceives the situation. He believes similarity in behavioral response is only likely when the behavior is likely to produce the same results as happened in a similar situation.<\/p>\n<p>Recently Mischel has looked at individual differences by looking at the meanings that people give to stimuli and reinforcements. Since he posits that these different meanings are a result of learning while experiencing various situations he called them strategies. The strategies are encoding or how an individual categorizes external information; competencies which include intelligence; expectancies or an individual\u2019s prediction of outcomes of various behaviors; and goals and values which provide the individual with behavior reliability.<\/p>\n<h3><strong>Attribution Personality Theories<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p>Attribution or Implicit Personality theories examine how people make inferences about other people based on what they observe about their behavior. This type of attributional behavior tends to simplify our world. Individuals, it has been found, tends to overestimate the consistency of their own behaviors.<\/p>\n<p>The power of situations is an interesting reason why personality can be such a weak predictor of behavior. Sometimes the situation is so powerful that it supersedes our inclinations. A good example of this type of situation would be a fire in a building. Although an individual is usually quiet and calm, it would not be unusual for that person to be caught up in the hysteria of the crowd trying to escape the flames and behave in a panicked or irrational way.<\/p>\n<p>As we have seen previously, not all traits are similarly relevant to all people and certain situations give individuals the opportunity to put forth certain traits. Consistency within situations comes with the problem of how do we classify situations and where would we expect behavioral consistency. We also look at the aggregation or average of behavior across situations. If for example, a person is known to be an extrovert but we observe him at a party as quiet and keeping to himself we might ask ourselves what is going on. There are at least two possible answers. There is the issue of reliability. Is this one sample of behavior a good indicator of personality? The issue of appropriateness of the situation to a particular trait has to also be considered. Perhaps this is a very formal and low-key affair.<\/p>\n<h3><strong>The Social Self<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p>\u00b7 DEVELOPING A SOCIAL SELF<\/p>\n<p>\u00b7\u00a0<u>SOCIAL IDENTITY VS. PERSONAL IDENTITY<\/u><\/p>\n<p>\u00b7\u00a0<u>JACK BLOCK<\/u><\/p>\n<p>Have you ever wondered why when you see someone get hurt you feel bad, or when you are watching an exciting sporting event you get excited? Or how about when you watch someone tasting food and they wrinkle their nose at it and you feel disgusted? Psychologists have also wondered about these things and now some researchers believe that mirror neurons in the brain might hold the answers. Simply put, these brain neurons fire in response to the actions or states that we observe in others and mirror or respond equally in us whether or not we are performing the same action or are in the same state. It seems to be a simple idea, but the implications are not simple at all. Researchers now think that mirror neurons might account for autism, empathy and even the development of language.<\/p>\n<p>Developing a social self is one of the primary tasks of infancy and childhood. The child learns that his hand is separate from another\u2019s hand and begins to learn how to behave appropriately in social situations. The social self is more dominant in some people and some situations than others. Going back to Kurt Lewin\u2019s ideas about field independence and field dependence we can reasonably say that in social situations a person who has high field independence may act more independently. Conversely, a person with high field dependence may conform to situational demands.<\/p>\n<h3><strong>Conclusion<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p>In summary, the humanistic and existential perspectives involve theorists Abraham Maslow, Carl Rogers, Erich Fromm and others. Their greatest strength is recognizing that humans have a spiritual potential and struggle for dignity and self-fulfillment. One of their weaknesses as we have noted in some of the other approaches, is that it shuns quantification and the principles of the scientific method, which are needed in order to understand personality from a scientific perspective.<\/p>\n<h3><strong>References<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p>Cherry, Kendra (updated January 21, 2016). Murray\u2019s Theory of<br \/>\nPsychogenic Needs. Retrieved March 17, 2016, from<br \/>\nhttp:\/\/psychology.about.com\/od\/theoriesofpersonality\/a\/psychogenic.htm<\/p>\n<p>Myers, David G. (July 25, 2000). Resolving the American Paradox<br \/>\nRetrieved 3\/15\/16 from<br \/>\nhttp:\/\/www.davidmyers.org\/Brix?pageID=72<\/p>\n<p>McLeod, S.A. (2015). Humanism. Retrieved 3\/14\/16 from<br \/>\nwww.simplypsychology.org\/humanistic.html<\/p>\n<p>Rank, J. (n.d.) Erich Fromm. Page 261. Retrieved 3\/15\/16 from<br \/>\nhttp:\/\/psychology.jrank.org\/pages\/261\/Erich-Fromm.html<\/p>\n<p>Sincero, Sarah Mae (July 19, 2012). Social Cognitive Theories of<br \/>\nPersonality. Retrieved March 18, 2016 from Explorable.com<br \/>\nhttps:\/\/explorable.com\/social-cognitive-theories-of-personality<\/p>\n<p>Winerman, Lea.Monitor Staff (October 2005) The Minds Mirror. Vol 36,<br \/>\nNo 9 Print Version: page 48.<br \/>\nhttp:\/\/www.apa.org\/monitor\/oct05\/mirror.aspx<\/p>\n<p><center><a href=\"http:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/orders\/ordernow\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com\/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTyj99p60XCLyLk1htB7-1neRt8-2QdnenNlQ&usqp=CAU\"target=\"_http:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/orders\/ordernow\"\/><\/center><p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Assignment Instructions THIS IS FOR WEEK 5!! The Learning Reflection Journal is a compilation of weekly\u00a0learning reflections you\u2019ll independently write about across Weeks 2, 3, 5, 6 and 7. During each of the assigned weeks, you will write two paragraphs, each 300 words in length (i.e., 600 words total). The first paragraph will describe a&#8230;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-13032","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v17.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Week 5 pt journal | Psychology homework - onlineclassesguru<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"http:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/index.php\/2020\/11\/24\/week-5-pt-journal-psychology-homework\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Week 5 pt journal | Psychology homework - onlineclassesguru\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Assignment Instructions THIS IS FOR WEEK 5!! The Learning Reflection Journal is a compilation of weekly\u00a0learning reflections you\u2019ll independently write about across Weeks 2, 3, 5, 6 and 7. During each of the assigned weeks, you will write two paragraphs, each 300 words in length (i.e., 600 words total). The first paragraph will describe a...\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"http:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/index.php\/2020\/11\/24\/week-5-pt-journal-psychology-homework\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"onlineclassesguru\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2020-11-24T09:05:08+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"admin_admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"235 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/\",\"name\":\"onlineclassesguru\",\"description\":\"Cheap Professional coursework and reaction papers help\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"http:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/index.php\/2020\/11\/24\/week-5-pt-journal-psychology-homework\/#webpage\",\"url\":\"http:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/index.php\/2020\/11\/24\/week-5-pt-journal-psychology-homework\/\",\"name\":\"Week 5 pt journal | Psychology homework - onlineclassesguru\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2020-11-24T09:05:08+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2020-11-24T09:05:08+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/#\/schema\/person\/1831fa4d28e47b468621cf27932f5742\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"http:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/index.php\/2020\/11\/24\/week-5-pt-journal-psychology-homework\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"http:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/index.php\/2020\/11\/24\/week-5-pt-journal-psychology-homework\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"http:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/index.php\/2020\/11\/24\/week-5-pt-journal-psychology-homework\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Week 5 pt journal | Psychology homework\"}]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/#\/schema\/person\/1831fa4d28e47b468621cf27932f5742\",\"name\":\"admin_admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/#personlogo\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/429c8d043f7a770af242b0031e8b9f2b?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/429c8d043f7a770af242b0031e8b9f2b?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"admin_admin\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/index.php\/author\/admin_admin\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Week 5 pt journal | Psychology homework - onlineclassesguru","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"http:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/index.php\/2020\/11\/24\/week-5-pt-journal-psychology-homework\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Week 5 pt journal | Psychology homework - onlineclassesguru","og_description":"Assignment Instructions THIS IS FOR WEEK 5!! The Learning Reflection Journal is a compilation of weekly\u00a0learning reflections you\u2019ll independently write about across Weeks 2, 3, 5, 6 and 7. During each of the assigned weeks, you will write two paragraphs, each 300 words in length (i.e., 600 words total). The first paragraph will describe a...","og_url":"http:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/index.php\/2020\/11\/24\/week-5-pt-journal-psychology-homework\/","og_site_name":"onlineclassesguru","article_published_time":"2020-11-24T09:05:08+00:00","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"admin_admin","Est. reading time":"235 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/#website","url":"https:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/","name":"onlineclassesguru","description":"Cheap Professional coursework and reaction papers help","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"http:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/index.php\/2020\/11\/24\/week-5-pt-journal-psychology-homework\/#webpage","url":"http:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/index.php\/2020\/11\/24\/week-5-pt-journal-psychology-homework\/","name":"Week 5 pt journal | Psychology homework - onlineclassesguru","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/#website"},"datePublished":"2020-11-24T09:05:08+00:00","dateModified":"2020-11-24T09:05:08+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/#\/schema\/person\/1831fa4d28e47b468621cf27932f5742"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"http:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/index.php\/2020\/11\/24\/week-5-pt-journal-psychology-homework\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["http:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/index.php\/2020\/11\/24\/week-5-pt-journal-psychology-homework\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"http:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/index.php\/2020\/11\/24\/week-5-pt-journal-psychology-homework\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Week 5 pt journal | Psychology homework"}]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/#\/schema\/person\/1831fa4d28e47b468621cf27932f5742","name":"admin_admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","@id":"https:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/#personlogo","inLanguage":"en-US","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/429c8d043f7a770af242b0031e8b9f2b?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/429c8d043f7a770af242b0031e8b9f2b?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"admin_admin"},"url":"https:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/index.php\/author\/admin_admin\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13032"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=13032"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13032\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=13032"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=13032"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/onlineclassesguru.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=13032"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}