Major Contributors of Humanistic Psychology
Humanistic psychology is one of the key areas of psychology, which emerged in the second half of the 20th century. Several authors, scholars, and psychologists played a central role in contributing to the development of humanistic psychology, thus, creating the need for evaluate their contributions. The first major contributor of humanistic psychology was Rollo May (1909-1994), who was a distinguished existential psychologist and existential psychotherapist (Rabinowitz, Good, & Cozad, 1989). One of the key roles associated with May in the field of humanistic psychology was his role in co-founding the Humanistic Psychology movement. During his time, May was involved in different platforms of research on the impacts of psychology in human development, which paved the way for his integration of the humanistic and existential traditions in psychology. In 1939, May published The Art of Counselling , which is considered as one of the notable texts in the field of humanistic psychology today (De Castro, 2009).
The second main contributor of humanistic psychology is Carl Rogers (1902-1987), who is described as the father of client-centered therapy. Rogers was involved in the development of this approach to therapy focusing more on the client rather than reflecting on the expected objectives of therapy (Wickman & Campbell, 2003). Similar to Rollo May, Rogers was an advent believer in the idea of psychology and its role in human development, thus, paving the way for his inclusion in the founding of the Humanistic Psychology movement. His contribution to humanistic psychology is evident in his approach towards helping and understanding his clients while focusing on their difficulties and suffering (Kirschenbaum, 2004). That paved the way for him to develop his person-centered approach to counseling. In the long-term, this was viewed as one of the notable concept of psychology that have helped in promoting efficiency in this field.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Basic Beliefs of Humanistic Psychologists
An in-depth review of humanistic psychology suggests that it encompasses several key beliefs and principles that seek to govern the profession with regard to its effectiveness in dealing with human difficulties and suffering. The contributors played a key role in stretching out these beliefs and principles depending on their varied levels of contribution to this field of study. Ultimately, that paved the way for the development of new approaches to humanistic psychology as part of ensuring that clients achieve the highest benefits as part of their engagement in psychology. The first notable belief to consider when evaluating the concept of humanistic psychology revolves around an understanding or perception of life as a constant process, as well as, the fact that change is inevitable for human beings.
Abraham Maslow, in his contribution through the presentation of the Hierarchy of Needs, sought to create the understanding that human life changes on a regular basis. Maslow suggested that human beings tend to change in their bid to achieving the highest levels of satisfaction depending on their varied needs. Similar to this approach, other psychologists also reflected on the position that human life is on a constant meaning that understanding life from a single perspective creates a wrong conclusion (Chavez, Fernandez, Hipolito ‐ Delgado, & Rivera, 2016). Instead, humanistic psychology was developed as part of understanding human life from multiple perspectives in a bid to establishing a positive position in dealing with the issues or challenges presented. On the area of change, all humanistic psychologists believe in the position that human beings are bound to encounter change in their respective social environment.
The second basic belief, which is evident from all humanistic psychologists, revolves around a universal recognition of profound issues or challenges affecting the world, thus, exposing humans to a wide array of psychological challenges. In his development of client-centered therapy, Carl Rogers believed in the fact that the world has a wide array of issues that humans may encounter within their differing environments. Thus, this created the need for creating a structure of therapy that would help understand such issues and challenges affecting human beings as part of promoting success in humanistic psychology. That is an aspect that majority of the humanistic psychologists today apply as part of their understanding of the profession, as it is a common belief among all these professionals. That leads them towards the conclusion that dealing with human problems would require a holistic understanding of the issues or challenges from multiple perspectives.
The belief also stretches to incorporate the fact that humanistic psychologists have a responsibility to restoring hope and promoting constructive change within human societies to support given positions. As a psychologist, one is expected to reflect more on ensuring that he or she provides clients with a safe and comfortable environment from which to reflect on the challenges or issues affecting the society (Goldberg, 2000). The role of the psychologist is to help restore hope or advocate for the need for constructive change, as this would be of value towards ensuring that societies achieve their set out objectives. The belief on hope and constructive change has played a central role in building the profession towards becoming one of the most lucrative and sought after professionals dealing with humanistic problems or issues.
Criticisms of Humanistic Psychology
However, it is equally important to point out the fact that humanistic psychology has faced immense criticisms especially when focusing on the approaches utilized when dealing with patients’ issues and challenges. The first major criticism revolves around the fact that humanistic psychology creates a platform for naïve assumptions on human beings, some of which cannot be supported by facts and evidence. Some of the critics argue that humanistic psychology, which focuses wholly on human beings, creates an unrealistic approach to understanding problems or issues affecting human beings (Mruk & Skelly, 2017). The unrealistic approach results in a situation where the nature of decisions made do not reflect on the actual humanistic problems but reflect on a naïve understanding of human nature. In other words, this criticism seems to argue on the basis that humanistic psychology is not positioned to provide a clear understanding of humanistic problems or issues, as it does not reflect on an accurate understanding of human nature.
The second criticism is on the narrow nature of humanistic theories utilized by humanistic psychologists in their approaches towards dealing with problems affecting human beings. Critics argue most of the humanistic theories are very narrow in their understanding of problems affecting human beings within different social environments (Mruk & Skelly, 2017). Additionally, most of these theories focus more on creating descriptions of personalities without having to delve in an in-depth analysis of the personalities. Thus, this means that humanistic psychologists face a major challenge in their understanding of personality, which, in turn, limits their understanding of problems affecting human beings. In the long-term, critics argue that the narrowness of the humanistic theories may affect their testability considering that it becomes difficult for psychologists to provide adequate evidence to support their positions.
References
Chavez, T. A., Fernandez, I. T., Hipolito ‐ Delgado, C. P., & Rivera, E. T. (2016). Unifying Liberation Psychology and Humanistic Values to Promote Social Justice in Counseling. The Journal of Humanistic Counseling , 55 (3), 166-182.
De Castro, A. (2009). Rollo May’s Critical Position in Psychology: The Concept of Comprehension Applied to Dysfuntional Experiences, Health, and Psychotherapy. Journal of Humanistic Psychology , 49 (4), 462-483.
Goldberg, C. (2000). A humanistic psychology for the new millennium. The Journal of Psychology , 134 (6), 677-682.
Kirschenbaum, H. (2004). Carl Rogers's life and work: An assessment on the 100th anniversary of his birth. Journal of Counseling & Development , 82 (1), 116-124.
Mruk, C. J., & Skelly, T. (2017). Is self-esteem absolute, relative, or functional? Implications for cross-cultural and humanistic psychology. The Humanistic Psychologist , 45 (4), 313-332.
Rabinowitz, F. E., Good, G., & Cozad, L. (1989). Rollo May: A man of meaning and myth. Journal of Counseling & Development , 67 (8), 436-441.
Wickman, S. A., & Campbell, C. (2003). An Analysis of How Carl Rogers Enacted Client ‐ Centered Conversation With Gloria. Journal of Counseling & Development , 81 (2), 178-184.
