Psychology is an important field that is deterministic of the holistic wellbeing of an individual. We may be well of physically and spiritually, but without the mental strength to put ourselves into perspective, we experience social challenges, and our wellness amounts to naught. Everyone searches for an intricate understanding of the self without which we are unable to project ourselves in the most desirable manner. In most instances, when an individual fails to attain the desired identity and authenticity, their mental dynamics become complicated. In such situations, psychoanalysis would show diagnosable mental problems. This is where James Bugental’s work comes into perspective – particularly the application of psychotherapy in relation to its successes and failures (Bugental, 1988). Jim’s article on “What is Failure in Psychotherapy” is in a way a provocation, or a yeast or leaven, to the life of the psychotherapist to consider how we hold ourselves in relationship to our work and life. This paper examines important concepts of James Bugental’s psychology in the context of developments in the field of psychotherapy.
My first introduction to James Bugental, years ago, was at the very end of my graduate studies in theology. At the time, I was, and consciously was much prior, struggling with and wanting to understand more on what it means to be me. Essentially looking into the phenomenon of authenticity. I came across his earliest book The Search For Authenticity in 2015 and absolutely loved it and found a sense of home in his words and personhood.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Before even launching into the content of this paper. I first began this assignment by reading The Art of the Psychotherapist (1987) and concurrently The Search for Existential Identity (1976). What I believe is talked about in The Art of the Psychotherapist, is embodied in his two prior books of The Search for Existential Identity and again later in Intimate Journeys. The answer to the questions you’re wanting us to answer of what’s Jims major contribution, though I think can easily be answered by the articles we’ve been asked to read, it’s clearly presented in the experience between the words of these two main texts.
Overview of Bugental’s Contribution
I believe it is this earliest book that we see the seeds of what Bugental focused most of his studies, The Search for Authenticity, and examples to us the themes of what it means to be a person with another person. What’s it look like, and feel like to be ourselves with another person. Bugental (1978) states that though we never got a clear image of our whole self, "again and again, we make choices that profoundly influence our lives in terms of this implicit image" (p. 5). "Psychotherapy at this level seeks to help the client be more realistic, more accepting of self and others, and more able to use powers which one employs only partially. Its main goal is reduction of self- alienation, one of the most frequent distraction influences in many people in our culture" (p. 5). I believe Jim is talking about shame.
Behind our anxiety, that which brings about an experience of pain, fear, and dread, are the "impulses, perceptions, and emotion" that not only guide our actions but block us from the therapeutic task of the person being brought to a place of greater "richness and meaningfulness in life." What I'm noticing, and experiencing from Bugental’s later literature (specific) is that he's most known for his presence in the therapeutic relationship. This presence is most clearly examples in his earlier literature of “The Search for Existential Identity” and then later revisited in “Intimate Journeys”. The Art of the Psychotherapist defines presence, as “but in my own experience of reading Bugental’s books is that he brought the therapist back into the room. Some statements such as (Examples) clearly exemplify that he's allowing and working with his experience of the person - there being.
The lineage of Bugental, prior to the influence of May's book Existence, that was also influential in the life of Irving Yalom, is that he was highly influenced by two significant points; his childhood during the depression and the influence of Carl Rogers. Jim notes in his epilogue Duality and Openness at the end of The Search for Existential Identity describing his influence of his family of being a “right person” (p.279). Then later on describes a moment of being interrogated by his mother and states, “She’s coldly aloof, and I am filled with shame” (p.280).
On a personal note, Jims description of his experience with his wife are startlingly similar to that of my previous wife. He describes this dual nature between his work life, which was booming and exciting, and then that of his life at home where it sounds like he needed to be this “right” image of a husband. Where he had been journeying towards, a more authentic and embodied life, was not allowed, just as with his family. He moved towards the very thing he wanted to get away from. I suspect that coming home every night was like stepping into the world of his childhood, only he was a grown man now, chained to a way-of-being that was not his own. This reminds me again of the cost and stress that deep person work puts on relationships. One partner is growing, and moving towards something different, and that has an effect on the other.
It’s not explicitly stated in any of the literature I’ve read through for and outside this course, but the influence of Carl Rogers is evident in the philosophy of Bugental. Where May and Rogers put the philosophy of EHP on the table, Bugental made the practice of EHP digestible to others. First in his book Mans Search For Authenticity. Krug (2009) highlights that
He notes that growing up during the depression forced him to become independent of his family in others. This is a significant point, because in order to have relationship we have to be separate from the other. Khalil Gibran (2019) says this quite beautifully in his poem on marriage, “let there be spaces in your togetherness, and let the winds of heaven dance between you” (p.15).
“ Looking back now, it is surprising to me how long I overlooked the fundamental importance of presents the therapeutic work it is even more surprising to me how many therapists in therapeutic systems also overlook it.” (P. 46)
“ In more than four decades since those days, I've been On a search for understanding of that mysterious room I didn't know this was my quest for a long time, but it is increasingly evident that it is so” (p. 65).
“ The loss of the chair is trivial compared to the loss of life that Larry has been subject to for years.” (P.48)
I found myself being so touched by these brief statements,” Laurence’s word's words are reasonable enough, but I'm aware of a tension starting between my shoulder blades. In some way I'm picking up a desperate urgency from him.” (P. 43) “I sit back exhausted and twenty minutes late for my next appointment” (p. 49).
Something that stands out so evidently is the balance in the voices and dialogue that we get. We get just as much of what he's personally experiencing, along with what he's imagining the client is, balanced with the amount of dialogue between the two of them.
The Concept of Subjectivity
The self-concept, according to Sarbit (1996), denounced the scientific emphasis on objectivity that threatened the foundations of the field of psychology. A paradigm shift to subjectivity implied a change in perception of humans as independent of the world phenomena. This is evident in Sarbit (1996) personal accounts as Bugental’s student, where he observes, “Jim has attempted to change a prevalent view that the focus on things objective is always worthwhile and that attention to our inner awareness, is much less, if at all, valuable” (p. 19). Consequently, Sarbit (1996) contended Jim to be a true champion of subjectivity, which he illustrated in his classroom sessions, writing, development and practice of psychotherapy. Bugental successfully challenged the application of objectivity in humanistic psychology, and established a framework for integration of subjectivity into psychotherapy with clients. Wittine, (1996) shared similar sentiments when she argued that understanding the “‘I’ and the ‘Self’ we get to know our individual acquired identity” (p. 32). Wittine highlighted Bugental’s practical application of subjectivity during her therapeutic sessions with him, which formed the basic approach of his approach to psychotherapy. “… when you come into my office, … lie down on the couch, take some time to get comfortable, and think about what concerns you. Pay particular attention to how you experience that issue in your body and feelings” (Wittine, 1996, p. 33). In my view, Wittine’s article shows Bugental’s philosophical foundations of subjectivity, establishing a form of synergy with the self in relation to an individual’s worldview and experiences. Bugental dedicated his professional and scholarly work to inspire and encourage all psychologists to apply subjectivity.
Bugental work on subjectivity draws from his understanding of the intrinsic self, an important factor that is deterministic of an individual worldview in relation to themselves as the center, and hence, interactions and experiences within social contexts. Bugental and Zelen (1950) advocated for the use of the “Who Are You?” framework as a means for eliciting the counselee’s approach to viewing himself. In his account of the sessions with Jennifer, one of his clients, Bugental contended that there is always more to an individual worldview (Bugental, 1991). He appears to caution us of believing in absolute certainty. Bugental offered numerous examples of cases where people of immense reputations reached conclusions showing the impossibilities in science, only for their assertions to be voided by later discoveries. Similarly, Bugental recognized that most, if not all, of his clients harbored the belief that” important life situations were absolutely unchangeable” (Bugental, 1991, p. 29). This approach to life, he notes, creates significant barriers because it hinders the exploration of possibilities beyond our limited scope. The important relationship between subjectivity and an individual’s perceptions in evident in Bugental’s observation that, “We live in the world as we perceive it. The size of one’s life is the size of one’s perceived world” (p. 31). Bugental observed that subjectivity allows an individual to view their “identity as part of how they see the world, a continual creation or discovery. A person’s identity is not substantive, but continually changing, and efforts to remain unchanging are crippling as they result to a smaller life” (Bugental, 1991, p. 30).
Therefore, by presenting one’s own perspective of the self to the therapist, the client provides an important lesson. Wittine (1996) observed that the self-construct is the individual identity from awareness rather than composite images of who they are or what the world is. Overall, Bugental (1991) posited that the client's understanding of the self teaches therapists important lessons on subjectivity. According to deCarvalho (1996), James Bugental specialized on the existential wing within humanist psychology, a discourse largely influenced by lived experiences during his upbringing and education. Bugental primary tenets of psychological thought stemmed from a personal view based on experience, which adds to the authenticity of his view of subjectivity. Bugental implied he can approach the client with an open mind knowing that they face similar complexities in defining who they are and describing their interactions with world’s phenomena. Bugental (1988) called for therapists to desist from the temptation to objectify clients to navigate potential failure of psychotherapy.
Presence in Psychotherapy
An area in which Bugental has had significant influence is existential psychotherapy. Bugental famously wrote, “The essence of my being is that I am subjective awareness continually in process . . . In short, I am nothing, nothing. I am solely the process of my being” (1976, p. 14). This perspective of the “self as a process had significant implications for the fundamental structures of human existence” (Krug, 2009, p. 335). The approach is crucial in the design of psychotherapy sessions with clients. Mahoney (1996) noted that Bugental presence in psychotherapy was founded on his ability to speak the truth many would perceive to be unfounded, truth that resonates with the personal life of almost every practitioner. What has endeared Jim to many practitioners in the field of psychology and psychotherapy is his ability to “Speak from the heart and talk openly about his being” (Mahoney, 1996, p. 59). Bugental continued presence in the field of psychotherapy owes to his courage that allowed him to disrupt the status quo in perception of how we relate to the world. He initiated a shift from the rationalist approach to humanistic psychology as evidence in his book, The Search for Authenticity, where he observed, “This book, I hope, is a voyage to a new world of human experience, an exploration however tentative and incomplete, that highlights the need for the compass of our feelings in the same manner we need the charts of our reasoning in making a true landfall in human frontier” (p. xv). Overall, Bugental used his personal experiences to back his ideological principles on humanistic psychology and psychotherapy, an approach whose results became indispensable because they defined what every practitioner experienced.
Bugental emphasized on the need to take up relationship and be with what's there. This important attribute is demonstrated through incremental obsession with existential paradigms of humanistic psychology. The consensus among psychology scholars is that James Bugental’s work in the field of humanistic psychology is indispensable. Psychologists recognize the complexity of the human entity that makes understanding of the self a challenge. Davidson (2000) noted that the Western school of thought of humanism philosophy recognized the irreducible nature of the human to other forms of life, whether material or divine. The conviction shared by scholars in the field is that “the human cannot be understood, except in its own terms” (Davidson, 2000, p. 7). In my view, this long-held humanist tradition gave rise to the self-concept, which Bugental and Zelen (1950) contended to be the newest candidate in the field of personality theory at the time. The view borrowed from earlier formal discussions by Raimy in 1943, Gordon Allport, Lecky’s Self Consistency Theory, and Gardener Murphy; a view that holds that “the primary determinant of the behavior of an individual is his phenomenal field, particular the aspect that is his concept of the self” (Bugental & Zelen, 1950, p. 483). Subsequent psychology scholars recognized and supported the view and supported its value in explaining and describing outcomes of non-directive counseling and psychotherapy. However, Bugental argued for the limitless application of the self-concept beyond the counseling paradigms to other practices in the field of psychology and by psychologists of other persuasions. As a result, Bugental set the precedent for the wider application of the self-concept in humanistic psychology.
Authenticity of Bugental’s Ideologies
Bugental’s assertions on the phenomenon of authenticity have a strong association to his advocacy for application of the self-construct. The self-concept paradigm is based on the facets of procedural evidence which Hattie (2014, p. 36) observed to involve “the belief in a theoretical proposition on the basis of its intelligibility, its consistency with common sense knowledge, or its implicit self-evidence”. The authenticity of Bugental’s concepts of humanistic psychology stem from this observation. Mahoney (1996) highlighted the influence Bugental had on upcoming psychologists and psychotherapists. Bugental’s work depicted a close relationship between his personal life, and the basic principles and processes of human psychological development he advanced. The work also showed the embodiment of experience in psychotherapy and the synergy between the self and others. Overall, Mahoney (1996) appeared to contend that Bugental adopted approach resembles hermeneutic phenomenology. Bugental’s focus on lived experiences is conspicuous, including its compassionate application to psychological services.
The existential aspect of Bugental ’s approach to the self-concept is of immense significance. Krug (2009) observed that together with Irvin Yalom, James Bugental focused on a psychotherapeutic approach that cultivated the element of presence. Despite the complexity of defining the approach in relation to its synergy with the irreducible aspect of humanism, it played an important role in the realization of change to psychotherapy. Knowledge of the self-construct, a phenomenon advanced by James Bugental, is thus crucial in ensuring success of psychotherapy, demonstrating the important contributions of the existential psychologist and educator to the field of humanistic psychology.
Bugental’s Life as a Journey
The late John O'Donohue, in this book Anam Cara, opens with this line, “It's strange to be here, the mystery never leaves you alone". Then later in a lecture on beauty, which is actually no longer available online for some unknown reason, “Whats the one thing that you just can’t get over? I'd have to say that it's life.”
Even as a I write this paper, I'm in a Relational Psychoanalysis 8-week study group, and I notice significant overlap in what I'm reading in this group and the writings of Bugental and the larger context of Existential-Humanistic Psychology. I find myself feeling immense agitation as I'm with this small group of folks cause I feel like we're reading about things that Jim spoke about 60 years ago, and were not paid attention to cause of the dynamics at play between the psychoanalytic, behavioral, and existential-humanistic traditions (Rogers, 1980).
The other piece is that I feel like, within this study group, that we're holding off our own humanity from not only ourselves but our clients as well. I notice, as we’re studying all these traditional psychoanalytic concepts that have been reworked in a modern context, that we’re still utilizing the same tools that we used to reduce and minimize the clients and therapists subjective experience to try to regain a sense of humanity and embodied personal exchange. We’re using analytic thinking to try to do what Carl Rogers and Jim exampled and said so plainly in the 50s and 60s.
Mahoney (1996), quotes these words of Jim, “A psychotherapist had best recognize that the profession will continually press on her or him to change and evolve” (p.58-59). Mahoney then describes how this has been profoundly true for him and likely every clinician and “remarkably unsounded” in literature and training.
References
Bugental, J. F. (1963). Humanistic psychology: A new breakthrough. American Psychologist , 18 (9), 563.
Bugental, J. F. (1991). Lessons clients teach therapists. Journal of Humanistic Psychology , 31 (3), 28-32.
Bugental, J. F., & Zelen, S. L. (1950). Investigations into the 'self‐concept’. the w‐a‐ y technique. Journal of Personality , 18 (4), 483-498.
Davidson, L. (2000). Philosophical foundations of humanistic psychology. The Humanistic Psychologist , 28 (1-3), 7-31.
deCarvalho, R. J. (1996). James FT Bugental: Portrait of a humanistic psychologist. Journal of Humanistic Psychology , 36 (4), 42-57.
Hattie, J. (2014). Self-concept . Psychology Press.
Krug, O. T. (2009). James Bugental and Irvin Yalom: Two masters of existential therapy cultivate presence in the therapeutic encounter. Journal of Humanistic Psychology , 49 (3), 329-354.
Mahoney, M. J. (1996). Authentic presence and compassionate wisdom: The art of Jim Bugental. Journal of Humanistic Psychology , 36 (4), 58-66.
Sarbit, B. (1996). James Bugental: Champion of Subjectivity. Journal of Humanistic Psychology , 36 (4), 19-30.
Wittine, B. (1996). The" I" and the:" SELF": Personal Reminiscences of Therapy with Jim Bugental. Journal of Humanistic Psychology , 36 (4), 31-41.
