2002). Many therapists embrace Rogers ’suggestion to make their clients the
center of therapy. In addition, many therapists include in their practices such
Rogerian techniques as therapist empathy, positive regard for clients, giving
clients responsibility for change, and self-disclosure by client and therapist.
The humanistic approach also sparked the growth of encounter groups in the
1960s. Variations of encounter groups remain today in the form of group ther-
apy and other self-improvement and personal-growth therapies.
Humanistic psychology ’s influence has not been limited to psychology
and psychotherapy. Students in education, communication, and business areoften introduced to Rogers and Maslow. Many employers and organizational
psychologists are concerned about promoting job satisfaction by taking careof employees ’higher needs. And many teachers and parents have adopted or
modified some of Rogers ’suggestions for education and child rearing. Because
they focus on issues that many of us address in our lives —fulfilling personal
potential, living in the here and now, finding happiness and meaning —books
by Maslow, Rogers, and other humanistic psychologists can still be found in
popular bookstores.
Criticisms
Like all influential personality theories, humanistic psychology has its critics.
One area of controversy concerns humanistic psychology ’s reliance on the
concept of free will to explain human behavior. Some psychologists argue
that this reliance renders the humanistic approach unfit for scientific study.
Science relies on the notion that events are determined by other events. Thus
the science of behavior relies on the assumption that behavior is determined
and therefore predictable. However, if we accept the idea that behavior is
sometimes caused by free will, which is not subject to these laws of determi-nation, these assumptions fall apart. How can we scientifically test whether
or not free will exists? Because we can explain any behavior as caused by
“free will, ”no investigation will ever fail to support a free will interpretation.
Free will by definition is not under the control of any observable or predict-
able force. These observations do not mean free will does not exist —only
that it cannot be explored through scientific inquiry. In response to this prob-
lem, Maslow pointed out that there are more avenues for understanding
human personality than the scientific method.
Another criticism of the humanistic approach is that many key concepts
are poorly defined. What exactly is “self-actualization, ”“fully functioning, ”
or“becoming ”? How do we know if we ’re having a “peak experience ”or
just a particularly pleasant time? Maslow argued that we simply don ’t know
enough about self-actualization and personal growth to provide clear defini-tions. But this defense is far from satisfying for most researchers. This vague-
ness prevents psychologists from adequately studying many humanistic
concepts. How can we investigate self-actualization if we can ’t decide who ’s
got it and who hasn ’t? Because most psychologists are trained as researchers,
the inability to pin down humanistic concepts causes many to challenge theusefulness of the approach.302 CHAPTER 11 The Humanistic Approach