Humanism,
putting “I” or “me” at the center of the universe, has been an insidious
problem for humanity from the very beginning of man’s existence. We could begin
with Adam and Eve, who, when the serpent spoke to Eve, revealed more about the
human condition than we could ever hope to learn from all that the history of
psychology might want to teach us. In the garden the following scene plays out,
1Now the
serpent was more crafty than any beast of the field which the LORD God had
made. And he said to the woman, "Indeed, has God said, 'You shall not eat
from any tree of the garden'?"
2The woman
said to the serpent, "From the fruit of the trees of the garden we may
eat;
3but from
the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God has said, 'You
shall not eat from it or touch it, or you will die.'"
4 The
serpent said to the woman, "You surely will not die!
5"For
God knows that in the day you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you
will be like God, knowing good and evil."
6When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and
that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable to make one
wise, she took from its fruit and ate; and she gave also to her husband
with her, and he ate. (Emphasis mine)
7Then the
eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they
sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loin coverings.
Genesis
3:1-7 (NASB)
As these events play out we
get the first glimpse of person-centered behavior ever recorded, and what
eventually proves to be the fall of mankind. The thought processes exhibited by
Eve (and Adam) continue to be evidenced throughout history.
In the ancient Greek world early humanistic beliefs were
propagated by Anaxagoras who proposed the idea of “Free Thinking.” This idea
allowed Epicurus to develop his human-centered approaches to achieving a state
of “eudaimon,” or what we would know as happiness achieved through
self-actualization. However, on the horizon, we see the mechanistic view
marching forward.
Beginning
with the 14th and 15th centuries the mechanistic view of
humanity was taking shape. Also, the idea of self-determinism was on the rise.
Thomas Hobbes recognized how society was wandering down the path of humanistic
thought. One feature of Hobbes’s theory of why people behaved the way they did
was that he considered human nature as being absolutely egoistic. He describes
people as being, by nature, selfish and not in fact considering others. “In his
psychological analysis he finds naught but self-regarding feelings impelling
man’s activity.” (Hobbes, 1898) Although Hobbes himself
was a proponent of a Christian worldview, his reference in this writing is to
reveal the prevailing zeitgeist of his day. His words show the pervasiveness of
humanistic thought processes during the late 16th and early 17th
centuries. The progression of humanistic thought continues to grow, and it
finds a foothold in the center of Germany the home of the beginnings of modern
psychology.
One
of the more ardent proponents of humanistic psychology was Charlotte Buhler. She
conveys that her clients often say they don't know what they want, and they do
not know what they believe in. Buhler subsequently states, “…this is a call for
humanistic psychology, a psychology that guides people in defining what
they think is healthy and meaningful living. It is through this
clarification of goals that people become fulfilled.” (Buhler, 1972) (Emphasis
mine) Again we see the same type of thinking that caused Adam and Eve so
much pain, and what Thomas Hobbes saw as he observed the behavior of his day.
Humanistic thinking focuses on “I” and “me.” It focuses on the
self-_________ (fill in the blank).
The people mentioned thus far reveal to us the anthropocentric nature of
humanism. All was not humanistic thought from the 15th through 19th
centuries. Blaise Pascal, Francis Bacon, Sir Isaac Newton, Michael Faraday,
James C. Maxwell, and J. Robert Oppenheimer represented the best that science
had to offer. All based there science in the fact that there is a creator who
is also a lawgiver, and none of them believed that man, starting from himself
could understand anything. None of them had a humanistic outlook.
Non-Christian
philosophers from the time of Plato to Sartre had some common ground. They were
rationalists. They assumed man, starting with himself, can gather enough
information to form logical conclusions (understanding) of who they were and
why they behaved as they did. They believed all knowledge comes from inside
them leaving out the possibility of God. They also took reasoned though very
seriously. Their logical conclusion was they could achieve true knowledge
through reason alone. These older views, albeit faulty, show an optimistic
outlook on life and knowledge. But a shift occurred that moved men from an
optimistic view to a view that all is lost. The humanistic expectation that
autonomous man would be able to bring together a unified view of human nature
stalled. The pessimistic view of man was ushered in by men like Jean-Jacques
Rousseau, David Hume, Immanuel Kant, Georg Hegel, and Soren Kierkegaard. The
main idea for these men could be summed in this way, autonomous freedom,
meaning freedom from any kind of restraint, and truth being sought in the
synthesis of ideas instead of absolutes or antithesis. Some going as far to say
meaning is found through a “leap of faith.” Without absolutes the door was left
wide open for humanistic thought to inflict more damage. The age of psychology
was beginning and the men of the 20th century will take humanistic
ideas to the edge of reasoned thought. Thus, Humanistic Psychology will be
born. Abraham Maslow, born in 1908, believed that although psychoanalysis as
posited by Freud was somewhat useful, but Maslow said it was on useful on the
sick. He placed his emphasis on studying the non-sick. Maslow studied those who
had achieved higher levels of satisfaction with life. He wanted to understand
what motivated the thought processes of successful and well adjusted people.
Thus marks the beginning of Humanistic Psychology which teaches that every
person has a strong desire to realize his or her full potential, to reach a
level of Self-actualization. Maslow used a visual aid to represent his idea of
a Hierarchy of Needs which shows how people progress from the most basic needs
to the pinnacle of self-actualization. The system emanates as follows,
“By
satisfying basic needs such as food, water, sex, exercise, and recreation, and
feeling safe, we can progress to higher order, psychological needs such as love,
needs for belonging, and self-esteem. When these are met, it provides the
confidence and focus to reach the pinnacle of psychological integration, or
self-actualization.” (Jacobs, 2002)
Basically Maslow states that
once we satisfy our basic needs we, in humanistic fashion, continue to put
ourselves first. With that understanding, human behavior is seen as based on a
perception of reality that causes the individual to act accordingly and satisfy
their needs in light of those perceptions. Maslow took this idea a step further
by stating that the way the needs are filled are just as important as the needs
themselves. He said that filling the needs and the way they are filled combine
to make up the human experience. Maslow’s idea of meaning level of self-actualization
is achieved when a person establishes meaningful connections to an external
reality. Establishing an external
connection is the goal of Carl Roger’s client-centered therapy.
The client-centered or
person-centered psychology is probably the biggest perpetuator of humanistic
psychology, and the dangerous ideas that flow from it that have come about in
our lifetime. Carl Rogers was influenced by the views of John Dewey, Sigmund
Freud, and Soren Kierkegaard. His brand of psychology is humanistic, but it is
also existentialistic as well. Where Rogers ideas begin to break down are in
the area of human nature. He believes that people are intrinsically good. He
also believes they are rational, and trustworthy. From these basic beliefs he
constructs his entire premise which states that people have an inherit tendency
toward actualization, growth, health, independence, and autonomy. His theory is
not without many shortcomings, “The person-centered counseling perspective in
its “classic” form possesses nearly insurmountable obstacles for rehabilitation
practitioners.” (See, 1986) Rogers offers a statement
in his book, A Way of Being, which is
true to humanistic thinking, but causes problems for those trying to engage his
theory, “individuals have within themselves vast resources for
self-understanding and for altering their self-concepts, basic attitudes, and
self-directed behavior.” (Rogers, 1980) The theories of Maslow and
Rogers seem, on the surface, to be reasonable, but are they really?
The Christian view of humanity
contradicts the Rogerian belief in man’s natural goodness. The Bible teaches
that,
“23for all have sinned and fall short of
the glory of God,”
Romans
3:23 (NASB)
Man is in not intrinsically good, but his nature was altered all the way back in the very beginning of human existence as stated in the verses of Genesis that began this writing. Except for God’s provision through His Son, Jesus Christ, and His finished work on the cross, man cannot overcome his fallen nature. The ultimate problem for mankind is not our childhood, our past, or the thwarting of our actualizing potential. Our problem is sin, and we cannot save ourselves. Taking the correspondent’s view of truth the Christian faith has the only real answers to our problems. That being the case, and it can be made with very strong evidence, then the humanistic view that we can find answers to our problems within ourselves and without God, is a bankrupt idea. So is there any hope for utilizing any of the ideas contained within humanistic psychology?
Man is in not intrinsically good, but his nature was altered all the way back in the very beginning of human existence as stated in the verses of Genesis that began this writing. Except for God’s provision through His Son, Jesus Christ, and His finished work on the cross, man cannot overcome his fallen nature. The ultimate problem for mankind is not our childhood, our past, or the thwarting of our actualizing potential. Our problem is sin, and we cannot save ourselves. Taking the correspondent’s view of truth the Christian faith has the only real answers to our problems. That being the case, and it can be made with very strong evidence, then the humanistic view that we can find answers to our problems within ourselves and without God, is a bankrupt idea. So is there any hope for utilizing any of the ideas contained within humanistic psychology?
Humanistic thought should have very
little use within the Christian counseling setting. For counselors to be true
to Biblical teaching, they must jettison humanistic practices such as no
boundaries, permissive therapy atmosphere, and nondirective therapy. The
logical outcome of using these practices is a counseling practice that will
have little resemblance to anything Biblical.
Works Cited
Buhler, C. (1972). Introduction
to Humanistic Psychology. Bellmont, California: Wadsworth Publishing Co.
Hobbes, T. (1898). The
Ethics of Thomas Hobbes as Contained in Selections from His Works. Boston,
MA, U.S.A.: Ginn & Company.
Jacobs, D. (2002). Psychology
(Brain, Behavior, and Popular Culture) (4th Edition ed.). Dubuque, Iowa,
U.S.A.: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Co.
Rogers, C. (1980). A Way
of Being. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
See, J. (1986). Applied
Rehabilitation Counseling. (M. W. Riggar, Ed.) New York, NY, U.S.A.:
Springer.
T
No comments:
Post a Comment