Human is the Least we Are

By Red the Philosopher

This paper will (1) discuss the school of humanism and its utility in present-day clinical practice, (2) non-exhaustively describe Carl Rogers’ significant contributions, and (3) non-exhaustively describe Maslow’s significant contributions. (2) and (3) will include critical commentary. Since both Rogers and Maslow’s careers are too broad for one essay, this paper will focus on areas of interest to the writer as a licensed professional counselor working with children and adolescents.

(1) Humanism refers to a school of thought in philosophy and psychology, among other areas, that emphasizes the power and potential of humanity. This school of thought permeates the field of counseling – applied psychology – as it suggests normative claims about the nature of humanity, the tendency toward “goodness” in healthy humans, and the presence of “badness, evil, or maleficence” stemming from some deprivation or injury in human needs or functioning. Humanism is extremely relevant either because it is either the product of intellectual conquest among professionals (Humanists managed to convince their colleagues of its utility and ratified it systematically) or because it is an effective approach at conceptualizing humanity. Humanism emphasizes rationality, morality, and general goodness. In clinical practice, humanism shows up in terms of the application of the works by Rogers and Maslow, namely unconditional positive regard for clients by clinicians, and a basic understanding that humans needs are organized hierarchically toward self-actualization. When working with clients, many organizations and providers utilize “client-centered” language, documentation ethics, and relational approaches in keeping with the school of Humanism. Additionally, clients are generally treated as inherently good, and their misdeeds are often characterized as some reaction to stress, trauma, or attachment styles. Essentially, psychopathology is seen as a divergence from health and normativity and treatment involves pushing individuals toward the resolution of symptoms that coagulate into syndromes and disorders. In general, within the field of counseling, this is all completed with a fundamental, Humanistic assumption and belief that there is good inside of every client no matter what they’ve done. This approach is especially helpful for many children and adolescents because it acknowledges their struggles and can reduce feelings of shame to feelings of guilt, identifying bad actions instead of bad people. In this way, among others, the diffusion of Humanistic assumptions and beliefs throughout counseling, psychology, education, and public policy raises questions about whether it bears true utility or Humanists were convincing in the past and entry-level professionals were trained to use this lens – possibly both.

(2) Rogers has contributed significantly to psychology and counseling and this paper will not address all of his contribution. Noteworthy to mention include his concepts of the organismic valuing process, unconditional positive regard, genuineness in therapeutic relationships, and empathy. Rogers acknowledged clients as experts on themselves, looked at the person as whole rather than pathologizing them, and even allowed the client to be in the driver seat during sessions. His therapeutic approach applied his psychological concepts, such as his belief in humans’ basic tendency to “actualize, maintain, and enhance.” Rogers’ approach is taught in undergraduate and graduate courses across the US. Of these, the most salient to the writer is the organismic valuing process, which supposes that people intuitively know what they need. This concept transcends counseling and touches on spirituality and neuropsychophysiology. Does the craving for a banana stem from a random taste for it or the biological need for potassium? Although Rogers did not approach it from that lens, his work is admittedly generative and maintains utility in present-day clinical practice. Rogers’ belief that individuals know what they need goes against Western medicine which supposes the doctor as the expert rather than the client. Even some clients do not see themselves as experts on themselves. This concept is one of Rogers’ most powerful offerings because it removes ego from help and the clinician no longer is perceived as a savior, rather an assistant. In clinical practice with children and adolescents, Rogers’ work is powerful because it is the key to establishing a solid therapeutic alliance which has been empirically proven to be the main predictor of therapeutic outcomes (Ardito & Rabellino, 2011). Although one critique might be that children and adolescents do not possess the self-awareness to be experts on themselves, which is valid, it may be more beneficial to teach them to become that rather than be another adult in their life telling them what to do. Developmentally, both may serve the same purpose of producing a child or adolescent whom is an expert on themselves in the way that discipline evolves into self-discipline. This is the pedagogical model schools used in the past of, “I do – We do – You do” for assignments.

(3) Maslow, on the other hand, is probably most well-known by laypersons for his Hierarchy of Needs. This will be the main point of this paper and the critique will be based on that concept. However, before delving into that, Maslow deserves acknowledgement for his ideas such as, the preconditions for human growth – “the delights of growth and anxieties of safety are greater than the anxieties of growth and the delights of safety”; the inherent striving of human potential toward self-actualization, morality, and goodness; and the roles of and relationships between deficiency and being in human functioning. That being said, Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs is questionable because one may not need social belonging to achieve self-actualization. Seeing humans as Rubic’s cubes, humans come in innumerable organizational arrangements of the self and needs. Use the figure of Jesus Christ, whom was socially outcast, starved, beaten, and deprived of the basic aspects of the hierarchy, he still showed compassion, kindness, and fulfillment of his life’s purpose. People like Ghandi and many others follow in this tradition in that sacrifices of some aspects of the Hierarchy do impede one from achieving higher tiers. Another critique is that Maslow’s theory was stolen from the Native American’s conception (See Figure 1). Whether this is true is not known – it appears the Indigenous conception can fit on top of Maslow’s – merging the two demonstrates how individuals grow and then stimulate growth at their communal and other macro levels. From a biological level, one could suggest that even cells within humans have a hierarchy of needs such that its fulfillment is the precondition for cells combining to form organs, and some deficiency in an individual cell’s need hierarchy can produce disruptions in its functioning and disorders. Looking at this from a physical level, one might suggest that elements have needs and disruptions in their need hierarchies create isotopes, some more volatile than others. In this way, Maslow’s theory can topple over itself and at different levels of analyzing life, from the micro to the macro, need hierarchies may exist which guide proper or normative functioning and dissatisfaction of any of the tiers in the hierarchies produce disorder. Looking at this concept longitudinally, and in keeping with the story, “Maybe so, Maybe not, We’ll See.”, (Archer, 2023), it is possible that today’s disorder or dissatisfaction of one of the tiers of a need hierarchy is actually beneficial or more beneficial long-term than immediate satisfaction of all tiers of the need hierarchy. This takes one a bit from Maslow but it demonstrates the generativity of his theory. Maslow’s theory is especially useful in working with children and adolescents because the hierarchy can be used as an assessment tool to identify where in the child or adolescent’s needs is the lack and how it can be resolved.

In summation, this paper discussed (1) Humanism, (2) Rogers, and (3) Maslow, with attention paid to their merits and some simple critical thoughts on their ideas.

Figure 1.

Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs x Indigenous Model of Self-Actualization

Image from Safir (2020)

References

Archer, M. (2023). Maybe so, Maybe not. We’ll see. Drmarlo.com. Retrieved April 3, 2023, from http://www.drmarlo.com/dr-marlo-speaks/maybe-so-maybe-not-well-see/

Ardito, R. B., & Rabellino, D. (2011). Therapeutic alliance and outcome of psychotherapy: historical excursus, measurements, and prospects for research. Frontiers in psychology, 2, 270. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00270

Blackstock, C. (2011). The emergence of the breath of life theory. Journal of Social Work Values and Ethics, 8(1), 1-16.

Safir, S. (2020). Maslows Hierarchy of Needs Informed by Blackfoot Nation (Alta). Shane Safir. Shane Safir. Retrieved from https://shanesafir.com/2020/12/before-maslows-hierarchy-the-whitewashing-of-indigenous-knowledge/.