** PRIVATE **
I don't have documentation, but would guess that with the advance of the
humanistic psych movement and its disavowal of traditional conceptions of
science (see also Maslow's file clerk versus artist conception of doing
science), Rogers also turned away from traditional conceptions of empiricistic,
analytic-reductive approaches (as he and other humanistic psych folk saw them).
If I were not busy with trick-or-treaters, I am sure that I could find this
increasing emphasis in his writings that should parallel the popularity of
humanistic psych to present day transpersonal psych and postmodernism. It is
ironic that he was recognized for opening up the therapeutic hour to empirical
scrutiny, but he did not feel that traditionalist, empirical psychology was up
to the task of accounting for personal experience. His research on therapy was
earlier in his thinking. His debates with Skinner on issues of choice come to
mind. Also, from somewhere..."A personal, subjective choice made my man sets
in motion the operations of science which in time proclaims that there can be
no such thing as a personal subjective choice" seems to capture his view, and
I think these words are his, but I am sticking with halloween candy rather than
searching my book-case at this hour ;-) I don't have the references handy but
am going with memory and the few times I saw him in person at conferences.
Personally, I thought he was at his best when describing ways people
self-distort and mis-interpret their experiences;a multi-faceted phenomenon
emphasized later by social-cognitive psychologists.
PS: MS's note about a client jumping out a window is typically discussed
with reference to T. Szasz's emphasis on non-interference, not Rogers' views,
but these are all just undocumented memories. Gary
Gerald L. (Gary) Peterson, Ph.D.
Professor, Psychology
Saginaw Valley State University
University Center, MI 48710
989-964-4491
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> "Jim Clark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 10/31/2008 8:47 am >>>
Hi
Early on Carl Rogers, Truax, and other collaborators did a fair amount of
empirical research on effectiveness of treatment as a function of qualities of
therapist and sessions. Is there any documentation as to why he subsequently
turned away from this empirical approach? Was it because the findings tended
not to confirm the importance of some of Rogers' theoretical constructs (e.g.,
unconditional positive regard)?
Take care
Jim
James M. Clark
Professor of Psychology
204-786-9757
204-774-4134 Fax
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Department of Psychology
University of Winnipeg
Winnipeg, Manitoba
R3B 2E9
CANADA
---
To make changes to your subscription contact:
Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
---
To make changes to your subscription contact:
Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
