Relational and Transcendental Humanism: Exploring the Consequences of a Thoroughly Pragmatic Humanism

JournalofHumaNisTiccOuNsELiNG,EducaTiONaNddEVELOpmENTFall2007Volume46 131

ARTICLES

© 2007 by the American Counseling Association. All rights reserved.

Relational and Transcendental Humanism: Exploring the

Consequences of a Thoroughly Pragmatic Humanism

James T. Hansen

The relational and transcendental elements of humanism are considered. Although the re-

lational component of humanism is extraordinarily valuable, the author argues that the

transcendental portion of humanism should be abandoned. The implications of a thoroughly

pragmatic humanism are explored.

Humanism isacomplexsystemof thought thathasbeen influencedbyvarious historical and ideological forces (davidson, 2000; decarvalho,1990;Halling&Nill,1995;Hansen,2000;sass,1989).Becausethereareamultitudeofphilosophicalcurrentsthatflowthroughhumanism,variouscomponentscanbedistilledfromtheoverallhumanisticparadigm.dividinghumanismintorelationalandtranscendentalsubcomponentsisonewaytoconceptualizethistheoreticallymultifacetedcounselingorientation.

Regardingtherelationalcomponent,thehumanistictreatmentparadigmoffereda richly relationalalternative to the reductive, scientificallybasedorientations of psychoanalysis and behaviorism (Hansen, 2005a; Rogers,1951).insteadoftreatingclientsaspsychologicalspecimens,earlyhumanistsarguedthatcounselingshouldbeahighlyrelationalaffair,whichisgroundedingenuineness,empathy,andunconditionalpositiveregard(Rogers,1957).Humanismisclearlycharacterizedbythisstrongrelationalcomponent.

in addition to the value it places on relationships, humanism is alsorootedinarealistepistemology(Hansen,2002).specifically,earlyhuman-istsemphasizedaccurate,objectiveknowledge.Thisdoctrineofknowingisreflectedintheideathatcounselorsshoulduseaccurateempathyandthat clients should be helped to find their true selves (Rogers, 1957). irefertothisemphasisonaccuracy,truth,discovery,andobjectivityasthetranscendental component ofhumanismbecausethehumanisticencounter

James T. Hansen, Department of Counseling, Oakland University. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to James T. Hansen, Department of Counseling, Oakland University, 450E Pawley Hall, Rochester, MI 48309 (e-mail: [email protected]).

132 JournalofHumaNisTiccOuNsELiNG,EducaTiONaNddEVELOpmENTFall2007Volume46

isguidedbyobjectivetruthsthattranscend(i.e.,existindependentofandapartfrom)thecounselingrelationship.

dividinghumanismintorelationalandtranscendentalcomponentssug-gestssomeinterestingquestions.Forexample,arebothcomponentsneces-sary?Howdotheyrelatetooneanother?doesthetranscendentalaspectofhumanismfacilitateordetractfromtherelationalelementofhumanism?itisthepurposeofthisarticletoexplorethesequestionsandothersthatarederivedfromconsideringhumanismasanideologythatsimultaneouslyemphasizesrelationshipsandtranscendence.Thisisaccomplishedwithinthefollowingorganizationalstructure:(a)RelationalHumanism,(b)TranscendentalHumanism,(c)critiqueofTranscendentalHumanism,and(d)discussionandconclusions.

RELATIONAL HumANISm

Theidealizationofthecounselingrelationshipisavitalcomponentofthehumanisticapproachtohelping(Rogers,1951,1957).incontrasttopsycho-analyticthought,whichconceptualizesthecounselingrelationshipasthedistorteddisplacementofearlydevelopmentalconflicts(Gabbard,2004),humanistsmaintain that an authentic encounterbetween the client andthecounselorisessentialforoptimalclientgrowthtooccur(Rogers,1951,1957).Humanistictheoryprovidesbothpracticalguidanceandtheoreticalsupport for this authentic relationship. in terms of practice, humanistictheorists have highlighted particular conditions that are necessary andsufficienttofacilitatetheemergenceofanoptimalcounselingrelationship(Rogers,1957).Theoretically,theidealizationofanauthenticrelationshipis derived from the humanistic emphasis on antireductionism (Hansen,2005a;matson,1971).

mid-20th-centuryhumanistscriticizedpsychoanalysisandbehaviorismforreducingclientstopsychicpartsandstimulus–responsecontingencies(matson, 1971). Like the proponents of Renaissance humanism, whichemergedmanycenturiesbefore,advocatesofhumanisticpsychologyarguedthatpeoplearebestunderstoodas irreduciblywholebeings (davidson,2000).ifclientsareviewedthroughthereductivetheoreticallensesofpsy-choanalysisandbehaviorism,humanistsargued,acounselingrelationshipbasedonaholisticappreciationoftheclientisunlikelytodevelop(matson,1971).Therefore,ratherthanadoptingareductivetheoreticalmind-setthatimpedesauthentic,holisticencounters,humanistictheoristsproposedthatparticularrelationalconditionsshouldbeestablishedbycounselorsasameanstofacilitateclientgrowth(Rogers,1957).Thisemphasisongenuinecounselingrelationships,whicheschewallreductivetheoreticalbaggage,isauniquefeatureofthehumanisticapproachtohelping.

inretrospect,themid-20th-centuryhumanistswereextraordinarilypre-scientintheiremphasisontherelationshipasthemostimportantfeatureofthehelpingencounter.decadesofcounselingresearchhasverifiedthatthe


qualityofthecounselingrelationshipishighlyassociatedwithtreatmentoutcomes,whereasspecifictechniquesbasedonreductiveideologiesmakeonlyaminisculecontributiontotheoveralloutcomevariance(Wampold,2001).clearly,therelationalcomponentofhumanismisavitalandusefulelementofhumanisticideology.

TRANSCENDENTAL HumANISm

inadditiontoitsstrongrelationalemphasis,humanismcanalsobeunder-stoodasendorsingaparticulartypeoftranscendence.Bytranscendence,imeanthathumanisticcounselingisguidedbyfactorsthattranscendthecounselingrelationship,suchastheuniqueexperiencesandtrueselvesofclientele.Fortraditionalhumanists,thesefactorsarenotaninherentpartor product of the counseling relationship. Rather, they exist on anotherepistemologicalplane,andthecounselingrelationshipsimplyfacilitatestheiremergence(maslow,1968;Rogers,1951,1957).Toappreciatethistran-scendentelementofhumanism,thehistoricaldevelopmentofhumanisticthoughtmustbeconsidered.

Renaissancehumanismisanappropriatestartingpointforahistoricalconsiderationofhumanisticthought.Throughoutthemiddleagesofhumanhistory, religion was considered the quintessential source of knowledgeandanswersaboutthehumancondition.duringtheRenaissance,whenclassicalGreekphilosophywas rediscovered, therewasa turningawayfromthedivineasawayofunderstandinghumanaffairs.Thisrejectionoftranscendence(i.e.,ultimatetruthandauthoritythatexistsoutsideofthehumanrealm)andtheconsiderationofhumansasirreduciblywholebeingswhoshouldbeunderstoodon theirown terms are thehallmarkfeaturesofRenaissancehumanism(Tarnas,1991).

ThereareinterestingparallelsbetweenRenaissancehumanismandthepsychological humanism that emerged during the mid-20th century.attheircore,bothhumanisticmovementsthoroughlyrejectedthereductionof humans to baser elements (davidson, 2000). This antireductionisticfeaturewascertainlypresent inRenaissancehumanismasarejectionoftheviewthathumansshouldbeunderstoodasmereby-productsofthedivine(Tarnas,1991).JustastheRenaissancehumaniststurnedawayfromGod,psychologicalhumanistsrejectedgrandpsychologicaltheories(i.e.,psychoanalysisandbehaviorism),whichpositedthathumansweresimplypawnsoftranscendentlawsofhumannature(matson,1971).Thisrefusaltoviewhumansasproductsoftranscendentforces,then,isacommonfeatureofbothRenaissanceandpsychologicalhumanism(davidson,2000).

Thepsychologicalhumanismthatemergedinthemid-20thcentury,how-ever,arguablycontainsvestigesoftranscendence.Forexample,considerthetraditionalhumanisticdirectivesforcounselorstobegenuineandtoaccuratelyempathizewiththeselvesoftheirclients(Rogers,1957).Notethatbothofthesetheoreticalelements(i.e.,genuinenessandaccurateempathy)


presumeareal selfintheclientthatcanbeaccessedbythecounselor.Thisrealselfisatypeoftruth,likeGodorpsychologicaltheories,thattranscends(i.e.,isunrelatedtoandexistsapartfrom)thecounselingrelationship.ac-cordingtoclassicalhumanists,accessingthistranscendentalrealself,bothintheclient(i.e.,accurateempathy)andinthecounselor(i.e.,genuineness),isvitalforpsychologicalhealingtooccur(Rogers,1951,1957).

alsoconsiderthattheprimaryaimofhumanisticcounselingistoresolveincongruentaspectsofselfwithintheclient(Rogers,1951).Oncetheclientbecomesmorecongruent, thetrueclientself, theonethatwasmeant tobeifitwerenotforcertainunfortunatedevelopmentalroadblocks,issetfreesothatitcanfullyflourish(Kalmthout&pelgrim,1990).settingthecounselingsightsonsometrue,asofyet,unrealizedselfisalsoaninstanceoftranscendenceinhumanistictheory.Thatis,thistrue,higherorderselfguidesthecounselingprocessbut,atthesametime,existsapartfromitonanotherplaneofbeing.

insteadofworshippingthedivineorgenuflectingtopsychologicaltheo-ries,then,mid-20th-centuryhumanistssimplyestablishedanewchurch,theoneofthetrue self.itcanbearguedthatthisidealizationofatrueselfisperhapsastepinanontranscendentaldirection.Thatis,unlikeGodorlawsofhumannature,theselfisconceivedofasresidingwithinhumanbeings.Thus,althoughstillendorsinganideologyoftranscendence,humanistsdidcomedowntoearthcomparedwiththestratosphericformsoftranscendencefoundinreligionandintheideaofuniversalpsychologicallaws.

Would it be beneficial, though, to complete the Renaissance projectand eliminate the idea of transcendence from psychological humanismaltogether? Would a thoroughly nontranscendental humanism be desir-able?Whatwouldthisnewhumanismbelike?Toanswerthesequestions,philosophicalcritiquesoftranscendence,astheyapplytohumanism,mustbeoverviewed.

CRITIquE OF TRANSCENDENTAL HumANISm

The relational component of humanism is clearly a vital aspect of thisideologythatshouldberetained.Whatistheworth,however,ofthetran-scendentalcomponentofhumanism?Twofundamentalclaimsabouttheimportance of the transcendental element of humanism can be inferredfromthehumanisticliterature:(a)Thetranscendentalportionofhumanismsupportstherelationalelementofhumanismand(b)thetranscendentalaspect of humanism facilitates client liberation. Each of these claims isdiscussedandexaminedinthesectionthatfollows.

Transcendence and Relationships

Humanists(e.g.,maslow,1968;Rogers,1951,1957)haveproposedthathigherqualityrelationshipswillresultfromaccuratelydetectingandnurturing


the true, transcendentalself (i.e., theself thatexists independentofandapartfromthecounselingrelationshipandtheselfthatisintheprocessofbecoming).Thispropositionappliestoboththecounselingrelationshipandrelationshipsineverydaylife.

in termsof thecounselingrelationship,oneof thecorenecessaryandsufficient conditions of humanistic counseling is that “the therapist isexperiencing an accurate [italics added] empathic understanding” (Rog-ers,1957,p.99)of theclient.Notethataccuratedetectionof theclient’sself(i.e.,transcendentalcomponent)isinextricablytiedtothequalityofthecounselingrelationship(i.e.,relationalcomponent).asanadditionalexampleofthewayinwhichtranscendenceisconnectedtothecounselingrelationshipinhumanisticideology,considerthatanothernecessaryandsufficientconditionofhumanisticcounselingisthatthecounselorshouldbegenuine.specifically,thecounselorshouldbe“freelyanddeeplyhimself[orherself]”(p.97).Therefore,thetranscendentalportionofhumanism,intermsofaccuracyabouttheself,iscloselytiedtotherelationalportionofhumanism,intermsofthequalityofthecounselingrelationship;greateraccuracyaboutselfleadstoabettercounselingrelationship.

Furthermore,accordingto thehumanisticsystemof thought,being intouchwiththetranscendentalselfnotonlyimprovesthecounselingrela-tionshipbutalsohelpsclientstoestablishmorematurerelationshipsout-sideofcounseling(maslow,1968;Rogers,1951,1957).Toelaborateonthispoint,thegeneralgoalsofhumanisticcounselingareforclientstobecomemorecongruentandself-actualized (maslow,1968;Rogers,1951).Thesegoalsareachievedbyafocusonselfwithinthecounselingrelationship.self-actualizedpersons,accordingtoclassicalhumanists,have“changed(the clinician would say, improved) interpersonal relations” (maslow,1968,p.27)andhavegreater“abilitytolove”(maslow,1968,p.157).asanexampleofrelationalimprovement,asaperson“getstobemorepurelyandsinglyhimself...loverscomeclosertoformingaunitratherthantwopeople”(maslow,1968,p.105).

Humanists, then, have proposed a strong correlative tie between at-tentivenesstotranscendence,intheformofself,andgreatermaturityinrelationships,bothwithinandoutsideof thecounselingsituation.doesa focus on transcendence, however, foster better relationships? indeed,doesaprolongedpreoccupationwithselfeventuallyresultinmorematurerelationshipswithothers?

Rorty(1991),inanarticlethatexaminedtherelationshipbetweenobjec-tivityandsolidarity,posedaninterestingchallengetotheideathatafocuson transcendencewill result inagreatercommitment toothers.specifi-cally,Rorty(1991)arguedthattherearetwowaysthatpeoplecanmakesenseoftheirlives.Thefirstistolookformeaningsthatareeternalandenduring,whichexistapartfromhumanity.Hereferredtothisorientationasa“desireforobjectivity”(Rorty,1991,p.21).incontrasttoobjectivity,humanscanturntotheirowncommunitiestofindmeaningandeschew


explanatorysystemsthatarederivedfromsometranscendental,nonhumanrealm.Thisorientationrepresentsa“desireforsolidarity”(Rorty,1991,p.21).accordingtoRorty(1991),thedesireforobjectivitydiminishesthedesireforsolidarity;thatis,

insofarassheseeksobjectivity,shedistancesherselffromtheactualpersonsaroundhernotbythinkingofherselfasamemberofsomeotherrealorimaginarygroup,butratherbyattachingherselftosomethingwhichcanbedescribedwithoutreferencetoanyparticularhumanbeings.(p.21)

Therefore, Rorty (1991) argued, a sense of solidarity is sacrificed whenobjectivityispursued.

Thisinteresting,andintuitivelyappealing,hypothesiscancertainlybeappliedtothecurrentdiscussionofhumanism.specifically,thetranscen-dentalportionofhumanism,whichrepresentsadesireforobjectivityinthe form of accuracy about true selves, may interfere with, rather thanpromote,therelationalgoalsofhumanism,whichareaimedtowardpro-motingsolidarity.

indeed, the very idea that prolonged focus on self can result in morematurerelationshipswithothersissomewhatcounterintuitive.arguably,itwouldbemoreplausibletoproposethatintensefocusonselfwouldmakeonemoreselfish,ratherthanotheroriented.ThisispreciselythepointmadebyHillmanandVentura(1992),whomaintainedthatcounselingdivertsconcernaboutotherstotheself.Toillustratethispoint,imagineaclientincounselingwhoreportsbeingdistressedabouttheprevalenceofchildabuseincontemporarysociety.Ratherthanexploretheclient’sinterestinthissocialproblem,thehumanisticcounselorwilllikelyrelatethisconcernto theclient’sself,perhapsdirecting thedialogue toadiscussionof theclient’stroubledchildhood.interest inthewelfareofothers, then,tendstobepsychologicallyfunneledintotheselfinhumanisticcounseling.Thetranscendental component of humanism, then, may detract from ratherthanfacilitatetherelationalgoalsofhumanism.specifically,turningtowardtranscendencemaycausepeopletoturnawayfromeachother.moreover,insteadofpromotinginterestinothers,prolongedself-focusmayinhibitthedevelopmentofmaturerelationships.

Transcendence and Liberation

in addition to promising more developmentally mature relationships,humanistic counseling purports to create a more liberated self (Rogers,1951).Bymaintainingafocusonthetrue,genuineself(i.e.,transcendentalcomponent)withintheoptimalrelationalenvironmentofthecounselingsituation,incongruentaspectsoftheclient’sselfemergeandaregraduallyintegratedintoamoreholistic,congruentidentity.Thisnewlevelofself-congruenceenablesclientstoridethepsychologicalwaveofgrowthandactualization,apossibilitythatdidnotexistwiththeirold,developmentally


stunted,incongruentselves(Hansen,2005b).Theprimarybenefitofthispsychologicalgrowthisliberationastheselfthatwasmeanttobecomeissetfreefromtheprisonofincongruence(Rogers,1957).Thisiscertainlyanappealingnarrative.However,theideathatliberationmightbeaproductoffocusingonatranscendentalselfhasbeenquestionedby20th-centuryphilosophers.Thesecritiquesareimportanttoconsiderwhenevaluatingthe humanistic claim that there is a connection between self-focus andpsychologicalfreedom.

inthisregard,considerthefollowingquotefromthephilosopherFou-cault(1983):

Therearetwomeaningsofthewordsubject:subjecttosomeoneelsebycontrolanddependence,andtiedtohisownidentitybyaconscienceorself-knowledge.Bothmeaningssuggestaformofpowerwhichsubjugatesandmakessubjectto.(p.212)

contrarytothehumanisticassumption,whatFoucaultessentiallyarguedisthatgreaterself-definitionresultsinamoresubjugated,disempoweredself(Hansen,2006).inotherwords,themoretheselfispinneddownwithanidentity,thelessfreeitistobecomesomethingelse.self-identity,then,is itself theprison,notthekeytounlockthedoor.Foucault’s (1983)cri-tiqueisintuitivelyplausible,perhapsmuchmoresothanthehumanisticconnectionbetweenself-definitionandfreedom.afterall,thecreationofsomethingnewalwaysentailsoperatingoutsideofoldassumptions.Howisit,then,thattheselfcanbecomemoreliberatedbybeingplacedinsideadefinitionalbox?

animportantphilosophicalassumptionthatunderliesFoucault’s(1983)ideasisthatthetranscendentalselfofhumanismisahumanconstruction,notarealentitytobefound.postmodernists,likeFoucault,havecritiquedtheEnlightenmentidealoftheselfasanessential,independentstructurethatishousedatthecenterofpersonality,likeanorganinthebody(mu-ran,2001).Rather, thepostmodernistself iscontinuallycreated throughrelationalmatrices(mcNamee,1996).ifthispostmodernistideaofselfistakenseriously, thehumanistsarecompletelymisguided in theirsearchforatrue,transcendentalself—thereisnothingtofind.

Theselfasasocialconstructionalsohasimplicationsforthehumanisticidealofself-congruence.Gergen(1991),forexample,hasarguedthatthecontemporaryselfmustplaymultiplerolesinmodernsociety.Ratherthanrespondtotheseidentitydemandswitharigid,homogeneous,congruentformofself,itisfarmoreadaptivetomakeuseofaflexibleselfthathasmultipleidentities.Withinthisvisionofself,congruenceandsingularityarepathological,whereasmultiplicityandadaptabilityaresignsofpsy-chologicalhealth(Gergen,1995;Hansen,2005b).

postmodernisttheorists,then,havechallengedthehumanisticconnec-tion between attentiveness to transcendence and self-liberation; that is,perhapsdefining theselfencages it.moreover, inaddition tobeing lessfree, thecongruentselfmayalsobe lessadaptiveandfunctional thana


multifaceted,incongruentself,whichcanflexiblyrespondtothemultipleroledemandsofcontemporarylife.

DISCuSSION AND CONCLuSIONS

ihaveproposedthathumanismcanbethoughtofashavingrelationalandtranscendentalcomponents.decadesofcounselingoutcomeresearchhasconfirmedthattherelationalcomponentofhumanismisextraordinarilyvaluable (Wampold,2001).However, ihavequestionedthevalueof thetranscendentalcomponentofhumanism.

ihavereferredtotheelementofhumanisticthoughtthatpositsapristineself,onethatsitsatthecoreofbeingandelectrifiesthepsychewithwill,asthetranscendentalcomponentofhumanism.Thisselfistranscendentalbecauseit isnotafunctionofthecounselingrelationship.Rather, it isapreexistingentitythatcanonlybecomeknownthroughcertainrelationalconditions.specifically,humanistictheorydirectscounselorstoestablishcontactwiththeirownselvesbybeinggenuineandtouseaccurateempathytodetectthetrueselvesoftheirclientele(Rogers,1957).mostimportant,however,thehumanisticorientationtohelpingdirectsbothpartiesinthecounselingrelationshiptofocustheireffortsonbringingabouttheclientself that isyettobe(Kalmthout&pelgrim,1990;maslow,1968;Rogers,1951).Thisistheultimatetranscendentalself,whichiscongruent,actual-ized,andfree.

ihavearguedthathumanisticassumptionsaboutatranscendentalselfarenotself-evident.Todemonstratethearbitrarynatureofthehumanisticposition,ihaveborrowedconceptsfromcontemporaryphilosophytocri-tiquehumanisticpremises.specifically,comingincontactwithasupposedtranscendentalselfdoesnotnecessarilyfostermorematurerelationships.Furthermore,therearepersuasivereasonstoquestiontheassumptionthatattentivenesstoatranscendentalselfwillpromoteliberation.

Therefore,imaintain,thetranscendentalportionofhumanismislikeananchorthatseverelylimitsthegrowthandpowerofhumanisticideology.TheRenaissanceprojectofturningawayfromreductiveexplanationsforhumanbehavior,whicharetranscendentalordivine,oughttobecompleted.iammakingaplea,then,forathoroughlynontranscendentalhumanism,onethatdisavowsallnotionsofultimatetruthandtranscendence.

ifthetranscendentalportionofhumanismisabandoned,however,whatmightreplaceit?itisunreasonabletosupposethattherelationalcomponentof humanism could operate optimally without a philosophical compasstoguideit.Thetruetranscendentalselfprovidesdirectionintraditionalhumanism.Whatcouldconceivablyguideanontranscendentalhumanism?perhapsthebeginningofananswertothisquestioncanbefoundindar-winism,anideologythateschewsalltranscendenceandplaceshumansonthesamelevelasanimals.Fromadarwinianperspective,humansdonothaveanytiestotranscendencebutaresimplybruteswhostruggletoadapt


totheirenvironment.althoughevolutionarytheoryistypicallyappliedtobiology, the implicationsofdarwin’s ideashave influencedphilosophy,particularlythepragmaticandneopragmaticmovements(Rorty,1999).

pragmatismisauniquelyamericanphilosophicalsystemthatemergedduringthelate19thcentury(menand,2001).Thebasicpremiseofprag-matismisthatpropositionsshouldbejudgedbytheiradaptationalvalue,notaccordingtotheircorrespondencetotranscendenttruth(polkinghorne,2000). concepts, then, are like tools that evolve to fulfill human needs.Withinthisdarwinianphilosophicalvision,itisjustasincoherenttoaskwhetheran idea iscorrespondentwithtranscendent truthas it is toaskwhetheritistranscendentallytruethatthenecksofgiraffesshouldbelong.inbothinstances—animalcharacteristicsandideas—theonlycriterionforjudgingworthisadaptationalutility.

afteraninitialburstofpopularity,pragmatismbegantofadeduringthemid-20thcenturyasnewerphilosophicalideascameintovogue.However,overthelastseveraldecades,withtheadventofpostmodernismandthelinguisticturninphilosophy,pragmatismhasbeenresurrectedasavitalsystemofthought(polkinghorne,1992).Thisnew,revitalizedpragmatismhasbeencalledneopragmatism(Goldberg,2002;Hansen,2007).Thebasicassumptionsofneopragmatismarefundamentallythesameastheoriginalpragmatism.However,thereisastronglinguisticelementtoneopragmatismthatwasnotpresentinclassicalpragmatism(Hansen,2007).Languageisidealizedasanall-importanthumantoolbytheneopragmatists.Humansprogressivelyadaptbyconstructingnewlinguistictoolstodescribetheirsur-roundings.ibelievethatneopragmatism,asathoroughlynontranscendentalsystemofthought,hastremendouspotentialtoreplacethetranscendentalcomponentofhumanism.insteadoffocusingonsometranscendentalself,aneopragmaticorientationwouldemphasizetheconstructionofadaptivenarrationswithintherelationalenvironmentofthehelpingencounter.

asanillustrationtocontrasttheneopragmaticapproachwithtraditionalhumanism,supposeaclient’sprimarycomplaintisdepression.Thetradi-tionalhumanisticwayofapproachingthisproblemwouldbetousetherelationalenvironmentofcounselingtodiscovertheclient’strueself.Em-pathiccontactwiththetrueselfwouldgraduallyfacilitatetheemergenceofamorecongruent,transcendentalclientself,therebyalleviatingsomeofthedepressivesymptoms.

Withintheneopragmaticversionofhumanismthatihaveproposed,how-ever,thecounselorwouldestablishrelationalconditions,justasheorshewouldwithtraditionalhumanism.Thegoalofcounseling,though,wouldbe the creation of adaptational narratives, not the discovery of objectivetruths(Frank&Frank,1991;Hansen,2007;White&Epston,1990).Thekeycriterionforadoptingnarrativeswouldbewhethertheclientfoundthemuseful.asthecounselorandclientcreatednewnarrativepossibilitieswithintherelationalenvironmentofthecounselingsituation,theclient’sdepressionwouldsubside,asnewandmoreadaptivenarrationsbegantotakehold.


Theprimarydifferencebetweentraditionalhumanismandthethoroughlypragmaticoneiamproposingisessentiallythedifferencebetweenanattitudeofdiscoveryandoneofcreation(seealsoHansen,2006).Humanisticcoun-seling,initstraditionalform,chargestherelationalpartieswiththetaskofdiscoveringatranscendentalself.Theclientandcounselorlookbeyondtheirrelationshiptodiscoverapreexistingentity.incontrast,ratherthanturningawayfromtherelationshiptodiscoversomethingold,thenontranscendentalversionofhumanisticcounselingwouldkeepthefocuswithintherelation-shiptocreatesomethingnew.insteadofenvisioningthecounselingprocessastwopeopleturningtowardthetranscendent,thevisioniamproposingisof twopeople fully turning towardeachother tocreatemoreadaptivelinguistictoolsforthepurposeofalleviatingclientsuffering.

certaincontemporarydevelopmentsinphilosophyhavesupportedtheRe-naissanceprojectofafullyde-divinizedvisionofhumans,onethatviewspeopleaswholebeingsintheirownrightandnotasmereby-productsofsomethinglargerthanthemselves.Thisantireductionisticspiritwascertainlypresentinmid-20th-centurypsychologicalhumanism.However,vestigesoftranscendencepersistinhumanismintheformofatranscendentalself.completingtheRe-naissanceprojectwouldmeanembracingathoroughlypragmatichumanism,onethatdisavowsalltranscendence.ihavearguedthatthisnewpragmatichu-manismmaybebetterequippedtobringaboutthehumanisticidealsofmaturerelationshipsandliberationthanwouldtranscendentalhumanism.moreover,anontranscendentalhumanismwouldencouragethepartiesinthecounselingrelationshiptoformatruepartnership,turningtoeachotherforanswersratherthanlookingskywardforsometranscendentideal.

REFERENCES

davidson,L. (2000).philosophical foundationsofhumanisticpsychology.Humanistic Psy-chologist, 28,7–31.

decarvalho, R. (1990).a history of the “third force” in psychology. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 30,22–44.

Foucault,m.(1983).Thesubjectandpower.inH.dreyfus&p.Rabinow(Eds.),Michel Fou-cault: Beyond structuralism and hermeneutics (2nded.,pp.208–226).chicago:universityofchicagopress.

Frank,J.d.,&Frank,J.B.(1991).Persuasion and healing(3rded.).Baltimore:JohnsHopkinsuniversitypress.

Gabbard, G. (2004). Long-term psychodynamic psychotherapy: A basic text. Washington, dc:americanpsychiatricpress.

Gergen,K.(1991).The saturated self: Dilemmas of identity in contemporary life. NewYork:BasicBooks.

Gergen, K. (1995). The healthy, happy human being wears many masks. in W.anderson(Ed.),The truth about the truth: De-confusing and re-constructing the postmodern world(pp.136–150).NewYork:putnam.

Goldberg,a. (2002).american pragmatism andamerican psychoanalysis. Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 71,235–250.

Halling,s.,&Nill, J.d. (1995).abriefhistoryofexistential-phenomenologicalpsychiatryandpsychotherapy.Journal of Phenomenological Psychology, 26,1–45.


Hansen, J. T. (2000). psychoanalysis and humanism:a review and critical examination ofintegrationisteffortswithsomeproposedresolutions. Journal of Counseling & Develop-ment, 78,21–28.

Hansen,J.T.(2002).postmodernimplicationsfortheoreticalintegrationofcounselingorienta-tions.Journal of Counseling & Development, 80,315–321.

Hansen, J. T. (2005a). The devaluation of inner subjective experiences by the counselingprofession:apleatoreclaimtheessenceoftheprofession.Journal of Counseling & Devel-opment, 83,406–415.

Hansen, J. T. (2005b). postmodernism and humanism:a proposed integration of perspec-tivesthatvaluehumanmeaningsystems.Journal of Humanistic Counseling, Education and Development,44,3–15.

Hansen, J.T. (2006).discoveryandcreationwithin thecounselingprocess:Reflectionsonthe timeless nature of the helping encounter. Journal of Mental Health Counseling, 28,289–308.

Hansen,J.T.(2007).counselingwithouttruth:Towardaneopragmaticfoundationforcoun-selingpractice.Journal of Counseling & Development, 85, 423–430.

Hillman, J.,&Ventura,m.(1992).We’ve had a hundred years of psychotherapy and the world’s getting worse. NewYork:Harpercollins.

Kalmthout,m.,&pelgrim,F.(1990).insearchofuniversalconceptsinpsychopathologyandpsychotherapy.inG.Lietaer,J.Rombauts,&R.VanBalen(Eds.),Client-centered and experiential psychotherapy in the nineties (pp.381–396).Leuven,Belgium:Leuvenuniversitypress.

maslow,a.(1968).Toward a psychology of being (2nded.). NewYork:VanNostrandReinhold.matson,F.(1971).Humanistictheory:Thethirdrevolutioninpsychology.The Humanist, 12,

7–11.mcNamee,s. (1996).psychotherapyasasocialconstruction. inH.Rosen&K.Kuchlwein

(Eds.),Constructing realities: Meaning-making perspectives for psychotherapists(pp.115–137).sanFrancisco:Jossey-Bass.

menand,L.(2001).The metaphysical club: A story of ideas in America.NewYork:Farrar,straus,&Giroux.

muran,J.(Ed.).(2001).Self-relations in the psychotherapy process.Washington,dc:americanpsychologicalassociation.

polkinghorne,d.(1992).postmodernepistemologyofpractice.ins.Kvale(Ed.),Psychology and postmodernism(pp.146–165).ThousandOaks,ca:sage.

polkinghorne,d.(2000).psychologicalinquiryandthepragmaticandhermeneutictraditions.Theory & Psychology, 10, 453–479.

Rogers,c.(1951).Client-centered therapy.Boston:Houghtonmifflin.Rogers,c.(1957).Thenecessaryandsufficientconditionsoftherapeuticpersonalitychange.

Journal of Consulting Psychology, 21,95–103.Rorty,R.(1991).Objectivity, relativism, and truth.NewYork:cambridgeuniversitypress.Rorty,R.(1999).Philosophy and social hope.NewYork:penguinputnam.sass,L.(1989).Humanism,hermeneutics,andhumanisticpsychoanalysis:differingconcep-

tionsofsubjectivity.Psychoanalysis and Contemporary Thought, 12,433–504.Tarnas,R.(1991).The passion of the Western mind: Understanding the ideas that have shaped our

world view.NewYork:Harmony.Wampold, B. (2001). The great psychotherapy debate: Models, methods, and findings. mahwah,

NJ:Erlbaum.White,m.,&Epston,d.(1990).Narrative means to therapeutic ends.NewYork:Norton.

Documents

Relational and Transcendental Humanism: Exploring the Consequences of a Thoroughly Pragmatic Humanism