It seems that Humanist Therapy is in fashion . Everywhere there are courses, conferences, web pages, articles…and evidently there are defenders and retractors.

I am not going to take a position, but I do think it is interesting to know what we are really talking about, in the same way that I think it is important that we learn to differentiate the therapy or humanistic approach from other unreliable disciplines. When something becomes fashionable, we lack time to invent “alternatives” of dubious credibility.

The origins of Humanist Therapy

The precursor of the humanist approach is considered to be Carl Rogers (1959). He was an American psychologist who, before becoming a relevant clinical psychologist, studied agriculture at university and later became interested in theology, which brought him into contact with philosophy.

Carl Rogers appeared in a specific socio-economic context, he didn’t come out of nowhere. In the 1960s everything was being questioned; it was the time of the student movements, of the hippies, of feminism, of the ecologists… there was a desire for change. And in that breeding ground appeared Humanist Psychology .

Humanist Psychology appears

We could simplify the identity of this current of psychology by saying that “humanists” do not only investigate suffering, but they go deeper into the growth and self-knowledge of the person himself. They are more concerned with proposing alternatives to this suffering than with studying behaviour . They bring a positive vision and their basis is the will and hope of the person himself. They start from goodness and health, and understand that mental disorders or everyday problems are distortions of this natural tendency. They focus on healthy people, and consider personality to be innate and “good” in itself.

Humanist models do not appeal to the past or to personal history, but rather it is the capacities and tools available to the person at the present time that influence his or her problem and/or solution. We could say that they analyse the present, the here and now. It is when one is not able to enjoy and take advantage of this present that problems appear. Humanists understand that the “healthy” person is the one who is enriched by his or her experience. Their aim is to be able to know themselves and learn gradually.

Humanists defend that each person has, in an innate way, a potential that allows him/her to grow, evolve and self-actualize and that pathology appears when these capacities are blocked. They consider that the individual must learn to be, to know and to do, and that it is the person himself who must find the solutions on his own, leaving him total freedom to decide. Pathological disorders are renunciations or losses of this freedom that does not allow him to follow his vital growth process.

Contributions from the humanist perspective

Some of the most important contributions associated with the appearance of Humanist Therapy are the following:

  • Optimistic vision : is the potential of the person the tool to solve his own problems.
  • Emphasis on social factors : self-knowledge must be linked to social responsibility.
  • Therapy as an intervention : placing support to the person as the objective and final goal.

We must also bear in mind that these models postulate that the individual does not react to reality, but to the perception he has of it, which is totally subjective.

Criticisms of this approach

Another remarkable point is the one that has brought more criticism to this approach: its theoretical weakness . Humanist Psychology flees from classifications and does not consider the scientific method as a “natural” method to understand “abnormal” behaviour. This implies that this current is not accompanied by a solid empirical base and suffers from theoretical weakness, which has given rise to many movements of “self-help” of dubious credibility.

Another criticism that this movement has received is its consideration of the human being as “good by nature”. It is an optimistic approach and surely very opportune for the epoch, but forgets that the human being is a set of factors and negative and positive characteristics , and therefore we must consider both.

“The curious paradox is that when I accept myself as I am, then I can change.”-Carl Rogers