The First Generation of Existential Psychologists
While many people helped shape the early existential psychology movement, these three figures stand out as the primary leaders, particularly in America. While many others, including prominent humanistic theorists, deserve some recognition for their contributions, for now I will focus on these three figures. These theorists played a prominent role in developing, defining, and promoting existential theory and psychotherapy. Without their leadership, it is doubtful that existentialism would be where it is today.
Please keep in mind that this is a brief overview of the theorists to help the reader understand where existentialism came from. There has been a great deal which has been written about each of these theorists in current and forthcoming biographies which provide a much more extensive coverage of their lives and contributions.
Rollo May has consistently been referred to as the father of American Existential Psychology. The beginnings of May’s contributions began with his doctoral thesis which was published in 1950 under the title The Meaning of Anxiety. This book, while not the most exciting of his books, remains a significant work. In this book, May reclaimed anxiety as an integral part of being human. In doing so, he made several important distinctions regarding anxiety, such as the distinction between neurotic and existential anxiety (discussed in the Emotions & Experience section).
The book simply titled Existence, which May edited with Ernest Angel and Henri Ellenberger in 1958, is often seen as the formal beginning of the existential movement in American psychology. Following the publication of this book, May published a flurry of books over the next 33-years including The Art of Counseling, The Courage to Create, The Discovery of Being, Love and Will, Freedom and Destiny, The Cry for Myth, and Paulus.
The approach to therapy which May developed, while remaining uniquely existential, was highly influenced by psychoanalytic, humanistic, and Jungian approaches. In reading his case histories, May’s grasp of psychoanalytic theory and technique is evident. Throughout his career he retained a respect for much of the analytic approach, while departing from it in other significant areas. Yet his theory was far more human than the analytic approaches of his time. Some of this was due to his affinity for humanistic psychology.
May’s conception of the daimon was another important development in existential thought. The daimon, for May, was a reworking of Jung’s idea of the shadow. While there are many similarities to Jung’s concept, there are also some significant differences. Diamond (1996) provides an excellent overview of the similarities and differences (See Anger, Madness, and the Daimonic review).
On top of being a brilliant psychologist, May is also a very talented writer. This multifaceted talent greatly helped him to promote existential theory. It’s hard to go wrong with May’s writings, although I wouldn’t recommend beginning with The Meaning of Anxiety. It’s a wonderful book, but not the most enjoyable read of his books (possibly because it began as a dissertation). The three top books I would recommend are 1) Love and Will, 2) The Cry for Myth, and 3) Paulus (a tribute to Paul Tillich). Additionally, there is an entire issues of the Review of Existential Psychology and Psychiatry devoted to the contributions of Rollo May. While these articles don’t replace the actual writings of Rollo May, this is an excellent resource on his life and work.
Bugental’s influence maybe isn’t as well known as that of Rollo May and Viktor Frankl, but it is no less significant. Bugental, himself, was influenced greatly by May. In fact, it was May’s influence that led Bugental to what he calls and existential humanistic approach to therapy. While Bugental contributed some significant writing and theory development to existential thought, more important is the video tapes on which Bugental is featured. These videos provide excellent therapy illustrations of what this approach to therapy looks like.
Recently, I was fortunate enough to have the personal experience of meeting James Bugental. This opportunity was approximately one-year after he suffered a stroke that has impacted much of his life, including some of his cognitive abilities. However, Bugental still was involved in the training process, largely through offering therapy demonstrations and interviews. In many ways, this provided the ideal situation to demonstrate the incredible power of his approach to therapy. Because of the stroke, he could not be overly cognitive, but rather had to stay in the moment. Bugental’s presence, attentiveness, and concern was the therapy. What occurred to me was that Bugental is more effective as a therapist through his non-verbals, which display his compassion and attentiveness, than many therapists are with their entire arsenals of therapeutic technique.
This example embodies the metaphor of Carl Rogers (1980) that therapy is about “A Way of Being.” While many therapists decrease their effectiveness by trying too hard or becoming overly focused on technique, Bugental is able to display that the best therapy is just about a way of being with people that is healing. While much of this seems more humanistic or Rogerian in perspective, part of what distinguishes it is the frame of reference.
In recent times, theory, especially abstract theory, has come under attack. The question often emerges as to ‘what is the purpose of it?’ and ‘How does it help anything?’ These are an important questions. Surely, if there is no benefit to abstraction it is best disregarded. Based on this critique, instructors are commonly now urged to make sure their teaching is practical and involves direct application. However, this is a rather naive position. Abstraction, often because it is better able to stimulate the emotions, impacts our way of being and our way of perceiving. The rather disheartening changes in our field which devalue abstract thought narrow our perception and understanding of the human experience.
Bugental is the existential thinker who best embodies this. When watching his therapy demonstrations it is amazing how simple it often appears. Yet, for any well-schooled therapist, it is evident that his approach is far from simple. It is the broader awareness, which has guided his way of being, which helps for him to be so effective in a seemingly simplistic manner. A therapist who merely tries to mimic this approach without the foundation of understanding would not be nearly as affective of a therapist.
In getting to know Bugental’s approach, his books are very helpful. However, to truly understand Bugental’s approach I’d recommend saving up to purchase one of his therapy videos or finding a place where you may be able to check out a video to watch. Many university libraries may have some of these videos and allow for you to watch them in the library.
I’ve added two links to interviews of Jim Bugental that I think may be of interest. The first is an interview in AHP Perspectives March, 2003. This was one of the last interviews with Jim Bugental before his stroke and discusses his views on death along with his reflections on his career. Click here to read. Second, it an interview by Viktor Yalom on Psychotherapy.net. This interview took place shortly after the release of his book, Psychotherapy Isn’t What You Think, Bugental’s last book of his career. Click here to read.