This blog was originally published June 2, 2014 on the New Existentialist Blog. It was republished here after the New Existentialist Blog as discontinued.
Dog lovers know that picking a breed is often an important part of responsible pet ownership. It also says a lot about ourselves and can be a source of self-awareness. Choosing a pet that is a good fit is important for the family as well as for the dog. Too often, a wrong match can lead to the pet being mislabeled as a “bad dog” or not having the life that they deserve.
Dogs and Spirituality
People have often scoffed when I have said that dogs are an important part of my spirituality. I am a dog lover. I enjoy their companionship and have fun playing with dogs, but it is more than that for me. My first dog was a Siberian Husky, and my current dog is an Alaskan Malamute. These are beautiful dogs. When watching them run or pull, looking into their eyes, or being out in nature with them, I am so often amazed that these beautiful creatures have such strong human connections.
My relationship with my dogs has helped me stay connected to nature and to the earth. They remind me that we are connected with something more than ourselves and more than our species. To love and be loved in this way is powerful.
Amaya
Siberian Huskies: An Existential Breed
I had been drawn to the northern breeds, particularly Siberian Huskies, since I was a child. However, I did not get my first dog, Amaya, until I was in graduate school. We had a very deep bond, one that some of my friends and family found strange and were even critical of at times.
I learned a lot from Amaya, which I began to recognize increasingly as I used her more and more to illustrate aspects of psychotherapy. She was, in ways, a therapist and even mentor to me. She was with me through many difficult transitions in my life, including several major moves, the ending of a longterm relationship, and the loss of some people very close to me. She also was a muse, of sorts, as she served as inspiration for some lectures, professional writing, and poetry.
Over time, I began to reflect upon what drew me to the breed of Siberian Huskies. As I did, I realized that huskies tended to share many qualities of my own temperament and personality. Also, I think they represent qualities common in existential psychology.
First, Siberian Huskies are known for being pack animals, but they are also quite independent and stubborn. In this way, they provide a balance to the being a-part-of and apart-from that Bugental (1999) speaks to. Although existential psychology is often misperceived as being highly individualistic, this is not necessarily so. While some existentialists represent a more extreme individualist perspective, there tends to be a strong relational focus that balances the individualist tendency.
Amaya was a very stubborn dog. She quickly learned many commands, but she decided when she wanted to respond to them and when she would ignore them. But she was also a great companion and fiercely loyal. When I was going through a difficult period she always stayed close. Amaya was also protective, as a skunk who had the misfortunate showing an aggressive posture toward me discovered. That was not a pleasant lesson for any of us.
Huskies are considered a “working breed.” As someone who has often struggled with workaholic tendencies, this seemed fitting. Though Amaya was never trained to pull a sled or the roles often thought of with the working breed, some of the traits associated with this often showed in her perseverance.
Last, huskies are also known to be fairly intelligent and creative. In particular, they are known to be great escape artists and can be difficult to contain. Although Amaya did show that she could use these skills to get out on a few occasions, she used them more frequently to learn how to get inside as she learned to open a variety of doors over the years. Creativity, too, is a common theme in existential psychology.
Dante and Amaya
While some of these qualities were frustrating at times, I also knew that they were a part of my deep love for Amaya. I did not want a dog that was completely compliant, nor did I want a dog that was aloof. Amaya had a personality and I wouldn’t have wanted to change this. This, too, I see as being very existential. While some approaches to psychology focus on trying to change people to better fit in, the existential approach tends to help people find out who they are and want to be. There were ways that Amaya conformed to my desires, but she was always herself, too.
Conclusion
When people speak of dogs and pets in such ways, it is common to hear some scoff that this is nothing more than projection. I suppose this is a possibility and I’m sure there are times when this is true. Yet, I think there is much we can learn and discover if we are open to learning from our pets. We can learn from their way of being, but we can also learn from our relationship with them and why we are drawn to loving them the way we do.
References
Bugental, J. F. T. (1999). Psychotherapy isn’t what you think: Brining psychotherapy engagement into the present moment. Zieg, Tucker, & Theisen.
This blog was originally published on September 18, 2013 on the New Existentialist Blog. It was republished here after the New Existentialist Blog was discontinued.
Several years ago I was teaching at a university in Colorado and a small group of us were working to fan the fire of interest in existential psychology with some success. Each year, we brought Kirk Schneider to co-teach a seminar on existential psychology. Mark Yang began joining us from China, often with some Chinese colleagues. I fondly remember one evening having dinner with Kirk and Mark in one of my favorite restaurants in Manitou Springs. Our conversation drifted to the idea of being existential evangelists. The use of “evangelist” was, in part, in jest. Yet, the idea of this always stuck with me.
The idea of “evangelism” is generally connected with trying to convert people to a particular religious perspective, most often Christianity. As hopefully is evident, our use of the idea of being an “evangelist” was not intended to in any way to suggest we wanted to convert people to or from a religious perspective, but rather to draw people into identifying as an existential therapist.
Respective Existential Evangelism
A primary challenge of any type of evangelism is to try to convert or draw people into affiliation with a perspective while being respectful of differences. Most people who know me at least fairly well recognize that I have a strong passion for the existential psychology. It is not just what I do in my professional world, it is part of who I am and part of my way of being.
Yet, I firmly believe that the world would be worse off if everyone was an existentialist. There is beauty in diversity, and this beauty is important for the world. In psychology, the diverse perspectives are essential in being able to meet the needs of diverse clientele. The dialogue between different perspectives helps advance each while too much agreement easily falls prey to group think.
The research on psychotherapy effectiveness suggests that all bona fide therapy approaches are about equally effective (CleareHoffman, Hoffman, & Wilson, 2013; Elkins, 2009; Wampold, 2001). Yet, this does not mean that it does not matter what approach to therapy one provides. The research also suggests that believing in one’s approach to therapy is more predictive of successful therapy outcomes than what we do. Thus, having a therapy orientation that one believes in is vitally important in becoming an effective therapist.
The client buying into the therapy approach is also an important predictive factor of therapeutic success, regardless of therapy orientation (Elkins, 2009; Wampold, 2001). I believe that this suggests that we should not be searching for which therapy is the most effective with which diagnosis or demographic, but rather which therapy is the best fit for a client’s values and desired way of being. If we can match the therapeutic approach that provides the best fit with who the client is, then it is more likely to be effective, and they are less likely to drop out of therapy. The different therapy approaches represent, at times, significantly different ways of being.
For instance, Cognitive Behavioral approaches to therapy implicitly value a more rational approach to living that values thinking over feeling or experience. While some existential approaches can be fairly cognitive or rational as well, in general, existential approaches value a fuller and deeper embracing of one’s emotions as well as their thoughts. Obviously, there is much more to the similarities and differences than illustrated in this one simplified example, but it does give some perspective on the implications of different therapy approaches.
As therapists, it is important for us to respect what could be termed “ontological diversity,” or different ways of being, and recognize the connection of this to different types of therapy or, at the least, different ways of implementing therapy approaches. This realm has largely been ignored as therapists go about imposing ontological perspectives on their clients without considering the implications of this and possibly without even recognizing that they are doing this. Respectful existential evangelism, or recruitment, recognizes and respects these differences while trying to avoid such ontological impositions.
Authenticity
Evangelism is often associated with coercion, converting, or attempting to change someone’s beliefs and/or values. I have never had much interest in this. Thus, it might seem that I am a rather poor existential evangelist. However, instead of trying to convert people to an existential approach, my desire to is to speak passionately about existential psychology in order to attract people individuals for whom this is a good fit.
When I have taught classes such as Theories of Personality, I will often state that I believe that I have done a very poor job teaching if everyone leaves the class identifying as an existential therapist. If all the students agree with me, I most likely have been more successful at coercion than illumination, which is never my goal.
I deeply believe that existential psychology is important, and that it can play an important role for changing the world for the better. It is from this belief and the associated passion that I hope to draw people in to existential psychology. I am confident that I have been able to do this with at least some success in my career thus far.
Conclusion
The best evangelism is not coercion or convincing others that one’s perspective is right or the best view; it is helping people explore their values and discover who they are. My experience is that when people are able to come to an understanding of what existential psychology represents as a way of being without the distortions of how it is often misrepresented, many find themselves deeply drawn to this approach. Yet, misconceptions about existential therapy are common and must be clarified. In the end, however, just sharing our passion and helping people understand the implications of existential psychology can be a very effective and authentic way of being an existential evangelist.
References
Cleare-Hoffman, L., Hoffman, L., & Willson, S. (2013, August). Existential therapy, culture, and therapist factors in evidence-based practice. In K. Keenan (Chair), Evidence in support of existential humanistic psychotherapy: Revitalizing the third force. Symposium presented at the 121st Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, Honolulu, HI.
Elkins, D. E. (2009). Humanistic psychology: A clinical manifesto. University of the Rockies Press.
Wampold, B. E. (2001). The great psychotherapy debate: Models, methods, and findings. Lawrence Erlbaum & Associates.
This blog was originally published on December 18, 2012, on the New Existentialist Blog. It was republished here after the New Existentialist Blog was discontinued.
"The citizens of a city are not guilty of the crimes committed in their city; but they are guilty as participants in the destiny of [humanity] as a whole and in the destiny of their city in particular; for their acts in which freedom was united with destiny have contributed to the destiny in which they participate. They are guilty, not of committing the crimes of which their group is accused, but of contributing to the destiny in which these crimes happened." ~ Paul Tillich (1957)
"I call a lie: wanting not to see something one does see, wanting not to see something as one sees it…. The most common lie is the lie one tells to oneself; lying to others is relatively the exception." ~ Nietzsche (1894/1990)
“Twenty seven dead in a Connecticut school.” Like many, I read with horror. I turned on the TV, my eyes filled with tears, and I considered picking my sons up early from school. But my sadness quickly turned to anger. In the United States, we love to talk about supposedly being the greatest country in the world. Yet, gun violence, mass killings, and our prison population are among the highest in the world. We are living in a dangerous delusion. I am not just angry at the shooter in Connecticut, but at our society for continuing to live in this mass delusion of our greatness while doing little to address the depth of our depravity.
What Existential Psychology Has to Say
One of the first things that drew me to existential psychology was its willingness to face evil without relegating evil to the other. Instead, it recognized that evil was a potential inherent in the human condition, a potential we all bear. For Rollo May (1969; 1982), the root of evil is in the daimonic, which he defines as, “any natural function that has the power to take over the whole person” (May, 1969, p. 65). Our emotional pain and suffering can easily become such a force. The daimonic, which bears conceptual similarity to Jung’s shadow, is not necessarily a destructive force. The daimonic can be a source of destruction and evil, but can also be a source for growth, creativity, and beauty.
What distinguishes whether the daimonic is used destructively or constructively is largely dependent upon our awareness and what we do with that awareness. When we repress, deny, or distort it, the daimonic becomes more powerful and the potential for evil grows (Hoffman, Warner, Gregory, & Fehl, 2011). This is why, from an existential perspective, the willingness to look at our dark side is so important. It is not just that such self-examination can lead to a more fulfilled life; it is also an ethical imperative.
For the betterment of ourselves and society, we must temper our belief in human potential with an honest accounting for our potential for evil. As William James (1902/1997) stated:
…there is no doubt that healthy mindedness is inadequate as a philosophical doctrine, because the evil facts which it refuses positively to account for are a genuine portion of reality; and they are after all be the best key to life’s significance, and possibly the only openers of our eyes to the deepest levels of truth. (p. 140)
The Exploitation of Tragedy
The tragedy of the school shootings is already transitioning to the search for answers. Yet, we will only find the answers we are willing to find. Religious leaders already ignorantly have proclaimed the cause was removing prayer from public schools while politicians have begun exploiting the tragedy with partisan politics. Blame is much easier to tolerate than self-reflection. Without doubt, the “mental illness” of the shooter will carelessly be blamed as the cause.
The tragedy of the school shootings is already transitioning to the search for answers. Yet, we will only find the answers we are willing to find. Religious leaders already ignorantly have proclaimed the cause was removing prayer from public schools while politicians have begun exploiting the tragedy with partisan politics. Blame is much easier to tolerate than self-reflection. Without doubt, the “mental illness” of the shooter will carelessly be blamed as the cause.
Most attempts to explain evil do so by identifying it outside of our individual and social identity. Evil is “them,” not “me” or “we.” If we can explain a school shooting through sin, political failure of the “other” party, or mental illness, we feel safer. If we can place the sole blame on the shooter, then we do not have to bear the brunt of the collective responsibility to which Tillich speaks. We ought hold the shooter responsible, but not in service of justifying our own irresponsibility. The etiology of violence is always more complicated than a single cause.
For instance, most people diagnosed with or meeting the criteria for mental illness are not violent. At most, mental illness may be a small contributing factor to violence, but never is it the sole cause. Violence is abnormal for those individuals diagnosed with mental illness and those who do not meet such criteria.
When we rush to diagnose these violent individuals, we quickly discount the other factors contributing to the violence. Whether perpetrated by someone diagnosable with a mental illness or not, there are always many factors that come together leading up to the act of violence.
It is tragic that we do not consider the impact of the millions of people in the nonviolent majority diagnosed with mental illness when we rush to diagnose the shooter with some type of psychiatric disorder. Many of these clients feel ashamed to be categorized with the perpetrator, further intensifying the stigmatization of mental illness.
We do not consider that many will readily lump all people diagnosed with mental disorders into the category of “dangerous,” thus further isolating these individuals. Ironically, it is such isolation that often plays a major role in causing and maintaining the psychological suffering that is diagnosed as “mental illness.” Furthermore, it is likely that isolation often is a contributing factor to violence.
Collective Responsibility
The world will not become a safer place as long as we only look to the shooter for answers. It will not be a safer place until we are willing to look inside on a personal level, and a collective level. We need to honestly examine why more mass shootings happen in the United States than any other country in the world. We need to consider why our prison population dwarfs most other countries. We need to consider why other countries, such as China, are experiencing a rise in violence as they become more influenced by the West. Though not as prominent in the news media, the same day as the school shooting in Connecticut occurred, there was a mass stabbing in China in which 22 children were stabbed. Such occurrences that once were unheard of in China are becoming increasingly common.
An honest look at contributing factors of violence in the United States means considering what we hold precious, what comforts us, what entertains us, and what we enjoy, with an openness to acknowledge that these, too, may be factors contributing to violence. A few examples may help illustrate.
First, in the United States, many enjoy violent movies, television, video games, and music, but are these worth protecting if they contribute to violence and serve as a threat to our children’s safety? Yet, not all violence is equal. Violent shows tend to impact children more than adults and violence in which the individual identifies with the perpetrator of violence is more likely to contribute to violence (Huesmann, MoiseTitus, Podolski & Eron, 2003).
Furthermore, when parents can limit exposure to violence as well as talking with children about the realistic consequences of violence and empathy for the victims, the impact may be lessoned or even reversed (Hughes & Hasbrouck, 1996). In general, moderate exposure to violence that portrays the emotional consequences for victims (as opposed to the graphic portrayal of consequences) combined with discussion of the consequences and responses to violence are less likely to be harmful. However, rarely is exposure to violence managed in this way.
Second, many people in the United States enjoy gun ownership and are responsible with their guns. However, gun ownership is higher in the United States than anywhere in the world, and we have more gun violence than anywhere in the world. Rarely does gun ownership save anyone’s life in the United States, and never has it been necessary to protect us from a tyrannical leader. However, guns regularly and frequently are used for violent crime. It may not be necessary to completely eliminate gun ownership to decrease violent crime; stricter laws on what guns can be owned, who has access to them, and how guns need to be stored may suffice. It seems evident that something, however, needs to change with gun control in the United States.
Lastly, economic disparity has regularly been connected to violent crime (Elgar & Aitken, 2011; Hsieh, 1993). At the same time, economic disparity in the United States continues at extreme levels. Are we willing to cash in an American dream that focuses on individual material success for one that places greater concern on social harmony and concern for others if it leads to significantly fewer victims of violent crime? In stating this, I am not advocating for socialism, but rather a more balanced capitalism.
Conclusion
Our first priority in response to the tragedy of the school shooting in Connecticut needs to be individual and collective grieving for the children and their families. However, we also must not allow another tragedy like this to occur without us seeking to learn from it. Our grieving ought lead to a collective, honest reflection upon the causes of violence in the United States. From this reflection, we are called to make difficult decisions about what truths we are willing to accept and what choices we will make based upon these truths. My hope is that this time we, collectively, will be wiser in how we choose to respond to tragedy.
References
Elgar, F. J. & Aitken, N. (2011). Income inequality, trust, and homicide in 33 countries. European Journal of Public Health, 21, 241246.
Hsieh, C. (1993). Poverty, income inequality, and violent crime: A meta-analysis of recent aggregate data studies. Criminal Justice Reviews, 18, 182202.
Hoffman, L., Warner, H. J., Gregory, C., & Fehl, S. (2011). Existential-integrative perspectives on the psychology of evil. In J. H. Ellens (Ed.), Explaining evil (Vol. 3: Approaches, responses, solutions; pp. 263286). Praeger.
Huesmann, L. F., MoiseTitus, J., Podolski, C., & Eron, L. D. (2003). Longitudinal relations between children’s exposure to TV violence and their aggressive and violent behavior in young adulthood: 1977–1992. Developmental Psychology, 39, 201221.
Hughes, J. N. & Hasbrouck, J. E. (1996). Television violence: Implication for violence prevention. School Psychology Review, 25, 134151.
James, W. (1997). The varieties of religious experience. Touchstone (Original work published in 1902)
May, R. (1969). Love and will. Delta.
May, R. (1982). The problem of evil: An open letter to Carl Rogers. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 22, 1021.
Nietzsche, F. (1990). The antichrist. In R. J. Hollingsdale (Ed. & Trans.). Twilight of the idols/The antichrist. Penguin Books. (Original work published in 1894)
Tillich, P. (1957). Systematic theology (Vol. 2). University of Chicago Press.
