Tag Archives: Lu Xun

Beyond Existential Martyrdom

This blog was originally published April 16, 2014 on the New Existentialist Blog. It was republished here after the New Existentialist Blog was discontinued.

In a recent email exchange with a friend, Michael Moats, I was teasing him about having a good attitude after witnessing a scary event. What began as good-natured humor also led to an important serious conversation as Michael wisely noted, “I still think there is something here to write on about the martyrish love affair I sometimes hear with people of existentialism.” I deeply appreciate Michael’s positive attitude and believe that it reflects his deep existential nature. For those who know Michael, they can attest that he does a wonderful job at balancing zhi mian (facing life directly and honestly, including the difficult parts) and maintaining a positive attitude.

Photo by Louis Hofman

The Dangerous Lure of Suffering

“…despair is suffering without meaning”
~ Viktor Frankl (2000)

In existential psychology, we often talk of suffering and the value of suffering. While this is not intended to glorify suffering and pain, it often comes across this way. There is nothing glorious or heroic about seeking suffering for the sake of suffering. When we seek suffering for suffering’s sake, we dishonor ourselves and dishonor the deeper potential inherent in suffering. Existential psychology, like Buddhism, advocates that, “suffering exists.” Life and suffering are inseparable; this is a basic given of life. From this recognition, existential psychology often encourages people to be open to the suffering that already exists. This is an important distinction: Existential psychology does not encourage seeking suffering, but rather being open to the suffering that exists in the world.

Seeking and excessively dwelling in suffering is dangerous. It often has negative consequences for our psychological, spiritual, and physical health as well as negatively impacting our relationships. Avoiding or denying our suffering that exists, too, brings with it the same risks. Yet, being open to suffering does not necessitate such seeking of it.

Misplaced Meaning in Suffering

Existential psychology will often speak of finding the meaning in suffering. This language can be somewhat misleading. It is not the suffering itself that is meaningful, but what we do with the suffering. The “in suffering” that is being referred to is the experienced suffering resulting from being open to it. In other words, it is the meaning found while in a state of suffering that is the “meaning in suffering.”

For example, when talking about finding meaning in a tragedy, such as rape, child abuse, or a natural disaster, people will sometimes respond saying, “How can you say this was meaningful! It was not a good thing that this occurred!” Talking of the value of suffering ought not glorify tragedy or suffering. Rather, it is referring to the meaning that can be created and emerge from the tragedy. This does not convert the tragedy into something good, but rather uses the tragedy in the service of creating something good.

As a personal example, one of the things I like most about myself is that I am a compassionate, empathetic person. I am very aware that it is suffering that I experienced in my life, as well as the suffering of those I cared about, that influenced me in becoming a compassionate, empathetic person. It is not good that this suffering occurred, but I am thankful for the very meaningful gifts that emerged largely as a product of this suffering. But it was not a simple linear process of suffering and then becoming compassionate and empathetic. Rather, from an early age I learned to open myself to the suffering that occurred. Through doing this, I was able to explore my suffering and begin working to create meaning from the experience of suffering. Had I chose a different response to the suffering I experienced and witnessed, it could have led to a very different result. Thus, what is meaningful to me is what I created from my suffering, not the suffering itself.

Balance in Existential Psychology

The ability to forget the past enables people to free themselves gradually from the pain they once suffered; but it also often makes them repeat the mistakes of their predecessors.
~ Lu Xun (1923/1961)

The purpose of opening oneself to suffering is to eventually transcend the suffering. When one does this, the suffering does not necessarily go away, but it no longer has the same hold over us and we are able to experience the beauty that often is connected to suffering. For example, our suffering often deeply connects us to others who care about us or who share in our suffering. Suffering is not intended to be the end; it is just part of the journey.

Some people picture existentialists as a group of people who are always serious and maybe even at least mildly depressed. While surely this fits some people who identify as existentialists, my experience is that existentialists tend to be a rather joyful bunch embracing life, laughter, and relationships very deeply. It is critical for us to keep this balance. The principle of zhi main is to face life directly and honestly. When we do this we will experience both the joys and the sufferings of life more deeply.

Applications

I worry that some existential therapists similarly have the instinct to “go for the tears” and see this as what successful therapy is about. This can be an important part of therapy—helping clients open themselves to the pain that they are experiencing and share it. However, therapy, like life, should never glorify suffering and pain. Additionally, existential therapy should also embrace the laughter, the joy, and the celebrations. In life and in therapy, we can zhi mian the joys as well as the suffering.

References

Frankl, V. E. (2000). Man’s search for ultimate meaning. Perseus.

Xun, L. (1961). What happens after Nora leaves home. In Y. Xianyi & G. Yang (Eds. & Trans.) Lu Xun selected works (Vol. 2). Beijing, China: Foreign Language Press. (Original work published in 1923)

Note: this site is owned by Louis Hoffman, this site supports the Rocky Mountain Humanistic Counseling and Psychological Association (RMHCPA), which is a 501(c)3 nonprofit organization. As an Amazon Associate, RMHCPA earns from qualifying purchases made through the links on this page.

A Tribute to the Students of Humanistic Psychology

This blog was originally published on September 21, 2012, on the New Existentialist Blog. It was republished here after the New Existentialist Blog was discontinued.

Some of my greatest teachers and greatest inspirations as an existential psychologist and professor have been my students. Although it has become cliché to say that teachers learn from their students, I hope to speak to this as a personal experience that comes alive beyond the cliché. When I speak of students, particular students come to mind, though too many to individually identify. However, in this article, I am also speaking to the collective energy and wisdom of the students of humanistic psychology.

Photo by Louis Hoffman, PhD

The New Energy in Humanistic Psychology

There has been much discussion about the youth movement and new energy that students have brought to humanistic psychology, including Rich Bargdill’s (2011) article in The Humanistic Psychologist and Bob McInerney’s New Existentialist post, “On the Movement and Interrelation of Youth and Diversity.” The Society for Humanistic Psychology (SHP) has been growing, particularly in student members, for several years, and the Students of Humanistic Psychology Facebook page has been steadily growing and active. This is some of the empirical evidence of the youth movement; however, like Bargdill and McInerney, I am interested in something more than this.

There is more than just energy, enthusiasm, and numbers coming from the youth movement; important leadership and new ideas are also emerging. There are an increasing number of students involved with various committees with SHP’s board, presenting at our conferences, and recruiting others to humanistic psychology. But it is also important to not underestimate the importance of the energy and enthusiasm. When spending time at SHP’s hospitality suite at APA or at the annual convention, it is talking with students that I often find the most energizing. The energy is catching and a big part of what is drawing in many new voices to existential and humanistic psychology.

Challenging Existential and Humanistic Fundamentalism

“… a people unable to reform will not be able to preserve its old culture either.” Lu Xun (1925/1961)

My experience has been that the youth movement in existential and humanistic psychology has little time for what is perceived as humanistic psychology’s propensity to pick unnecessary fights. Please don’t misunderstand; I am not saying that they are not willing to fight, but rather that the youth movement seems to be more thoughtful about picking battles. Let me give a few examples to flesh this out.

The Open Letter to the DSM5 committee of the Society for Humanistic Psychology has received great attention and attracted many students who are concerned with the DSM5. Many students have appreciated this effort and joined the fight. The success of the open letter committee would not have been nearly as great had it not been for the student efforts, largely directed in social media, to spreading the word.

However, I have increasingly found that even the most passionate humanistic students tend to find the fighting over what is a “pure” existential or humanistic psychology quite distasteful. Many are arguing for a more inclusive understanding of humanistic and existential psychology. Similarly, they often are quite frustrated with the pitting of humanistic psychology against mainstream psychology and the American Psychological Association. Instead, they are providing encouragement and leadership in how we can engage mainstream psychology in a more collaborative manner.

Beyond Discipleship to Mentoring

This quote from Nietzsche is not just about moving beyond the student role, but rather about not being bound by the teacher’s ideology and knowledge. This could be used to contrast a discipleship approach to education with a mentoring model. Disciples are trained in the way of their teacher and to follow their teacher’s wisdom. Mentors provide guidance, encouragement, and training to prepare one to enter the field as a professional or expert. While disciples are often committed to the content of their teacher, mentees are committed to their relationship with their mentor while being empowered to move beyond their mentor in their scholarship and practice.

When teaching, I have often told my classes that if they agree with all that I say in class, I have failed. I deeply believe this. Yet, at the same time, as a human being, I want people to agree with me and affirm that my positions are valid. This is only natural. It takes much more courage and trust to be a mentor than it does to create disciples. An important lesson I have learned from my teachers, who have temporarily occupied the role of student, is that it is much more rewarding to be a mentor, too. Yet, it is also true that it takes more courage to be mentored than to become a disciple.

Multiple Humanistic Psychologies: We are One, but We are More Than One

At the first Society for Humanistic Psychology Conference, there was a tribute to James F. T. Bugental. In this presentation, many of his former students stood up and said what they were doing with Jim’s work. It was remarkable to see the many ways that his work had been applied, including in settings Jim himself never dreamed of venturing. This is one example of expanding humanistic psychology; however, we can talk about other more profound expansions of humanistic psychology.

At the second Society for Humanistic Psychology Conference, it was students that led the initiative to focus on diversity issues in existential and humanistic psychology, including submitting several critiques of humanistic psychology. Students have continued to be some of the strongest voices advocating for diversity and presenting on diversity issues at our conferences.

It is students, too, that are doing some of the most creative work. A few years ago, a group of students created a commercial on the effectiveness of psychotherapy to counter the many advertisements for medications. The video was a brilliant illustration of combining scholarship and creativity to impact the world on important issues in the field of psychology.

Conclusion

Often, it is students and early career professionals who are most able to see existential and humanistic psychology for what it ought to be or what could become. After being in the field for a while, it becomes easier to see it just for what it is. If we want to advance the field, we need to see our students and early career professionals not as people who need to be acculturated into the field, but as colleagues with an important voice and a fresh perspective. We need to see them as people from whom we have much to learn. Existential psychology has been uniquely blessed with unusually talented, thoughtful, and courageous students who are willing to speak their voices and advocate for change.

As I conclude this article I have read back through it several times and keep thinking, “Its not enough.” This article does not do justice to honoring the students of existential and humanistic psychology. So much more is deserved. But maybe this can be a beginning.

References

Bargdill, R. (2011). The youth movement in humanistic psychology. The Humanistic Psychologist, 39, 283287.

Lu Xun, (1961). Sudden notions. In Y. Xianyi & G. Yang (Eds. & Trans.) Lu Xun selected works (Vol. 1). Foreign Language Press. (Original work published in 1925)

Nietzsche, F. (1966). Thus spoke Zarathustra (W. Kauffman, Trans.). Penguin.
(Original work published in 1892)

~ Louis Hoffman, PhD

Note: Although this site is owned by Louis Hoffman, it supports the Rocky Mountain Humanistic Counseling and Psychological Association (RMHCPA), which is a 501(c)3 nonprofit organization. As an Amazon Associate, RMHCPA earns from qualifying purchases made through the links on this page.

Politics and Existentialism: Zhi Mian and United States Politics–Part 2: Empathy and Collective Responsibility

This blog was originally published on October 23, 2012 on the New Existentialist Blog. It was republished here after the New Existentialist Blog was discontinued.

It is easy to become disgusted with politics in the United States today. Corruption seems to be the norm, and there does not appear to be any genuine hope for change. We blame the politicians, the politician system, the parties, and the media, but rarely do we consider our role—the role of the general public. In this blog, I am going to argue that we need to take a closer look at the role of the general public and the voters, and advocate for an empathetic interpretation of our political candidates. This is not intended to say that the politicians and media do not bear a great amount of responsibility; in a previous blog, I even stated that politicians ought not be considered role models for our children because of much of their behavior. Rather, I am advocating that we ought not blame them without considering our role.

Zhi Mian

Zhi mian, as noted in the previous blog I referred to, is a concept recently introduced to the existential psychology literature through Xuefu Wang. According to Wang (2011), zhi mian is not easily translated into English, but a literal translation would be “to face directly.” Essentially, it refers to facing oneself, facing others, and facing life honestly and directly. Furthermore, it unifies these different ways of facing directly, suggesting that the only way to face oneself directly is to also face life and others directly.

Clearly, zhi mian is something lacking in politics, which is more about spin and rhetoric than truth, responsibility, and authenticity. Yet, if we are going to zhi mian politics, it must involve looking honestly at various aspects of the political process, including the role of the general public and voters. In other words, zhi mian advocates for collective responsibility when considering the political problems in the United States.

The Expectation of Lying

The idea for this article has been building for several years, but the more recent inspiration came when reading an internet news article noting results from recent poll that indicated people felt Romney was more dishonest than Obama, but that they expected both candidates to lie. This is a sad state of affairs, but I could not help but wonder: Is this all the fault of the politicians? Could a truly honest politician, who spoke the truth, really be elected to a high office today? Isn’t there an expectation to lie, to tell us what we really want to hear?

Most people know politicians lie; yet, we still endorse this behavior. We know they cannot fulfill all their campaign promises; yet, we praise them on the campaign trail then attack them later for not living up to these unrealistic promises. Although some politicians are shady characters from the outset, many begin as honest individuals wanting to positively impact the world. Once introduced to the political system, they soon learn many painful realities, such as that they are expected to lie, spin the truth, and be vicious in their attacks of the other candidate if they want to win. If you are an honest, caring person when beginning as a politician, this is a difficult position.

Critical Thinking & Flip Flopping

In science and philosophy, keeping an open mind to be swayed by the data is an asset; in politics, it is a liability. The best politicians should change their mind fairly frequently, but they should do it for the right reasons. Politicians are routinely expected to vote and make decisions on areas outside of their expertise. As they review the data, and continue to learn about the various issues on which they need to vote, they should become better informed and able to make more educated decisions. Yet, we expect politicians to make good decisions with little knowledge and then stick to that position despite what the evidence says.

When politicians make mistakes today, they often are expected to defend the mistake instead of apologizing and correcting the mistake. They are rewarded more for sticking to a bad decision than they are from learning. In essence, this is a system that says we do not want our politicians to learn!

I am not defending all instances when politicians change their positions. As is evident, often politicians change their position, or at least their stated position, for the wrong reasons. They conform to what the big donors expect, to align with the polls, or to agree with what their party pressures them to say. This is not authentic learning or change and should be discouraged. Yet, this change, done for the wrong reasons, is better tolerated than changing because one has become more informed and thought through the issues more thoroughly.

Think Skinned Politicians & Empathy

I have great empathy for how painful it must be for the politicians and their families as they have to sit through day after day of character attacks, including many that come from deceptive political spin and outright lies. My father, who was a state legislator, experienced some of this in his campaigns at the state level. It was very painful for my mother and him to go through this, but I am proud that he did so without resorting to such tactics in return. He was lucky that at the state level at the time he was running—you could still get elected as an honest politician with integrity. I suspect that would be more difficult now.

I have also experienced situations in my own life where I was being regularly criticized with spun half-truths and outright lies. Much like with politics, I knew that responding to these would have little effect. Some people would believe me, and some would believe the person who was criticizing me. This was extremely painful, but in the end, I had to accept that all I could do was try to live with integrity and trust that my character would be seen and trusted by most people.

What I experienced, and even what my father experienced, was nothing in comparison to what politicians at the national level, and sometimes even the state and local level, experience today. To be able to withstand such consistent and extreme attacks, one must develop a thick skin and learn to not react to these attacks. Yet, I have to wonder, at what cost? When one develops a thick skin, it is easy to develop a thick skin in areas where it is better to be thin-skinned, where empathy and compassion is what is needed. This leads me to wonder, have we created a political system that makes it difficult to remain compassionate and empathetic? If so, it is no wonder that there is so little concern for many of the people truly suffering. Their stories are great for the rhetoric of political speeches, but not powerful enough to penetrate the thick skins of the politicians using them.

What Can We Do?

So how is this our fault? We participate in this system when we condone these behaviors. When we, as a society, tolerate the news media sensationalizing these problems and turning them into entertainment, we support this behavior. We complain about the news media, yet continue to watch Fox News and MSNBC, and shows that dramatize these problems. We do not confront politicians when they misbehave. We allow attack adds to work. We buy into spin. I am sure many would respond defending themselves saying they are good at criticizing the spin, the deceptions, and the dramatizations—and this is likely true when it is done by the politician and political party that is not our own.

If we want things to change, we need accountability and accountability always starts at home. As Lu Xun (1919/1961) stated, “you have to reform yourself before reforming society and the world” (p. 52). First, we need to acknowledge our personal role. Second, we need to work to hold our own party and the politicians we support to be accountable. We can have no authenticity or credibility criticizing others if we do not authentically look at how we are contributing to the problem and work to change that.

Conclusion

Politics in the United States is a mess, no doubt. I must acknowledge that it is much easier for me to find the fault in the candidate I do not support, and easier to justify the behaviors of my candidate. Sadly, I have to wonder, if my candidate ran his campaign with perfect honesty and integrity and I knew that his approach would likely cost him the election, would I prefer that he lie and deceive or be honest? In reality, this scenario may be the case. That terrifies me.

References

Lu Xun (1961). Random thoughts. In Y. Xianyi & G. Yang (Eds. & Trans.) Lu Xun selected works
(Vol. 2). Beijing, China: Foreign Language Press. (Original work published in 1919)

Wang, X. (2011). Zhi mian and existential psychology. The Humanistic Psychologist, 39, 20246.

~ Louis Hoffman, PhD

Note: Although this site is owned by Louis Hoffman, it supports the Rocky Mountain Humanistic Counseling and Psychological Association (RMHCPA), which is a 501(c)3 nonprofit organization. As an Amazon Associate, RMHCPA earns from qualifying purchases made through the links on this page.

Politics and Existentialism: Zhi Mian and United States Politics–Part 1: Facing Conflict and Disagreement Directly

This blog was originally published on October 22, 2012 on the New Existentialist Blog. It was republished here after the New Existentialist Blog was discontinued.

United States politics is fraught with conflict and disagreement as is evident even to the casual observer. These are natural occurrences in all organizations and political systems. They can be used poorly or for gain. Often, disagreement and conflict, when handled properly, can encourage creativity and development. When handled poorly, they can stifle any growth or development. Rarely in our political system do we witness them being used well today.

Stages of Conflict

Speed Leas (2002) developed a model for the levels of conflict based upon his work with churches, but it has relevance well beyond this setting. Although, as with any stage model, it has its limitations, it can help illuminate a common progression witness during the presidential and other political campaigns.

According to Leas, prior to the emergence of conflict, the focus typically is on sharing one’s ideas. Gradually, there is a shift to critiquing the ideas or others and/or defending one’s ideas. As the conflict escalates, the focus becomes being critical of the other person and defending oneself. Already at this point, the content is no longer the central focus; instead, the focus is now on the individuals in conflict. Often, this is where attacks on the person’s character emerge. As the conflict escalates, the desire is to emotionally or physically harm the other person, often reaching a point of intractability, where it seems impossible to continue to work collaboratively together.

More than three presidential elections ago, I began teaching about models of conflicts during a presidential campaign. I found that the campaign provided great illustrations of the levels of conflict. Since this time, I have observed each political election in relation to these stages of conflict. Not surprisingly, the model fits quite well, although there have been some changes over time. With each subsequent election cycle, it seems that the candidates move more quickly through the stages of conflict.

“I Am Not a Role Model”

Conflict is big entertainment in the United States. It sells our reality TV, sports, news media, and our politics. It often seems that the more sensationalized the conflict, the more interest. Yet, conflict in politics is much different than conflict in reality TV, and it is a sad state when they begin resembling each other. When Charles Barkley was playing in the NBA, he famously noted, “I am not a role model.” It is also sad when we need to urge our politicians, who should be role models, to make the same disclaimer.

Politicians today regularly model a type of violence to our children: an emotional violence. This violence can be extremely painful and leave deep, emotional scars just like physical violence. However, there is a more disturbing side to this. If you were to put children and even many young adults in similar conflicts in terms of the level and intensity, many would lack the resources to keep the violence at the verbal level. Politicians have years of practice at dealing with this conflict and have a constant support system surrounding them as outlets to vent and reminders to watch their tongue. In a very real way, it can be argued that politicians routinely model styles of conflict and behaviors that could easily be translated into physical violence if the individuals and contexts were changed. We ought to expect more from our political leaders. We ought expect from our politicians that they are able to deal with conflict in an honest, diplomatic, and respectful manner.

Zhi Mian and Political Conflict

“…we must dare look things in the face before we dare think, speak, act, or assume responsibility. If we dare not even look, what else are we good for?” (Lu Xun, 1925/1961, p. 198)

Zhi mian is a concept that is becoming better known in the existential literature in the United States. It is being popularized through Xuefu Wang (2011), who has introduced the term from the writing of Chinese literary figure Lu Xun. This term can be translated as “to face directly,” and symbolizes a unity of facing oneself, others, and life directly, honestly, and with integrity. This is lacking in United States politics.

Instead of looking honestly at conflict, it is routinely distorted and spun for political gain. Taking responsibility for one’s mistakes in most situations is considered political suicide. It is more advantageous to distort, deceive, and lie than to apologize or own one’s mistakes. If we were to zhi mian United States politics, even if just related to political conflict, it would require radical change in the behaviors of politicians and the news media. It would encourage asking what we can learn or gain as a country from these conflicts instead of focusing on how it can be used to the advantage of a politician or a political party. It would require listening to the other perspective and reflecting upon our own. It would require much of what Schneider (2004) advocates for his existentially rooted awebased
approach to politics.

Conclusion

My dream for United States politics is that we could attract and elect politicians that I would want my children to see as role models. However, today, I am embarrassed to say, politicians are one of the last professions to which I would look for role models for my children. If my children emulated many of the behaviors of politicians they would be sent to time out or grounded. It is sad when our children are the role models of morality for our politicians.

References

Leas, S. B. (2002). Moving your church through conflict. Alban Institute.

Lu Xun (1961). On looking facts in the face. In Y. Xianyi & G. Yang (Eds. & Trans.) Lu Xun selected works (Vol. 2). Foreign Language Press. (Original work published in 1919)

Schneider, K. J. (2004). Rediscovery of awe: Splendor, mystery, and the fluid center of life. Paragon House.

~ Louis Hoffman, PhD

Note: Although this site is owned by Louis Hoffman, it supports the Rocky Mountain Humanistic Counseling and Psychological Association (RMHCPA), which is a 501(c)3 nonprofit organization. As an Amazon Associate, RMHCPA earns from qualifying purchases made through the links on this page.

The Proper Use of Tradition and Scholarly Authority

This blog was originally published June 1, 2014, the New Existentialist Blog. It was republished here after the New Existential Blog was discontinued.

Lu Xun

Quick to kindle, quick to calm down, an even quick to grow decadent, men of letters [i.e., a type of scholar] can always find reasons and precedents from the classics to justify their shifts of allegiance. (Lu Xun, 1931/2003)

One repays a teacher badly if one always remains nothing but a pupil. (Nietzsche, 1892/1966)

The impulse in contemporary times, and really through all of history, is to either vilify or idealize history, tradition, and the scholars of old. We see this in our classroom, our political debates, our movies, and our books and journals. Yet, whether the impulse is to vilify or glorify, such simplistic ways of engaging tradition and history are problematic and potentially destructive.

I have long appreciated the approach of Lu Xun, an influential Chinese literary figure of the early to mid-20th century, in regard to this issue. However, as I have been working through a four-volume collection of his works, this appreciation has deepened. Lu Xun was known as a powerful critic of the cultural problems of China during his life, but this really only touches the surface of Lu Xun’s thought and work.

Lu Xun (1931/2003) wrote, “The sole hope of development for our literature lies in understanding the old and seeing the new, in comprehending the past and deducing the future” (pp. 138139). Similarly, he was highly critical of those who were critical or defensive of tradition without understanding its history. Before we can critique any period and any scholarship or tradition from the beginning of recorded history through contemporary times, we must first seek to understand. This, too often, is missing. We are quick to debate and assert a correct position, slow to ask questions and seek to understand. And even our questions, when they are asked, are really just trickery, pretending to seek understanding while seeking to find a weakness in the position of the other. Such processes serve no constructive purposes; they only tear down and reinforce what we believe we know to be truth.

The Use of Idols

All those from ancient times till now who hold no definitive views and have no guiding principle for the changes they advocate, but make use of the arguments of different schools, deserve to be called hooligans. Take a Shanghai hooligan. If he sees a man and a woman from the country walking together, he calls out, “Hey! You’re immoral—you’ve broken the law!” Here he uses Chinese law. If a peasant makes water by the roadside he shouts, “Hey! That’s not allowed. You’ve broken the law, and deserve to be locked up!” Here he is using foreign law. But in the end the law can go by the board—if you grease his palm he will let the matter drop. (Lu Xun, 1931/2003, pp. 134-135)

I grew up in a conservative religious environment, and my early studies of psychology, philosophy, and theology began in this context. From early on, I learned the law well. Yet, I also quickly became troubled by it. I remember watching it being used to harm others and justify oneself, which to me seemed inconsistent with the deeper messages of grace. It seemed there were many ways to condemn, but few routes to understanding and forgiveness. While I believe hypocrisy to be a given for all people, as no human being can live up to what they profess or even develop a complete and coherent belief system, this hypocrisy for me was too great. It was not so much the hypocrisy, but the way the hypocrisy was used and the hurt it caused.

Yet, I’ve seen these patterns recreated in each new spiritual and intellectual home that I have found, even my beloved existential and humanistic psychology. In my own approach to existential psychology, I see love, compassion, and relationship as essential foundations. Yet, too often, I have seen “humanistic” and “existential” used as a weapon. Most often, this occurs when certain important figures in the history of our movement become elevated to the level of becoming idols. I have seen this occur with Heidegger, Rollo May, James Bugental, and other leaders in our field. I have seen our students and early career professionals fearful to present or even speak up at conferences because they fear they will be harshly criticized for not having the orthodox interpretation of one of these figures.

This is a tragedy worthy of one of Nietzsche’s tirades. We dishonor those early influential thinkers in our movement when we turn them into idols. We distort the message they were bringing to us and the message they lived in their lives. I believe (and hope) that if these figures were around today their harshest critiques would be of the way we over-revere their contributions. We love and honor our heroes when we recognize their humanity. To be revered as an idol or infallible scholar is much less of an honor than to be revered as a human who within all the limitations of being human rose to contribute a unique voice and make an important, though imperfect, contribution worthy of a lasting influence on the history of humankind. When we look closely, the heroes of existential and humanistic psychology certainly were “human, all too human.”

Conclusion

I have long found it interesting that many outside of existential and humanistic psychology view them as outdated and label them as “dead theories” because they believe they have not changed since their inception. Too often, there is some truth to this; we often use historical ideas and figures as the measure or standard of truth. Yet, arguably more than any other major school of psychology, such a belief or process contradicts our theory.

Our history, tradition, and influential early voices are an essential foundation to the contemporary humanistic and existential psychology movement. Yet, if we treat them like idols or view their ideas as beyond reproach, they become our greatest and most powerful adversary. Even our good values hold the potential of evil when we become bound to them and cling to them so closely that we can no longer properly see them.

Lu Xun is a good model for us. Although he is known more for his critiquing of the culture and ideas of his time, a closer reading shows that he greatly values history and tradition. He honored and revered his culture and the people of China. Yet, he was very critical when people became bound to their ideas. There must be balance. We must revere, but not over-revere; we must honor, but not create idols; we must critique, but not destroy; we must preserve, but not stagnate. This honors history and tradition. Yet, many who seek to preserve tradition destroy it by holding on too tightly. We must let our history be freer than this.

References

Lu Xun (2003). A glance at Shanghai literature. In Y. Xianyia & G. Yang, Ed. & Trans.), Lu Xun: Selected works (Vol. 3; pp. 127-141).  Foreign Language Press.

Nietzsche, F. (1966). Thus spoke Zarathustra: A work for none and all (W. Kaufmann, Trans.). Penguin. (Original work published in 1892)

~ Louis Hoffman, PhD

Note: Although this site is owned by Louis Hoffman, it supports the Rocky Mountain Humanistic Counseling and Psychological Association (RMHCPA), which is a 501(c)3 nonprofit organization. As an Amazon Associate, RMHCPA earns from qualifying purchases made through the links on this page.