pdfprint _encountering a human being means being kept awake by an enigma._ (e. lévinas) prospects...

8/11/2019 PDFPrint _Encountering a human being means being kept awake by an enigma._ (E. Lvinas) Prospects on furthe

1/14

Salvar no Evernote

"Encountering a human being means being kept awake by anenigma." (E. Lvinas) Prospects on further developments in thePersonCentered Approachpfs-online.at

Hoje atualizado

Compartilhada por iagomestrado

Compartilhada por iagomestrado

Peter F. Schmid, Paper "Prospect on further developments"

Artikel Psychotherapie

Peter F. Schmid

"Encountering a human being means being kept awake by an enigma."

(E. Lvinas)

Prospects on further developments in the PersonCentered Approach

Paper given at the IVth ICCCEP, Lisbon 1997

published in: Marques-Teixeira, Joo / Antunes, Samuel (Eds.), Client-Centered and Experiential Psychotherapy , Lindaa Velha (Vale&Vale) 2001, 11-33

(c) 1997by Peter F. Schmid

Abstract

Ten years after Carl Rogers death we can give a rsum: What have almost six decades of the PersonCentered

Approach brought about? What conclusions can be drawn scientific, social, practical? And what are the future

perspectives and prospects of the PersonCentered Approach? Which direction will further development take?

It is assumed that this should best happen in reference to a truly personal and social approach which may also

contribute to a basic consent of those schools that feel obliged to a dialogic and encounterorientated understanding of

psychotherapy and carry out the corresponding theoretical and practical paradigm shift. As far as that goes, this

approach like any good therapist in a therapy implies the tendency to render itself superfluous. Not because such

a "therapy of the future"(Carl Rogers) would already exist on the contrary: the consequent realization of the Rogerian

paradigm shift still has to be implemented even with respect to the PersonCentered Approach.1

Keywords

Foundations, anthropology, encounter philosophy, kairology, ethics, paradigm shift, PCA as a personal

approach, further developments of PCA/PCT, diakony, Lvinas and the pholosophy of the Other, public


2/14

appearance, PCA as a cultural philosophy, basic consensus beyond to school

In February 1997 it was ten years ago that Carl Rogers died a special occasion to ask oneself the question how

things are with the PersonCentered Approach and what changes have turned out to be necessary if it wants to remain

true to its principles.

It happens quite often that among personcentered theorists it does not apply so much to the practicians but

sometimes it is even true for them a metaphor like the following can be heard: As for the PersonCentered Approach

we find ourselves and this is said with a slight touch of nostalgia in the voice on board a sinking ship. Once she

had a great time, full speed ahead, when the charismatic captain had the say and set the course. However, now she is

rusting away and seems quite "unrefloatable". As things now stand, lying at anchor, she seems to deserve being

converted into a "museum ship", because she has completed her mission successfully. She seems to be dissolving and

breaking up into her components, it is true, but as a model for others she did an irreplaceable and inestimable service

and a whole fleet is under way making use of the experience of this pioneer ship.

Consequently, the PersonCentered Approach seems to have completed its historic mission in so far as it influenced

the humanization of various social and psychological orientations, in particular the humanization of psychotherapy. Asan independent orientation, however, the PersonCentered Approach will hardly survive. If at all, complementary

methods or additional techniques would have to be looked out for, it would have to be combined with systemic methods,

body therapy techniques or skills from art and creative therapies or would have to be fused with the also no longer

highly trendy gestalt therapists and other related schools, in order to save at least the Humanistic Psychotherapy.

I do not share this view at all together with many others. On the contrary, I am even convinced that the essence of

the PersonCentered Approach has not yet been sounded out by far, let alone has it been put into effect, in its

radicalism, its profound humanism and in its critical potential, a potential towards emancipation. Carl Rogers positions

and visions are not at all outdated, they have not even been caught up with. Without doubt it is a valuable merit of theapproach that today, half a century later, even behavior therapists, psychoanalysts and systemic therapists encounter

the importance of the personal, the personal and actual relationship, the core conditions ("without which nothing works",

as these therapies now also agree) a fact which became extremely clear at the World Council for Psychotherapy

1996 in Vienna, where e.g. psychoanalysts promoted and pushed as new positions what our approach had already

made the obvious focus of interest in the middle of the century e.g. the respect of the person. But even if others adopt

some of our positions, they have by no means yet got at the core of the approach, centered on the person of the human

being.

Relationship person to person: The essential focus of the approach

I am really convinced that the PersonCentered Approach has got a future. Therefore I want to indicate some of the

developments which in my opinion line up for the approach. However, first of all a definition of our position seems to be

called for. What is essential? And: who is to decide? Certainly no personcentered pontifex or any other authority. But if

everybody has got something to say in this matter, how will any agreement ever be reached?

During an informal meeting in order to exchange theoretical concepts of thirty personcentered scientists and

practicians from all over the world, which took place at the invitation of the PersonCentered Association in Austria

(PCA) in July 1996 in Bad Hall, Upper Austria, subsequent to the World Congress (cf. Frenzel/Schmid 1996),

spontaneous and prompt consent was reached about the idea that time has come to found an international

organization2as a common roof in the shape of a worldwide organization or forum for personcentered practicians andtheorists in psychotherapy and counseling. (It was founded during the IVth International Conference in ClientCentered

and Experiential Psychotherapy, Lisbon, July 8th, 1997.) It was obvious from the very beginning that this association had

ACP teria servido somente de

exemplo a ser seguido.. Mas est

naufragando.

Fala-se que a ACP no pode subsistir como

abordagem independente


3/14

to be an open structure which on the one hand had to offer room for various suborientations within the approach, and

on the other hand had to be clearly identifiable. Consent about that was easily reached, and the same goes for the

name of the organization. However, it was considered difficult to find this common core and to find out how it could be

put into words so that it was clear and unambiguous and at the same time open enough. To our all surprise it turned out

that this task was not difficult to solve at all. In next to no time agreement was reached and the five items were put up

which now form the five principles of our International Association:

It is unrenounceable for the PersonCentered Approach a commitment to the primary importance in therapy of the

relationship between therapist and client.It is unrenounceable for the PersonCentered Approach an essential trust in the experiential world of the client and

its centrality for the therapeutic endeavor.

It is unrenounceable for the PersonCentered Approach a belief in the efficacy of the conditions and attitudes

conducive to therapeutic movement first postulated by Carl Rogers and a commitment to their active

implementation within the therapeutic relationship.

It is unrenounceable for the PersonCentered Approach a commitment to the understanding of both clients and

therapists as persons who are at one and the same time individuals and in relationship with others and their

environment.

It is unrenounceable for the PersonCentered Approach an openness to the elaboration and development of

personcentered and experiential theory in the light of current and future practice and research.3

Perhaps these five items seem to be selfevident at first glance, perhaps they seem to be a meager minimum program

or a vague humanism. On closer examination, however, they include everything that is essential and at the same time

imply the element linking all (or almost all) suborientations4from Focusing to phenomenologically or empirically

orientated approaches, from encounter philosophical and personaldialogical to clinical or constructivist approaches.

Furthermore, they imply, above all, the core of the developments necessary entirely in accordance with the sentence

by Carl Rogers and John Wood from their abridged description of the approach: "Clientcentered theory is still growing

not as a school or dogma but as a set of tentative principles." (Rogers/Wood 1974, 213)

The personcentered relationship as immediate encounter

Following the above mentioned items I hereby want to give a concise summary of what I consider the essence of the

PersonCentered Approach.

As already expressed by its name it is orientated by the person of the human being. What is meant by "person" is the

human being in both, his or her unparalleled unexchangability and in his or her social interconnectedness, that is, as

person within society, within his or her respective system; the individual and the relational dimension of being and

becoming a person, independence and orientation towards relations are equally important to a personal view (Schmid

1991; 1997 b; 1997e; 1998a; 1998c).The two basic axioms in personcentered anthropology are the actualizing

tendency and the interconnectedness. They form the foundations of the understanding of personalisation of "on

becoming a person" (Rogers 1961a).

Offering help in a personcentered understanding means letting oneself in for a personal relation. That implies putting

oneself into play as helper5and trusting in the possibility that such an encounter from person to person, be it among two

persons or within a group (Schmid 1994; 1996a; 1997b; 1997f; 1998b; 1998c), is the most important contribution to

helping those seeking for help in order to make better use of their so far unused or temporarily blocked inner resources,

thus, developing their own personality and widening their scope of action as well (Rogers 1961a; 1970a; 1980a; Schmid

1989). Explicitly connected with it is an image of man which considers every human being capable of living and

organizing his or her life and solving the problems and, on account of their own potential, expects him or her to actualize

the ability to develop in an individually and socially constructive direction, if he or she feels accepted and understood in

Definio de PESSOA

Compromisso

Esforo


4/14

principle, that is, in a social environment in why they may feel and behave quite authentically (Rogers 1959a).

Such an approach quite fundamentally rules out any conception of oneself on part of the therapist or helper or teacher

etc. as an expert on the problems or on the person of the partner in counseling, therapy, education, supervision or any

other helpful relation whatsoever. Such an approach also rules out that the therapist considers himself as an expert in

the correct usage of methods and means, and even excludes any preconceived use of methods and techniques, which

is not rooted in the immediate experience of the relationship. The only "means" or "instrument" employed is the person

of the therapist him or herself. And only where "any means has fallen apart" encounter takes place, as Martin Buber

(1923,19) stated unsurpassably and precisely also grasping the process of such a relationship. Therefore the Person

Centered Approach differs radically from those other approaches which in the meantime have all more or less found

their way to the core conditions of authenticity, unconditional positive regard and empathy brought out and accurately

described by Rogers (1957a). However, these approaches consider Rogers conditions, attitudes and definitions only as

preparatory design of relations meant to establish a certain climate or rapport, as obviouslyhuman preconditions so to

speak, upon which the actual therapeutic work still has to be constructed. For the person working in the person

centered field the realization of these basic attitudes, which at the time has to be newly put into effect during the

process, represents the help which needs no supplementation by specific methods and techniques reserved for the

expert. "Expertism", if it has to be described, lies exactly in the ability to resist the temptation of behaving like an expert

(even against the clients wishes) that means, solving problems with the help of techniques rather than facing them

as persons.

The existential and immediate presence as understood by encounter philosophy, the personal beingwith which leads

to a togetherness, not an ideological or pragmatic hereandnowprinciple, means that, in his or her psychophysical

presence, the person who offers a personcentered relation opens up to his partner, either another person or a group,

the possibility to concentrate on the fertile instant and thus on oneself and his or her relations. In the "kairos" (which the

very instant is called according to the Greek god of "the favorable opportunity", who had to be seized by his thick front

hair of the crown when hurrying past in the back he was closecropped) it is important to take advantage of fallow

potential and to seize the opportunity.

The PersonCentered Approach respects the individual and understands him or her out of the

social environment

Rogers liked to call December 11, 1940 the birthday of the approach, the day on which he gave a lecture at the

University of Minnesota with the title "Newer Concepts of Psychotherapy" (Rogers 1940b) which met with a lively

response. Much has changed and developed further in the approach itself and in its surrounding, the social psychology,

since that day which marks its foundation.

Carl Rogers left us a well elaborated theory from the first half of his work (Rogers 1959a), but he did not compile later

developments as concisely and comprehensively as the early ones with the effect that these later developments

became less and much later known and that for a long time the PersonCentered Approach consequently had a one

sided, individualistic image which simply does not apply.

That is to say, as a result from his experience with psychiatric patients and his experience in encountergroups from

a psychotherapeutic point of view they are two "extremegroups", hospitalized patients on the one hand and the "normal

population" on the other Rogers developed his own approach further in a quite significant way and, what is more, his

earlier theories are integrated into his later conceptions. It is, what Hegel calls an "Aufhebung". The German word

"aufheben" means (1) to preserve and keep, (2) to abolish, suspend and dissolve and (3) to elevate, supersede,

transcend and revalorize. If one takes these meanings together at one and the same time, this means that the earliertheories are preserved as well as dissolved by being superseded and transcended. Rogers integrated his previous

experiences and concepts into a new theory without abandoning its essence and developed the approach further in a

Rogers no elaborou tanto a 2 parte de sua teoria quanto

o fez na 1. Isso nos d uma impresso de que sua teoria

individualista.

Para Schmid houve umreconceitualizao, superao, dosprimeiros conceitos de Rogers, semque eles tenham sido abandonados.


5/14

significant way. At that time, from about the second half of the sixties onwards, when the social dimension, the presence

in the relation and finally the political aspect of therapy and of the approach as a whole were worked out without

abandoning the uniqueness of the individual and the focus on the client, i.e. without losing the clientcenteredquality

the importance of the person (also of the person of the therapist), the relationship person to person, the group as

"arena" of the relation and the whole surrounding of this relation was theoretically reflected and, thus, the

personcenteredquality was conceptualized.

Nowhere has Rogers ever laid that down in a comprehensive way. These ideas and concepts are included in a series of

articles and interviews and those who got to know him personally do not doubt this comprehensive view. With that

Rogers gave such a decisive impulse and left us such a rich legacy that a concrete realization of a number of

consequences is yet to come. If the approach is taken seriously as "approach" (and not as a readymade doctrine), and

if we take the implications seriously which are a consequence of the understanding of the human being as person

within society and which above all arise from the experience of personcentered group work and grouppsychotherapy,

a range of necessary and farreaching changes in the sense of further developments of the approach regarding the

image of man and the practice crowd into our mind.

Some of these challenges for the approach shall be summarized in form of theses without claiming to be complete.

Challenges for the PersonCentered Approach as a personal approach

The interconnectedness of the human being (and thus the equal consideration of the relational dimensionand the

interactional aspect of becoming a personas well as of the substantial dimensionand the individual aspect of

being a person) must be laid down in a concept. Just as it was necessary, first of all, to radically stress the non

directive and, with that, the uniqueness, dignity and freedom of the person, it is also necessary to pay attention to

the beingfromtheother and the beingtowardstheother in theory and in practice. Associated with it, among

other things, is an enlarged view of human motivation, of what moves a human being, and, thus, changes him or

her a motivation which comes from the inside (from the actualizing tendency of the organism) as well as from

the outside (from the interconnectedness, the challenge and the vocation initiated by the other). Therefore theactualizing tendency is no longer the only personcentered axiom, relationality is equally important.

Closely connected with that isan understanding of the human being quite fundamentally focusing the others view,

in which the other is no longer an alter egobut truly a different person. Just as encounter philosophy has reached

beyond Buber and with Emmanuel Lvinas (1961; 1974; 1983), a thinker of tremendous importance who has

hardly been discovered for the PersonCentered Approach, yet has made a paradigm shift from the "I" to the

"Thou" only managing to get closer to the verge of the "We", so the PersonCentered Approach has to give serious

thoughts to what it means giving response to a suffering human beings cry for help, a responseability rooting in

fundamental ethics.

Thus, all psychosocial, pedagogic, political, and pastoral acting receives a socioethical dimensionleading fromthe categories "response" and "responsibility" to a new understanding of selfrealization which can only become

reality in what Lvinas called "diakonia [diakony]" a term with the same meaning as "therapy" i.e. "service". In

the interpersonal encounter, which we call therapy, addressed and asked to respond, we assume a deep

responsibility, an obligation in which our fellow man expects us to render the service we owe to each other

neither more nor less but what is meant with the frequently misused and still irreplaceable word "love".6

The above mentioned Lithuanian Emmanuel Lvinas, who lost his whole family in the holocaust, again and again points

out that all of occidental philosophy (and this also applies for psychology as its "daughter" and psychotherapy as its

"granddaughter") including its socalled humanistic orientation in this century has remained "egology". And, indeed,this fixation on the I is clearly predominant in the terminology of the numerous selfterms in Humanistic Psychology and

despite all positioning against an objectivation and instrumentalization it finally indicates a reduction of the other, of what

the other means to me. In this connection a wellknown sentence by Martin Buber (1923, 18) like "I become through the

s atendnciaAtualiz.

Schmid chama o paciente/cliente de "Companheiro" (fellow)


6/14

Thou" all of a sudden sounds quite different: even here, as is to be suspected, everything is still focused on me. This,

however, presents the ideals of the humanistic movement as such in a new light. And according to Lvinas the following

applies: "What once seemed to be a distinctive human quality, the absolute desire to determine and realize oneself,

"selfdetermination" and "selfrealization", has proved the reason of violence against the other human being. Not the

enforcement of the egos objectives must become the basis of the humanism of the other but the perception of the

other. This is an ethical relation, and as such it is asymmetric. I am much more obliged by the other than I am capable

of obliging him.[...] Thus being a human is and can be founded and is explicable by the other." (Waldschtz 1993)

The PersonCentered Approach as a humanistic understanding of world and man now includes a number of ethic

implications which definitely prepare for getting beyond "egology". Of course, they still await an explicit, systematic

presentation, definition, and further development for every single area of personcentered acting. In doing so ethics

cannot be deduced from anthropology but we have to realize that personcentered anthropology has always been

ethics at first; for "ethics is personadequate acting" (Keil 1992,17). Traditional ethics orient acting by principles which

are deduced from philosophic ideas. However, a philosophy orienting itself by experience, as it undoubtedly

corresponds to the PersonCentered Approach, realizes from the experience in the encounter, which is taken seriously

down to the roots, ethics as the first philosophy. Especially out of the personal experience of encounter being

addressed and thus encouraged by the Other a legitimate claim to an answer and to acting in the kairos is derived

and this is where personcentered ethics come in.

Personcentered ethics is dialogic ethics. In so far it is ethics which never degrades a fellow being to an alter ego but

sees him or her as a call and a provocation. In doing so the fellow being is the Other on principle, the one strange to me,

who surprises me, and who I find myself opposed to, who I have to face neither monopolizing nor rejecting him

face to face. "Encountering a human being means being kept awake by an enigma" states Lvinas (1959, 120). The

presence of the Other which always "comes first" is a call for a respond which I cannot escape because nobody can

respond in my place. We are obliged and responsible to the Other and owe him an answer. This causes a " priority" of

the Other. From that follows a new nonindividualistic understanding of selfrealization as realization in and out of

the relations, in which the individual lives, and which is never possible without the realization of the Other.

Any help whatsoever is to be understood on principle as such a response to the misery of the Other.Love, which

fundamentally is experienced from the very beginning in the development of the human being (just think of the child,

"conceived" and born into relations), is the deposit of solidarity that has to be made. In empathy communication

becomes encouragement, becomes advocacy and becomes community.

Accordingly, psychotherapy means engaged and solidary service to the fellow person, is "diakony".Like any psycho

social activity it has a radical servicecharacter. The suffering person demands. This corresponds with the duty of

responseability. From "diakony" emerges dialogue, from personcenteredness room for personal encounter. This

commitment towards the Other cf. the not enough appreciated commitmentconcept of Binder and Binder (1981,179274) , a responsibility which originates in the basic dependency of the human being on his fellow beings, calls

for acting also in communication and not for talking. Therefore we should understand the PersonCentered

Approach as an action approach and not merely as a verbal approach, misleadingly called "Gesprchstherapie [talking

therapy]".

The realization of the above described responsibility actually happens in the stress on presence as kairologic

category. This attitude focused by Rogers at the end of his life (e.g. Rogers 1986h), is an unconditional openness

for the relationship and towards the person of the Other in the given moment. For the personcentered core

conditions it opens up an anthropological dimension which goes far beyond attitude and behavior. The attitude of

presence is not something additional like a fourth core condition or a variable, but it is an Aufhebung of the three

in the above mentioned Hegelian sense. Presence can be understood as an Aufhebung of the basic attitudes:

They are preserved as well as dissolved by being superseded and transcended. Presence is the point to which the

Humanismo do Outro Homem


7/14

trias of the core condition refers in a comprehensive way and makes them clear as conditions for personal

encounter. This way of being, actually a "way of being with", is kairologic, because it embarks on the kairos as the

fertile moment of encounter. Thus, encounter becomes clear as a central category of the approach.

Such an attitude demands an inclusionof creative ways of understanding and acting in an unspectacular way,

especially of play and art, into the understanding and the actual realization of therapy and psychosocial work as

forms of action. Consequently the approach takes seriously that its aim is not towards "making" something or

towards effects or presupposed goals of any kind (not to be used in order to), but in the sense of an

"actualization therapy" it is a matter of creative open rooms emerging where human beings areopen, acceptingand empathic, living together as persons, playful and curious, where they get involved and bring themselves at

stake, get engaged, take risks, and where they do not hesitate to confront each other as the persons they are.

Thus, the holistic view of the human being is taken seriously. Among that counts his or her corporality and the

unspectacular inclusion of the bodyin the view of the person and, thus, in the practice of a truly personal therapy

which neither "adds" the body to psychotherapeutic work or concentrates on the body instead of the psyche nor

does it use it, in order to"heal the soul by the body" thus instrumentalizing it (cf. Schmid 1994; 1996b; 1997d). So

the separation of body and soul would all the more be fixed. Instead of this the point is to overcome the misguiding

occidental separation of body and spirit and the separation of psychotherapy and body therapy, which derives from

this, towards a truly anthropological therapy the only way of correctly viewing the human being as a person.Taking man seriously as a social being results in areevaluation of the indication for single and group therapy.

Because of the fundamental understanding of the human being in his or her social relations, as a person in the

group, because of the realization of the fact that working on conflicts is best done where conflicts originate, namely

in groups, the question is in how far the group is the therapeutic place to be chosen first, whereas the single

relationship as a special and especially protected relationship is indicated only when special protection is

needed or other specific reasons call for it. One can prove hat the PersonCentered Approach is a deeply social

and thus actually a group approach contrary to what it is regarded because of its historical development. At the

same time the group is considered to be a central aspect in the future of the approach. This opposes also the

"pathology" of overemphasizing single therapy, e.g. in German speaking countries, to be seen especially intraining programs, different from those in AngloAmerican countries. (Schmid 1996a; 1996d)

This also means the necessity of developing a theory of the understanding and the practice of large groups and

communities a first rank sociopolitical and peace establishing activity. The task is to continue Carl Rogers

engagement for peace and crosscultural communication.

The approach also is a basis for a theoretical and practical reevaluation of the aggressive and sexual ways of

encounterwhich are essential for human coexistence in regard to security and intimacy. And it is a basis for

understanding poweras personal empowerment: The task is not to give power to the people but rather not to take

it from them and encourage them to realize and actualize their potency. This is one of the most revolutionary

implications of personcentered anthropology. (Schmid 1996a; 1996c)

Creative ways in training and researchare necessary, offering a broad range of new possibilities for individual

development in the social context. Although the trend lies with an arrangement with the social security system and

the adaptation to traditional concepts of disorder and illness and although the temptation very much goes towards

administrating conflictuous processes during a persons lifetime i.e. they are called "illnesses" and we are

ensured against illnesses a PersonCentered Approach focuses on recognizing the chance of a "disorder" as

crisis. Thus, it is regarded as a decision. In the understanding of the uniqueness of the kairos which calls for a

change oneself, the others, society as a whole it is creativity which is provoked and demanded instead of

classification.

More selfconfidence and identity in public

Before drawing conclusions in regard to the theses discussed above a couple of remarks seem appropriate about how


8/14

those committed the PersonCentered Approach think of it, work with it and deal with it in public.

Regarding the present situation one cannot but state thatconfidence in the own approach and its foundations is

lacking sometimes in an alarming way. This comes to the fore in borrowing ideas and techniques from other

schools and in propagating eclectic and socalled combining or integrative methods. A kind of an "inferiority

complex" still can be observed among personcentered therapists in so far as they consider themselves being

"only" personcentered. If one is aware in contrast to that that other approaches, mainly psychoanalytic ones,

have recently achieved positions the PersonCentered Approach has been holding prominently for a long time, the

task is being aware of ones pioneering role and to be ready to state it also in public.The fact that the approach is often regarded as primitive, superficial and credulous, as "only talking" and as "thin in

theory", its partly its proponents fault. Why is the fact that the approach does not use a mysteriously sounding

sophisticated jargon but a language close to experiencenot regarded as strengthrather than weakness? Or just

the same, that it has no ready answers to many questions? And that it runs counter a good many of present trends

and values, e.g. the technical and rational thinking? All that has to be regarded as strength rather than weakness.

Above all it seems to be necessary to explicate and make clear that the essential concept of the approach lies with

its being a nonconcept.

Consequently it is a question of selfpresentation and p. r.how the approach is seen and how far its influence

reaches. This means that it is necessary to contradict the stereotype of a passive mirroring therapist by makingclear that "activity" and "technical orientation" must not be connected automatically and that the approachs

strength rests with its "midwifequality", in the fact that its way of proceeding rests with its present and active and

with its gentle and nonintrusive way as well. This means that it is necessary to point out the fact that in actual

therapeutic practice the approach is highly present and thus, does have an important function for the

psychotherapeutic supply. In many countries PersonCentered Therapy is the most frequently applied approach.

Carl Rogers himself did a lot to make the approach understandable and present it unambiguously. He put much

weight on communicating what he considered important. Just think of his numerous publications, films, video and

audiotapes and his journeys. Compared to it present day p. r. is poor. The representatives of the approach are

simply not present enough in the scientific community, in journals (common to psychotherapy and related fields in

general), in politics and in the media.

Last but not least there is a lack of identity promoting institutions. With our new founded International Association

we hopefully made up a world wide roof with a facilitating and fostering nature (not a bureaucratic or rigid

organization) which has the influence needed in a pluralistic, democratic society. The next steps to take are to

create an international journal and at least in German and Dutch speaking countries to agree on an

unequivocal name for "Gesprchstherapie / Rogerian Therapy / ClientCentered Therapy / PersonCentered

Therapy".

The rsum to be pointed out is: the present "calm" in the popularity of the approach has to be seen as a challenge tocreativity.

The PersonCentered Approach as a culture philosophy needs new ways of research and

theory development

From the above mentioned basic thoughts derives the necessity of a theoretical and practical reorientation of the

approach faithful to its own tradition. Already with his interest for encounter groups and thus overcoming an approach

only centered on the client which Carl Rogers was blamed for by many critics (e.g. Swildens 1992; cf. van Belle 1990)

a qualitatively new step was made, the consequences of which had a retroactive effect on therapy. The challenge is

to genuinely follow this path.Today important impulses for a personcentered theory come from areas beyond onetoone therapy. John Wood

(1994a, 31) e.g. holds the opinion that leaderless large groups prove that the theory of ClientCentered Psychotherapy

is not sufficient enough for the PersonCentered Approach. In such groups it simply cannot be the facilitator who


9/14

provides a climate for constructive personality development. Nevertheless there are clear parallels to personcentered

groups with a leader. It cannot be denied that facilitating attitudes of different persons undoubtedly are a factor. But

Wood is convinced that there are a range of further factors of the environment, of the culture etc. which are to be found

out in a kind of research directed towards the unexpected instead of the confirmation of the expected. The task is to re

learn the ability of letting oneself be taken by surprise: "One of its best hidden secrets is that the PCA seems to function

best where conventional methods (the application of the principles of clientcentered therapy included) have failed."

(Ibid. 1994b, 6).

Since we as human beings are always members of all groups possible, the research of these phenomena could beimportant for mankind as a whole. Therefore the approach, no longer just psychotherapy, like psychoanalysis claiming

to be an overall philosophy of culture, is challenged to no less than understanding the conditio humana, the being

human in general. By the way, this needs to deal with ecological questions as well.

A dialogic and social therapy, a creative, flexible and kairologic approach

Obviously a paradigm shift within the approach announces itself in all that. The PersonCentered Approach may well

face a turningpoint of its selfunderstanding. If the underlying image of man is taken seriously it becomes obvious that

the approach needs further development to a truly dialogic and social approach (also in psychotherapy) which becomes

also clear in the claim of the anthropology represented by Kierkegaard and Buber but even more so by Lvinas.An important development of the approach can take placeif

if the PersonCentered Approach succeeds in overcoming the traditional view of man as individual and of the

individualcentered view of the group,

if it succeeds in enduring the tension to regard the human being as "unique person in the group in any given

moment",

if it succeeds in holding the balance between relation and autonomy as it is founded in the notion of the person or the

understanding of the encounter group seen as place to learn both solidarity and autonomy

if that can be achieved, it is possible that an important development takes place in two ways:

Firstly the paradigm shift from the solely client centered to the interpersonal quality will be put into effect (consequently

carrying on Bubers anthropology and his critique of the approach), personal encounter will be seen as the central

guideline for the personcentered relationship.

Secondly in respect to the above mentioned ethically founded anthropology the step from the individual to the

person, from relation to encounter will be made as a step from the view of the personcentered relationship as an I

Thourelationship to a view as a Werelationship and therefore finally towards a social therapy. Then the I will not only

be found as a respond to a Thou, which always comes first, but the I will be an respond to a We which comes first.

Then the PersonCentered Approach will become a truly personal, truly dialogic and anthropological approach, a fully

PersonCentered Approach, and PersonCentered Therapy will become a dialogic, personal, anthropological therapy.

Thus the personcentered relationship is to be regarded as a process providing room valuing spontaneity and creativity,

a process in which both client(s) and therapist(s) develop aiming at personal encounter.

Then the approach will consequently be seen as a social approach. Sociotherapy besides psychotherapy will be ranked

highly in the frame of an overall therapeutic point of view implying the communities man lives in. Thus the political

significance will become obvious.

On the other hand the PersonCentered Approach must not become onesided and overlook the individual. It lives

through the tension between We and I, group and person, relationality and substantiality, encounter and selfreflection,

i.e. from the dialectic connectedness of communicative relativeness and individual development. The bridge is the

understanding of the person in both his or her individuality and his or her relationality. Therefore it is still true what Carl

Rogers (1989d,106) pointed out towards the end of his life: "Im willing to stand by valuing the person above anything

Como

Lvina

s

veria

isso?


10/14

else."

Acting personcentered means acting from encounter

"Encountering a human being means being kept awake by an enigma." If this is taken seriously the experience of an

other as the Other is a fundamental dimension of the personcentered image of man, far away from a concept of

unilateral individualistic selfrealization. In spite of all inflation the term "encounter" in general and in the Person

Centered Approach in special has undergone, it has to be stated that the essential element of encounter consists in the

fact that the human being meets a reality which moves him or her deeply, which is counter him or her. Encounter is not

simply an experience, it is an "experience counter"which opposes the affected one. Encounter is an essentially

different experience from what an idealistic and subjectivistic understanding of (solely intrinsic development)

presupposes, from an understanding of development or fulfillment coming completely from itself. However, it is an alien,

an Other, another reality, another person, which or who encounters my reality, which or who encounters me. This

makes up the existential dimension and unavoidability as well as the claim for the exclusiveness of encounter.

Working in a personcentered way derives from being affected by the encounter and tries itself to open a room for

encounter. Thus, as an activity which understands itself from the Other (so it is fully "clientcentered) it is a

consequence of a view of human existence facing encounter because its selfunderstandingcomes from encounter.

Only where the person exposes himself or herself to the given Other, he or she can enter in a dialogue even more so,

he or she is called to do so.

From the encounter the concrete action arises depending on the phenomenon respectively the person I encounter.

The essential thing is not to apply preconceived principles but to be open to new experiences in the from moment to

moment given situation of life, in the kairologic basic attitude of presence and encounter, and to respond authentically

in short: to try to live a culture of encounter again and again.

Towards a basic consensus beyond schools

Developing the approach in this way a step could be taken towards a basic orientation7without giving up independence,as Carl Rogers intended. (By no means does such a further development render a careful and diligent theoretical and

practical training superfluous. On the contrary: only after having received an appropriate, qualified training, are we

enabled to act as a person even in difficult situations.) What is aimed at is a basic consensus beyond schools which are

obliged to a dialogic understanding of therapy and group work, because they carry out the paradigm shift from

treatment, caretaking and counseling to encounter. In doing so they transcend models which concentrate on the

individualistic self as well as on models which exclusively concentrate on a simply systemic approach. As soon as this

step is truly taken not the schools are the issue any more, but the issue is to really understand and practice therapy and

group work as dialogue. Or expressed in a more provoking way: the PersonCentered Approach must intend and aim at

making itself superfluous just as a good therapist has to do.

In order to reach that goal a lot still has to be done.

"Encountering a human being means being kept awake by an enigma." Only such "kept awake" persons who are ready

to question others and themselves, will be capable of making the PersonCentered Approach appear a ship in order

to use the initial metaphor again which is leaving the secure harbor in which she has enjoyed fame, prestige and

reputation, but at the same time has started rusting away and now is setting sail "full speed ahead".

Endnotes

1 Paper presented at the IVthICCCEP, Lisbon, July 1997. Translation by Josef Tihanyi and LillySchmid. Cf. Schmid 1997a; 1995; 1996a, 513522; 1997b; 1997c; 1997e; Frenzel/Schmid 1996.

2 The original proposal of the proponents was: "International Association for PersonCentered Therapy


11/14

(IAPCT). An Association for the Science and Practice of ClientCentered and Experiential

Psychotherapies and Counseling." This was changed by the founding members in Lisbon to: "World

Association for PersonCentered Counseling and Psychotherapy. An Association for the Science and

Practice of ClientCentered and Experiential Psychotherapies and Counseling."

3The call for the foundation was published worldwide: IAPCT 1996.

4 Maybe especially eclectic and interventionorientated people will miss something.

5In the whole paper always men and women are meant and addressed. For the simplicity in reading,

however, not always both formulations are used.

6Such attempts to personcentered ethics constitute a very important task in respect to an ethicfoundation of psychotherapy and psychosocial work, if one doesnt want to get stuck in unfounded

casuistics and doesnt want to reduce ethics to the moral discussion of single cases, e.g. concerning

abuse. Cf. Schmid 1996a, 521532.

7 Cf. van Kalmthout 1997.

References

Binder, Ute / Binder Johannes(1981), Die klientenzentrierte Psychotherapie bei schweren psychischen

Strungen, Frankfurt/M. (Fachbuchhandlung fr Psychologie) 21981

Buber, Martin (1923), Ich und Du, in: Dialogisches Leben, Zrich 1923; quoted after the edition

Heidelberg (Lambert Schneider) 81974

Fietkau, HansJoachim(1988), Von Mglichkeiten, Notwendigkeiten und Erfordernissen

personenorientierter Politikberatung am Beispiel der Umweltpolitik, in: GwG (ed.) Orientierung an der

Person. Bd. II: Jenseits von Psychotherapie, Cologne (GwG) 1988, 266272

Fietkau, HansJoachim / Kessel, H.(1981) (eds.), Umweltlernen, Knigstein/Taunus 1981

Frenzel, Peter / Schmid, Peter F. (1996), Von der Herausforderung, die eigene Power zu gebrauchen...

Bericht ber ein Treffen personzentrierter Wissenschafter, Bad Hall, Juli 1996, in: apgkontakte 2(1996) 3754

Hutterer, Robert / Pawlowsky, Gerhard / Schmid, Peter F. / Stipsits, Reinhold(eds.), ClientCentered

and Experiential Psychotherapy. A paradigm in motion, Frankfurt/M. (1996)

IAPCT 1996 (International Association for PersonCentered Therapy. An Association for the Science

and Practice of ClientCentered and Experiential Psychotherapies and Counseling): From Participants

at a PersonCentered Meeting at Bad Hall, Austria, July 1996, in: apgkontakte 2 (1996) 5557; v. a.

in: Personzentriert; Brennpunkt; GwGZeitschrift et al.

Keil, Wolfgang W.(1992), Grundlagen der Klientenzentrierten Psychotherapie, in: Personzentriert 2

(1992) 933

Lvinas, Emmanuel (1959), Der Untergang der Vorstellung, in: ibd. 1983, 120139; orig. in: Husserl

18591959. Recueil commmoratif publi l'occasion du centenaire du philosophe,

(Phaenomenologica VI), Den Haag (Nijhoff) 1959

(1961), Totalit et infini. Essai sur l'extriorit, Den Haag (Nijhoff) 1961, 71980

(1974), Autrement qu'tre ou au del de l'essence, Den Haag (Nijhoff) 1974, 21978

(1983), Die Spur des Anderen. Untersuchungen zur Phnomenologie und Sozialphilosophie,

Freiburg (Alber) 1983, 31992


12/14

Pfeiffer, Wolfgang M.(1992), Gesundheitsfrderung, Vorsorge und Begleitung im Rahmen der

Sozialarbeit, in: Straumann, Ursula(ed.), Beratung und Krisenintervention. Materialien zu

theoretischem Wissen und interdisziplinrem Bezug, Cologne (GwG) 1992, 8499

Preu, Sigrun(1990), Umweltkrise und personenzentrierter Ansatz, in: Deter, Detlev / Straumann,

Ursula(eds.), Personenzentriert Verstehen, Gesellschaftsbezogen Denken, Verantwortlich Handeln.

Theorie, Methodik und Umsetzung in die psychosoziale Praxis, Cologne (GwG) 1990, 85104

Rogers, Carl R. (1940b), Some newer concepts of psychotherapy, (manuscript) 1940

(1957a), The necessary and sufficient conditions of therapeutic personality change, in: Journal of

Consulting Psychology 21,2 (1957) 95103

(1959a) A theory of therapy, personality, and interpersonal relationships, as developed in the client

centered framework, in: Koch, Sigmund(ed.), Psychology. A study of a science. Vol. III: Formulations

of the person and the social context, New York (McGraw Hill) 1959, 184256

(1961a), On becoming a person. A therapist's view of psychotherapy, Boston (Houghton Mifflin) 1961

(1970a), On encounter groups, New York (Harper & Row) 1970;

(1980a), A way of being, Boston (Houghton Mifflin) 1980

(1986h), A clientcentered / PersonCentered Approach to therapy, in: Kutash, I. L. / Wolf, A.(eds.),

Psychotherapist's casebook. Theory and technique in the practice of modern times, San Francisco

(JosseyBass) 1986, 197208

(1989d), An interview with Carl Rogers, by David Ryback, in: PersonCentered Review 4,1 (1989)

99112

Rogers, Carl R. / Schmid, Peter F. (1991), Personzentriert. Grundlagen von Theorie und Praxis,

Mainz (Grnewald) 1991; 2ndenlarged ed. 1995

Rogers, Carl R. / Wood, John Keith(1974), The changing theory of clientcentered therapy, in: Burton,

Arthur(ed.), Operational theories of personality, New York (Brunner/Mazel) 1974, 211258

Schmid, Peter F.(1989), Personale Begegnung. Der personzentrierte Ansatz in Psychotherapie,

Beratung, Gruppenarbeit und Seelsorge, Wrzburg (Echter) 1989; 3rdenlarged and act. ed. 1998

(1991), Souvernitt und Engagement. Zu einem personzentrierten Verstndnis von Person, in:

Rogers/Schmid 1991,15164; 3rdenlarged and act. ed. 1998

(1994), Personzentrierte Gruppenpsychotherapie. Ein Handbuch. Vol. I: Solidaritt und Autonomie,Cologne (Edition Humanistische Psychologie) 1994

(1995), Konkurrenz und Solidaritt. Der Personzentrierte Ansatz in sterreich und Europa.

Inhaltliche und politische berlegungen im Anschlu an den Europischen Kongre in Aachen und die

Entwicklungen der letzten Zeit, Talk, Vienna, Oct. 4, 1995

(1996a), Personzentrierte Gruppenpsychotherapie in der Praxis. Ein Handbuch. Vol. II: Die Kunst der

Begegnung, Paderborn (Junfermann) 1996

(1996b), Krperorientiert oder Personorientiert? Aspekte zur Inkompatibilitt krpertherapeutischer

und systematischbender Verfahren mit dem personzentrierten Ansatz, in: apgkontakte 3 (1996) 541

(1996c), "Intimacy, tenderness and lust". A personcentered approach to sexuality, in:


13/14

Hutterer/Pawlowsky/Schmid/Stipsits 1996, 8599

(1996d), "Probably the most potent social invention of the century". PersonCentered Therapy is

fundamentally group therapy, in: Hutterer/Pawlowsky/Schmid/Stipsits 1996, 611625

(1997a), "Einem Menschen begegnen, heit von einem Rstel wachgehalten werden." (E. Lvinas).

Perspektiven zur Weiterentwicklung des Personzentrierten Ansatzes, in: Person 1 (1997)

(1997b), Personzentrierte Supervision. Berufliche Entwicklung durch Begegenung, in: Luif, Ingeborg

(ed.), Supervision, Vienna (Orac) 1997, 175188 (1997c), PersonCentered Psychotherapy State of the art. Plenary address, IVth ICCCEP, Lisbon

(manuscript) 1997; published: Brennpunkt (1998)

(1997d) "Mit dem Krper die Seele heilen"? Der Personzentrierte Ansatz im Gesprch mit der

Krperpsychotherapie, in: Korunka, Christian(ed.), Begegnungen. Psychotherapeutische Schulen im

Gesprch. Dialoge der PersonCentered Association in Austria (PCA), Vienna (WUV) 1997

(1997e), Vom Individuum zur Person. Zur Anthropologie in der Psychotherapie und zur Entwicklung

des Personzentrierten Ansatzes, in: Psychotherapie Forum 1997

(1997f), Begegnung von Person zu Person. Zum Beziehungsverstndnis in der Personzentrierten

Psychotherapie, in: Psychotherapie Forum 1998

(1998a), On becoming a personcentred approach. A personcentred understanding of the

person, in: Thorne/Lambers 1998

(1998b), Face to face. The art of encounter, in: Thorne/Lambers 1998

(1998c), Im Anfang ist Gemeinschaft. Personzentrierte Gruppenarbeit in Seelsorge und Praktischer

Theologie Beitrag zu einer Theologie der Gruppe, Bd. III, Stuttgart (Kohlhammer) 1998

Swildens, Hans(1992), Die klientenzentrierte Therapie, die prozeorientierte Gesprchstherapie unddie personzentrierte Gesprchsfhrung: drei Tchter des gleichen Vaters, aber aus verschiedener Ehe,

in: Stipsits, Reinhold / Hutterer, Robert (eds.), Perspektiven Rogerianischer Psychotherapie. Kritik und

Wrdigung zu ihrem 50jhrigen Bestehen, Vienna (WUV Universittsverlag) 1992, 5470

Thorne, Brian / Lambers, Elke(1998) (eds.), PersonCentred Therapy. European perspectives,

London (Sage) 1998

van Belle, Harry A. (1990), Rogers' later move toward mysticism: Implications for clientcentered

therapy, in: Lietaer, Germain / Rombauts, Jan / van Balen, Richard(eds.), Clientcentered and

experiential psychotherapy in the nineties, Leuven (Leuven University Press) 1990, 4757

van Kalmthout, Martin(1997), Personoriented psychotherapy. Toward integration of insightoriented,

experiential, clientcentered, personcentered, interpersonal and existential therapies, paper given at

the IVth ICCCEP, Lisbon (manuscript) 1997

Waldschtz, Erwin (1993), Was ist Personalismus?, in: Die Presse, Spectrum, Dec. 24, 1993, XII

Wood, John K.(1994a), A rehearsal for understanding the phenomenon of group, in: PersonCentered

Journal 1,3 (1994) 1832

(1994b), From the PersonCentered Approach to clientcentered therapy. Towards a psychology,keynote address IIIrd ICCCEP, revised version, Jaguarina (manuscript) 1994; cf.: The Person

Centered Approach. Towards an understanding of its implications, in:

Hutterer/Pawlowsky/Schmid/Stipsits 1996, 163181


14/14

Salvar no Evernote

O Evernote torna fcil lembrar de coisas grandes ou pequenas de sua vida diria com o seu computador,

tablet, telefone e a Web.

German version

Sie finden eine berarbeitete deutsche Fassungdes hier auf Englisch abgedruckten Vortrags unter

dem TitelEinem Menschen begegnen heit, von einem Rtsel wachgehalten werden. (E.Lvinas)

Perspektiven zur Weiterentwicklung des Personzentrierten Ansatzes

in: PERSON 1 (1997) 14-24 sowie

in:Brennpunkt, Sondernummer 1998, 10-21

Overview papers

Hauptseite English mainpage

pdfprint _encountering a human being means being kept awake by an enigma._ (e. lévinas) prospects...

Documents