pdfprint peter f. schmid, paper _a way of being with_ (c. rogers). prospects on further developments...

8/11/2019 PDFPrint Peter F. Schmid, Paper _A Way of Being With_ (C. Rogers). Prospects on Further Developments of a Radi

1/12

Salvar no Evernote

Peter F. Schmid, Paper "A way of being with" (C. Rogers). Prospectson further developments of a radical paradigmpfs-online.at Nov 12, 2012 atualizado

Compartilhada por iagomestrado

Compartilhada por iagomestrado

Peter F. Schmid, Paper "A way of being with" (C. Rogers).Prospects on further developments of a radical paradigm

Article Psychotherapy

Peter F. Schmid

"A way of being with" (C. Rogers)Prospects on further developments of a radical paradigm

Keynote lecture at the 2nd World Conference for Psychotherapy , Vienna, July 1999 1

(c) 1999 by Peter F. Schmid

Overview

The varying importance of relationship in psychotherapy

The paradigm shift of Carl Rogers: The personcentered relationship as immediateencounter

Challenges for the personcentered approach as an encounter approachThe OtherAn understanding of the human being quite fundamentally focusing the others view, in which the

other is no longer an alter ego but truly a different personBeyond "egology"A socioethical dimension leading from the categories "response" and "responseability" to a newunderstanding of selfrealization


2/12

Dialogic ethicsEngaged and solidary service to the fellow person ("diakonia")Immediate encounterinstead of preconceived methods, clientcentered ones includedCreative ways of understanding and actingespecially of play and artUnspectacular inclusion of the bodyin the understanding and practice of a truly personal therapyGroup therapyas the therapeutic setting often to be chosen firstLarge groups and communitiesdeveloping a theory of their understanding & practiceCreative ways in training and researchdirected towards the unexpected and the surprise

Towards a dialogic and social therapy, a creative and kairologic approach

Towards a basic consensus beyond schools

Abstract, Keywords

While goal- and skill-oriented approaches in psychotherapy are en vogue mainly because of sociopolitical claims for efficiency, open and holistic concepts and a relationship-orientated understanding become more important in various schools. In a radical paradigm change, not yet fully sounded out, the person-centered approach focussed on the human being as person and on the art of encounter half a century ago. Thus, this approach commits itself to an image of the human being rooted in the European Jewish-Christian tradition the claim of which still has to be met in theory and practice in spite of tendencies towards eclectically watering down or underrating it.

In the person-centered approach both traditional lines of understanding of the term person (the individualistic view of being a person which emphazises autonomy, freedom and dignity, and the relational view of becoming a person which stresses the inclination to relationship, encounter and dialogue) are connected in a unique way - in a tension which is to be endured (Become who you are). Thus, personhood, ethically founded, is conceptualized as response in a communication into which men and women are born, from where his or her respons-ability evolves. In the sense of

encounter philosophy, in particular the radical understanding of Emmanuel Lvinas, the client is focussed as actually being an Other, which makes of the therapist not only an alter ego but a partner in the encounter. Therapy becomes a mutual experience of encounter proceeding from the enclosed I- Thou to the open We. In this perspective the importance of the group and of group therapy at the interface between person and society becomes obvious.

Actual tendencies and necessary further developments, the ongoing challenge of the person-centered approach in anthropology, theory and practice of psychotherapy and its relation to other approaches are discussed.

Ladies and gentlemen!

No doubt: In psychotherapy an increasing trend exists towards the importance of the actual relationship for the


3/12

therapeutic endeavor. While goal and skilloriented approaches in psychotherapy are en vogue mainly because ofsociopolitical claims for efficiency, open and holistic concepts and a relationshiporientated understanding becomemore important in various schools. Obviously a convergence of very different orientations can be found (not just amongthe original and traditional relationship therapies!) a convergence stressing the importance of the relationshipbetween client and therapist in the very moment of therapy. Putting the focus on the actual present therapeuticrelationship implies or even explicitly means also to stress the importance of the person and his or her basic attitudes,yet more: his or her way of being in the relationship. In spite of this convergence fundamental differences exist about the

meaning of this remarkable new consideration of the person and the personal relationship.The varying importance of relationship in psychotherapy

Psychodynamic and humanistic traditions always have been emphasizing the relationship as such as a central force oftherapy both, individual and in groups. In the course of the development of psychoanalytical theory the relationship ofthe persons involved beyond transference and countertransference, the intersubjective point of view became moreimportant. What once was merely called anobject relation more and more has been viewed as a process betweensubjects . Behavior therapists and systemic practitioners and theoreticians increasingly deal with the therapeuticpersonal relationship. The latter although putting the focus on the system as such and thus paying attention to

relationships from the very beginning also started to explore the person him and herself.I was quite impressed at the First World Congress three years ago to learn how crucial it had become to very differentrepresentatives of various orientations to deal with the issue of the present relationship in therapy and with the personalqualities necessary for this venture. My impression this year is very similar. As a person-centered therapist andtheoretician I observe with a smile and a grin that these developments are often praised as a most recent achievement,that they are promoted and pushed as new positions, as something at the edge of the theory of therapy and I observewith astonishment the level of ignorance towards an already quite old paradigm: the only one which is based on theconviction that the actual relationship between client and therapist and thus the way the therapist acts as a real personbeyond role, function and methods is not only a precondition or a basis of the therapeutic work but is the very essenceof therapy.

Without doubt it is a valuable merit of the person-centered approach that the orientations mentioned encounter theimportance of the personal and of the core conditions and attitudes conducive to therapeutic movement first postulatedand accurately described by Carl Rogers (1957a). Probably almost no therapist who had not heard about the trias of aperson-centered relationship offered by the therapist: authenticity and genuineness, unconditional acceptance andsensitive empathy. "Without these nothing goes in therapy" a vast majority of therapists probably agree on. "We all dothis kind of relationship work", a lot of colleagues think and say, "we have learned our lesson; we integrated CarlRogers. His approach has completed a historic mission; as a separate approach it is outdated." As likely as they think

this kind of relationship to be necessary they hold the position that it is insufficient. So they would add something like:"These are the foundations, this is the starting point, the precondition, but then ... then thereal therapeutic work has tostart, then we need diagnostics, methods, expertise, specific know how about different diseases, patterns, techniques,interventions, behavior etc. etc. to conduct at least the process (if not the client)."

No, a clear "no" from a personcentered point of view, there is no "then", no "first the relationship, then the therapy assuch". There is noperson -centered relationship as a means to, no relationship in order to. The genuine, accepting andempathic presence of the therapist in the relationship is not only necessary but sufficient, Carl Rogers postulated wasignored at first, got tremendous support from rsearch, became a celebrity and was "zu Tode gefeiert", as we would say

in German, "praised to death" so much applauded that the radical core was not even heard, was underrated,eclectically watered down, so called "integrated", neglected, and even ignored. Carl Rogers got a first class funeral.

So even if some of the person-centered positions seem to be adopted, this by no means is an expression that the


4/12

radical core of the approach, its very nature, was even understood. And, embarrassingly enough, let me add critically,not even by a lot of therapists who call themselves Gesprchstherapeuten und therapeutinnen, clientcentered orpersoncentered.

I am convinced that the essence of the PersonCentered Approach, the revolutionary paradigm shift of Carl Rogers, hasnot yet been sounded out by far, let alone has it been put into effect, in its radicalism, its profound humanism and in itscritical potential, a potential towards emancipation individually as well as politically. Carl Rogers positions and visionsare not at all outdated, they have not even been caught up with.

What Carl Rogers initiated was a trulyperson- centered approach focussed on the human being as a person and thustherapy as the art of encounter as relationship person to person.

What does this mean precisely?

The paradigm shift of Carl Rogers:The personcentered relationship as immediate encounter

The time given here is much too short to elaborate on the anthropology and epistemology in the necessary details. Afew sentences must do.

As already expressed by its name the PersonCentered Approach is orientated by the person of the human being. Thisis a clear statement about the image of man that underlies personcentered thinking and acting. What is denoted by"person" according to the western history of anthropology, deeply rooted in the Jewish-Christian tradition, is the humanbeing in both, his or her unparalleled unexchangability and in his or her social interconnectedness, that is, as personwithin society, within his or her respective system; the individual and the relational dimension of being and of becominga person, independence and orientation towards relations are dialectically related to each other and are equallyimportant to a personal view (Schmid 1991; 1997 b; 1997e; 1998a; 1998c). In the person-centered understanding of theperson the individualistic view of being a person which emphazises autonomy, freedom and dignity, and the relational

view of becoming a person which stresses the inclination to relationship, encounter, dialogue, responsibilty andsolidarity are connected in a unique way in a tension which is to be endured. The task is to "become who you are".The basic axiom in personcentered anthropology are the dialectics of the actualizing tendency of the individualorganism and the interconnectedness of the human being. They form the foundations of the understanding ofpersonalisation of "on becoming a person" (Rogers 1961a).

Offering help in a personcentered understanding means letting oneself in for a personal relation. Deeply standing in the

tradition of personalistic philosophy (also called dialogic or encounter philosophy) that implies putting oneself into play2

and 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 fostering those seeking forhelp to make better use of their so far unused or temporarily blocked inner resources, thus, developing their ownpersonality and widening their scope of action as well (Rogers 1961a; 1970a; 1980a; Schmid 1989). Explicitly connectedwith it is a personality theory which considers every human being capable of living and organizing his or her life andsolving the problems and, on account of their own potential, expects him or her to actualize the ability to develop in anindividually and socially constructive direction, if he or she feels accepted and understood in principle, that is, in a socialenvironment in which they may feel and behave quite authentically (Rogers 1959a). Thus, an essential trust in theexperiential world of the client and its centrality for psychotherapy is unrenounceable for the PersonCenteredApproach.

Such an approach quite fundamentally rules out any conception of oneself on part of the therapist or helper or teacheror social worker or pastoral worker 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


5/12

therapist considers himself as an expert in the correct usage of methods and means, and even excludes anypreconceived use of methods and techniques, a use 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 meanshas fallen apart" encounter takes place, as Martin Buber (1923,19) stated unsurpassably and precisely also grasping theprocess of such a relationship.

Therefore the PersonCentered Approach differs radically from all other approaches which in the meantime have allmore or less found their way to the core conditions. 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. From a personcentered stance the basic attitudes need no supplementation by specific methods reserved for the expert. "Expertism", ifit has to be described, lies exactly in the ability to resist the temptation of behaving like an expert (even against theclients wishes) that means, solving problems with the help of techniques rather than facing them as persons.

In Carl Rogers' words: To work as person-centered therapist is not only "a way of being", but "a way of being with" inGerman to describe this philosophy of life we use, according to Ludwig Binswanger e.g., the term "Miteinandersein", notonly "Mitsein".

The existential and immediate presence as understood by encounter philosophy, the personal beingwith which leadsto a togetherness means that, in his or her psychophysical presence, the person who offers a personcentered relationopens up to his partner(s) 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 beseized by his mop of hair, when hurrying past in the back he was closecropped in the German language we havethe phrase "eine Gelegenheit beim Schopf packen") in the kairos it is important to take advantage of fallow potentialand to seize the opportunity. A personcentered "way of being with" is applied kairology.

In spite of all inflation the term "encounter" in general and in the PersonCentered 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 whichmoves him or her deeply, which is counter him or her. Encounter is not simply an experience, it is an "experiencecounter "which opposes the affected one. Encounter is an essentially different experience from what an idealistic andsubjectivistic understanding of (solely intrinsic development) presupposes, from an understanding of development orfulfillment coming completely from itself. However, it is an alien, an Other, another reality, another person, which or whoencounters my reality, which or who encounters me. This makes up the existential dimension and unavoidability ofencounter.

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 towards a personal encounter. Where the person of thetherapist or/and of the client expose himself or herself to the given Other, he or she can enter in a dialogue evenmore so, he or she is called to do so.

Challenges for the PersonCentered Approach as an encounter approach

Rogers gave such a decisive impulse and left us such a rich legacy that a concrete realization of a number ofconsequences is yet to come. If the approach is taken seriously as an "approach" (and not as a readymade doctrine),"not as a school or dogma but as a set of tentative principles" (Rogers/Wood 1974, 213), and if we take the implicationsseriously which are a consequence of the understanding of the human being as a person within society and whichabove all arise from the experience of personcentered group work and grouppsychotherapy, and if the paradigm shallremain true to its principles under circumstances different from those of the America at the time of the New Deal a rangeof necessary and farreaching changes in the sense of further developments of the approach regarding the image ofman, the theory and the practice crowd into my mind.


6/12

Some of these challenges for the approach, as I see them, shall be summarized in form of theses without claiming to becomplete.

The interconnectedness of the human being enforces to not only to radically stress the nondirective element 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. Therefore it seems to be correct toformulate the basic personcentered axiom as a dialectic principle: The tendency of actualizing his or her potentialin a constructive way livesin the human being, but a specific kind of relationshipfrom the outside is needed to

make this development possible. This leads to an understanding of the human being quite fundamentally focusing the others view , in which the other is no longer an alterego but truly a different person. Just as encounterphilosophy has reached beyond Buber and with Emmanuel Lvinas (1961; 1974; 1983), a thinker oftremendous importance who has hardly been discovered for the PersonCentered Approach, yet has made aparadigm 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 cryfor help, a responseability rooting in fundamental ethics.Thus, all psychosocial, pedagogic, political, and pastoral etc. acting receivesa socioethical dimension leadingfrom the 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.3

The above mentioned Lithuanian philosopher Emmanuel Lvinas again and again points out that all of occidentalphilosophy (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 onthe I is clearly predominant in the terminology of the numerous selfterms in Humanistic Psychology and despiteall positioning against an objectivation and instrumentalization it finally indicates a reduction of the other, of whatthe other means to me. In this connection even a wellknown sentence by Martin Buber (1923, 18) like "I becomethrough the Thou" all of a sudden sounds quite different: even here, as is to be suspected, everything is stillfocused on me. This, however, presents the ideals of the humanistic movement as such in a new light. Andaccording to Lvinas the following applies: "What once seemed to be a distinctive human quality, the absolutedesire to determine and realize oneself, "selfdetermination" and "selfrealization", has proved the reason ofviolence against the other human being. Not the enforcement of the egos objectives must become the basis [...]but the perception of the other. This is an ethical relation." (Waldschtz 1993)

The PersonCentered Approach includes a number of ethic implications which definitely prepare for getting

beyond "egology". In doing so ethics cannot be deduced from anthropology but we have to realize that personcentered anthropology has always been ethics at first. Traditional ethics orient acting by principles which arededuced from philosophic ideas. However, a philosophy orienting itself by experience, as it undoubtedlycorresponds to the PersonCentered Approach, realizes from the experience in the encounter, which is takenseriously 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 thekairos 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 alterego but sees him or her as a call and a provocation. In doing so the fellow being is the Other on principle, the onestrange to me, who surprises me, and who I find myself opposed to, who I have to face neither monopolizingnor rejecting him face to face. "Encountering a human being means being kept awake by an enigma" statesLvinas (1959, 120). The presence of the Other which always "comes first" is a call for a respond which I cannot


7/12

escape because nobody can respond in my place. We are obliged and responsible to the Other and owe him ananswer. This causes a " priority" of the Other. From that follows a new nonindividualistic understanding ofselfrealization as realization in and out of the relations, in which the individual lives, and which is never possiblewithout 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 ofthe 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 anypsychosocial activity it has a radical servicecharacter. The suffering person demands. This corresponds with theduty of responseability. From "diakony" emerges dialogue, from personcenteredness room for personalencounter. This commitment towards the Other cf. the not enough appreciated commitmentconcept of Binderand Binder (1981, 179274) , a responsibility which originates in the basic dependency of the human being onhis fellow beings, calls for acting also in communication and not for talking. Therefore there can no longer beany discussion about the understandimng of the PersonCentered Approach as an action approach

[Handlungsansatz] and not merely as a verbal approach, misleadingly called "Gesprchstherapie [talkingtherapy]".

If encounter becomes clear as a central category of the approachin principle the use of preconceived methods,techniques or tools, the clientcentered ones included, is ruled out, as already stated their use, e.g. the use outof a repertoire in case of difficult situations, only shows the lack of trust of the therapist in the client and in himor herself.A personcentered way of beingwith demands aninclusion of creative ways of understanding and acting in anunspectacular way, especially of play and art , into the understanding and the actual realization of therapy as a form

of action. Consequently the approach takes seriously that its aim is not towards "making" something or towardseffects or presupposed goals of any kind (not to be usedin order to ), but in the sense of an "actualizationtherapy" it is a matter of creative open rooms emerging where human beingsare open, accepting and empathic,living together as persons, playful and curious, free of purpose, where they get involved and bring themselves atstake, 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 theunspectacular inclusion of the body in the view of the person and, thus, in the practice of a truly personal therapywhich neither "adds" the body to psychotherapeutic work or concentrates on the body instead of the psyche nordoes 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 misguidingoccidental separation of body and spirit and the separation of psychotherapy and body therapy, which derives fromthis, towards a trulyanthropological therapy . (I am aware of formulating a challenge that will not be met tomorrowor the day after tomorrow.)Taking the human seriously as a social being results in a reevaluation 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 personin 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 thesingle 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 that the PersonCentered Approach is a deeply socialand thus actually a group approach contrary to what it is regarded because of its historical development. At thesame time the group is considered to be a central aspect in the future of the approach. This opposes also the


8/12

"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 Rogersengagement for peace and crosscultural communication.

Creative ways in training and research are necessary, offering a broad range of new possibilities for individualdevelopment in the social context. 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, qualifiedtraining, are we enabled to act as a person even in difficult situations. Although the trend lies with an arrangementwith the social security system and the adaptation to traditional concepts of disorder and illness and although thetemptation very much goes towards administrating conflictuous processes during a persons lifetime i.e. they arecalled "illnesses" and we are ensured against illnesses a PersonCentered Approach focuses on recognizingthe chance of a so called "disorder" as crisis. Thus, it is regarded as a decision. In the understanding of theuniqueness of the kairos which calls for a change oneself, the others, society as a whole it is creativity whichis provoked and demanded instead of classification. The same applies to research: New things are to be found outin a kind of research directed towards the unexpected instead of the confirmation of the expected. The task is torelearn the ability of letting oneself be taken by surprise: "One of its best hidden secrets is that the personcentered approach seems to function best where conventional methods (the application of the principles of clientcentered therapy included) have failed." (Wood 1994b, 6).

Towards a truly dialogic and social approach

Therefore the approach, no longer just psychotherapy, claiming to be an overallphilosophy of culture, is challenged to no less than increasingly understanding the conditio humana, the being human in general. (By the way, this needs todeal with ecological questions as well.)

Obviously a paradigm shift within the approach announces itself in all that. The PersonCentered Approach may wellface a turningpoint of its selfunderstanding. If the underlying image of man is taken seriously it becomes obvious thatthe approach needs further development to a truly dialogic and social approach (also in psychotherapy), a creative,flexible and kairologic approach which becomes also clear in the claim of the anthropology represented by Kierkegaardand Buber but even more so by Lvinas.

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 IThou

relationship 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, but the I will be a respond to a We.

Then the approach will consequently be seen as a social approach. Sociotherapy besides psychotherapy will be rankedhighly in the frame of an overall therapeutic point of view implying the communities man lives in. Thus the politicalsignificance becomes obvious.

Towards a basic consensus beyond schools

Developing the approach in this way a step could be taken towards a basic orientation4 without giving up independence,as Carl Rogers intended. What is aimed at is a basic consensus beyond schools which are obliged to a "way of beingwith", 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 selfas well as on models which exclusively concentrate on a simply systemicoriented approach. As soon as this step istruly taken not the schools are the issue any more, but the issue is to really understand and practice therapy and group


9/12

work as dialogue. Or expressed in a more provoking way: the PersonCentered Approach must intend and aim atmaking itself superfluous just as a good therapist has to do.

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

Thank you.

Endnotes

1 Partially translated by Josef Tihanyi and Lilly Schmid.2 In the whole paper always men and women are meant and addressed. For the simplicity in reading,however, not always both formulations are used.3 Such 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 unfoundedcasuistics and doesnt want to reduce ethics to the moral discussion of single cases, e.g. concerningabuse. Cf. Schmid 1996a, 521532.4 Cf. van Kalmthout 1997.

References

Binder, Ute / Binder Johannes (1981), Die klientenzentrierte Psychotherapie bei schweren psychischenStrungen, Frankfurt/M. (Fachbuchhandlung fr Psychologie)21981

Buber, Martin (1923), Ich und Du, in: Dialogisches Leben, Zrich 1923; quoted after the editionHeidelberg (Lambert Schneider)81974

Fietkau, HansJoachim (1988), Von Mglichkeiten, Notwendigkeiten und Erfordernissenpersonenorientierter Politikberatung am Beispiel der Umweltpolitik, in: GwG (ed.) Orientierung an derPerson. Bd. II: Jenseits von Psychotherapie, Cologne (GwG) 1988, 266272

Fietkau, HansJoachim / Kessel, H. (1981) (eds.), Umweltlernen, Knigstein/Taunus 1981Frenzel, 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.), ClientCenteredand Experiential Psychotherapy. A paradigm in motion, Frankfurt/M. (1996)

IAPCT 1996 (International Association for PersonCentered Therapy. An Association for the Scienceand 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: Husserl18591959. 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,


10/12

Freiburg (Alber) 1983,31992

Pfeiffer, Wolfgang (1992), Gesundheitsfrderung, Vorsorge und Begleitung im Rahmen derSozialarbeit, in: Straumann, Ursula (ed.), Beratung und Krisenintervention. Materialien zutheoretischem 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, (manuskript) 1940

(1957a), The necessary and sufficient conditions of therapeutic personality change, in: Journal ofConsulting Psychology 21,2(1957) 95103

(1959a) A theory of therapy, personality, and interpersonal relationships, as developed in the clientcentered framework, in: Koch, Sigmund (ed.), Psychology. A study of a science. Vol. III: Formulationsof 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; 2nd enlarged 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; 2nd enlarged and act. ed. 1995

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

Rogers/Schmid 1991,15164; 2nd enlarged and act. ed. 1995

(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 dieEntwicklungen der letzten Zeit, Talk, Vienna, Oct. 4, 1995

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

(1996b), Krperorientiert oder Personorientiert? Aspekte zur Inkompatibilitt krpertherapeutischerund systematischbender Verfahren mit dem personzentrierten Ansatz, in: apgkontakte 3 (1996) 541


11/12

(1996c), "Intimacy, tenderness and lust". A personcentered approach to sexuality, in:Hutterer/Pawlowsky/Schmid/Stipsits 1996, 8599

(1996d), "Probably the most potent social invention of the century". PersonCentered Therapy isfundamentally 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, in print: Brennpunkt 73 (1997)

(1997d) "Mit dem Krper die Seele heilen"? Der Personzentrierte Ansatz im Gesprch mit derKrperpsychotherapie, in: Korunka, Christian (ed.), Begegnungen. Psychotherapeutische Schulen imGesprch. 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, to be published in: Psychotherapie Forum 1997/98 (1997f), Begegnung von Person zu Person. Zum Beziehungsverstndnis in der PersonzentriertenPsychotherapie, to be published in: Psychotherapie Forum 1997/98

(1998a), On becoming a personcentred approach. A personcentred understanding of theperson, 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 Beitrge zu einer Theologie der Gruppe, Bd. III, Stuttgart (Kohlhammer) 1998Swildens, 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 undWrdigung zu ihrem 50jhrigen Bestehen, Vienna (WUV Universittsverlag) 1992, 5470

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

van Belle, Harry A. (1990), Rogers' later move toward mysticism: Implications for clientcenteredtherapy, in: Lietaer, Germain / Rombauts, Jan / van Balen, Richard (eds.), Clientcentered and

experiential psychotherapy in the nineties, Leuven (Leuven University Press) 1990, 4757van Kalmthout, Martin (1997), Personoriented psychotherapy. Toward integration of insightoriented,experiential, clientcentered, personcentered, interpersonal and existential therapies, paper given atthe 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: PersonCenteredJournal 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 PersonCentered Approach. Towards an understanding of its implications, in:Hutterer/Pawlowsky/Schmid/Stipsits 1996, 163181


12/12

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.

Authors identification

Peter F. Schmid, Univ.Doz. Prof. Mag. Dr.Founder of personcentered training in Austria 30 years ago, Universittsdozent at the University of Graz, Styria;Professor at the Hochschule St. Gabriel / Mdling; personcentred psychotherapist; psychotherapy trainer and staffmember of the "Academy for Counselling and Psychotherapy" of the "Institute for PersonCentred Studies" of the APGin Vienna, 10 books and numerous articles about further developments of the PersonCentered Approach.

Overview papers

Hauptseite English mainpage

pdfprint peter f. schmid, paper _a way of being with_ (c. rogers). prospects on further developments...

Documents