pfaffenberger a different conceptualizations of optimum development

7/27/2019 Pfaffenberger a Different Conceptualizations of Optimum Development

1/24

http://jhp.sagepub.com

PsychologyJournal of Humanistic

DOI: 10.1177/0022167806296858Aug 23, 2007;

2007; 47; 501 originally published onlineJournal of Humanistic PsychologyAngela Pfaffenberger

Different Conceptualizations of Optimum Development

http://jhp.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/47/4/501The online version of this article can be found at:

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

Association for Humanistic Psychology

can be found at:Journal of Humanistic PsychologyAdditional services and information for

http://jhp.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:

http://jhp.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:

http://jhp.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/47/4/501Citations

at PONTIFICA UNIV CATOLICA CHILE on April 13, 2009http://jhp.sagepub.comDownloaded from
http://www.ahpweb.org/http://jhp.sagepub.com/cgi/alertshttp://jhp.sagepub.com/cgi/alertshttp://jhp.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://jhp.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navhttp://jhp.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/47/4/501http://jhp.sagepub.com/http://jhp.sagepub.com/http://jhp.sagepub.com/http://jhp.sagepub.com/http://jhp.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/47/4/501http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://jhp.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://jhp.sagepub.com/cgi/alertshttp://www.ahpweb.org/


2/24

501

DIFFERENT CONCEPTUALIZATIONS OF

OPTIMUM DEVELOPMENT

ANGELA PFAFFENBERGER, PhD, is a theoretical

psychologist with an interest in critical theory,

personality development, and humanistic psychol-

ogy. She has previously published in this journal

about higher stages of development (JHP, 45 [3])

and about theoretical issues in therapy outcomeresearch (JHP, 46 [3]). The current article won the

Jourard Student Paper Award of Division 32 and

was presented at the Annual Convention of the

American Psychological Association. Angela teaches at the Oregon

College of Oriental Medicine, and she maintains a private practice that

integrates counseling and acupuncture for the treatment of emotional

issues in Salem, Oregon.

Summary

This article discusses different conceptualizations of optimum

development in adulthood.The existential perspective of Rollo May

is compared to the self-actualization theory of Abraham Maslow

and to transpersonal psychology. The paradigms and value

assumptions underlying the different theories of personality are

explicated, and social constructionism is used as an organizingframe of reference. The principal argument is that in addition to

repeating viewpoints in a philosophical debate about values, we

need to substantiate our claims with evidence from the existing

research and explore how well-designed empirical studies can help

us answer lingering questions of what is desirable and possible in

regard to optimal development. The author examines the existing

research literature in regard to how the disagreements of the

above-named schools of thought could be clarified. Suggestions for

future directions in humanistic research are presented.

Keywords: humanistic; existential; personality theory; self-

actualization; adult development

Journal of Humanistic Psychology, Vol. 47 No. 4, October 2007 501-523

DOI: 10.1177/0022167806296858

2007 Sage Publications

http://jhp.sagepub.com/http://jhp.sagepub.com/http://jhp.sagepub.com/http://jhp.sagepub.com/


3/24

502 Optimum Adulthood

The focus of this article is on theories of optimal adult development.

Theoretical orientations guide the conceptualization of research

projects and consequently exercise a far-reaching influence overhow a field evolves. Contemporary psychology is strongly influenced

by a hedonistic perspective (Slife, 2004); consequently psychological

health is usually defined as the achievement of happiness and theabsence of problems. This approach currently dominates contem-

porary personality research.

I am interested in alternate positions, those based on maturityand eudaemonic, meaning-centered definitions of psychological

health. Three approaches are chosen for closer examination: the

existential position of Rollo May (1983) and Kirk Schneider(2004), the self-actualization theory of Abraham Maslow (1971),

and transpersonal psychology (Wilber, 2000). They represent

competing truth claims within the field of humanistic psychology.This article is an attempt to explicate the values and similarities

among the three theories in regard to what constitutes health

and optimum development in adulthood.These divergent theories have been debated over several

decades. My principal argument is that instead of repeating view-points in a philosophical debate about values, we need to sub-stantiate truth claims with evidence based on existing research

and explore how well-designed empirical studies can help us

answer lingering questions of what is desirable and possible inregard to optimal development. To achieve this objective, I pre-

sent findings from relevant research projects and discuss how

future research could contribute to a more differentiated under-

standing. This may pave the way for well-conceived researchefforts that emphasize the contributions of humanistic psychol-

ogy to the fields of personality theory and lifespan development.

THE EXISTENTIAL POSITION OF ROLLO MAY

Since the 1958 publication ofExistence, Rollo May has been at

the forefront of existential psychology in America. The existentialperspective emphasizes understanding persons in their being-

ness. According to May (1983) the term existence means to

emerge, and denotes not a static concept of the person but aprocess of becoming. May actively rejects the position of tradi-

tional psychology, which is focused on dynamisms, such as drives

or overt behavior in an isolated manner.



4/24

Angela Pfaffenberger 503

The existential position understands individuals in a dialectic

manner and embraces paradox (May, 1958). We can understand

others and ourselves in both an objective and a subjective man-ner. The objective perspective of another person would be

explanatory; we intellectually grasp a problem with which the

other person is struggling. We treat ourselves as objects when weintellectualize about problems in our lives. The subjective per-

spective is a direct experience, being present with our emotions.

In regard to the other person, we can grasp their being andunderstand their subjective position through empathy. May

(1958) sees the simultaneous occurrence of subjective and objec-

tive awareness, the oscillation between the two, as the process ofconsciousness itself. Existentialism, in short, is the endeavor to

understand man by cutting below the cleavage between subject

and object which has bedeviled Western thought and sciencesince shortly after the Renaissance (May, 1983, p. 49).

Central to Mays (1981) conceptualization of psychological

health is the dialectic relationship between freedom and destiny.Destiny is associated with the objective experience of being. May

noted that the awareness of ones own death, actually the cre-ation of a word for death, allows us to see our own finitude, ourlimitations, and the objective aspect of our lives. Freedom is asso-

ciated more with the subjective aspect of experiencing, and also

with the ability to relate to both aspects of this dichotomy.Freedom is expressed through directing our attention, being able

to choose and act, and consequently through valuing. Freedom is

thus more than a value itself: it underlies the possibility of valu-

ing; it is basic to our capacity to value (May, 1981, p. 6).Our gifts and possibilities are real, but they exist only within

the contexts and constraints of our lives, because our capacities,our time, our energies are limited. The awareness of our limita-

tions, the threat of nonbeing, the ever-presentness of death itself

heightens the preciousness of our potential, and the need to makechoices and to act on them. Nonbeing is thus enhancing our

awareness. In this way freedom and destiny facilitate each other,

create each other.May (1958) argued that we can accept hostility, aggression,

and anxiety in our lives if we accept our limitations and the real-

ity of death itself. Instead of creating an allegiance to only oneside of lifethe positive, expansive sideand repressing all neg-

ativity, a fuller, more real and conscious life can be created if we

acknowledge both sides. According to May (1982) human nature



5/24


is daimonic; this means containing destructive and constructive

elements. We can consciously strive to integrate destructive

impulses, which results in the expression of creativity. If we denythe existence of aggressive elements in human nature, we run

the risk of facilitating their inappropriate expression, leading to

violence and evil on an individual and collective scale. The aware-ness and recognition of the dichotomy between constructive and

destructive elements allow for a greater actualization of our

potential, for the expression of who we truly are. Meaning in lifeis created through making conscious choices about how we con-

front our own finitude and express our potential. Not only do we

need to become conscious and make choices, but we also mustcommit to our values by acting on them.

In Mays (1950/1977) view of psychological dynamics, anxiety

has a pivotal place. Anxiety is tied to creativity, especially the cre-ative act. Psychological health is closely connected to being able

to tolerate the anxiety that arises with the creative act. Anxiety

is also associated with freedom and choosing, because any choiceinevitably denies many other possibilities and futures. Neurotic

anxiety is connected to an inability to decide, to feelings of pow-erlessness and alienation. Existential anxiety, however, arisesfrom our awareness of the dynamic tension between freedom and

destiny. The increasing willingness to embrace the paradox, to

tolerate the anxiety, to allow it to be present in our lives is forMay (1958) one of the most significant signs of psychological

growth and maturity. May distrusted easy answers; psychological

health for him was a complex process of struggle and integration.

In addition to May, several contemporary psychologists haveelaborated the existential position. In a recent contribution,

Schneider (2004) delineated how within the field of psychology,different schools of thought have emerged and aligned them-

selves with the extremist positions of complete freedom and

determinism. Biological psychology and the adjacent practice ofpsychopharmacology are associated with determinism, whereas

the New Age approaches of limitless self-fulfillment are associ-

ated with unlimited freedom. Schneider suggested that the fieldof psychology would become more capable of assisting clients if it

could adopt an understanding of the person as being suspended

in a dynamic tension of realizing dread, veneration, and wonder,termed awe (p. xv). Schneider called for a reorientation in the

field of psychology, a reorientation that accepts values and pur-

poses based on the existential orientation.



6/24


Clinical commentaries have delineated how the rather philo-

sophical, abstract ideas of existentialism can be brought to bear

fruitfully on the practice of psychology. Schneider, in collabora-tion with May, presented a detailed discussion of therapeutic

approaches and techniques (Schneider & May, 1995). Bugental

(1976) offered case histories and gave exquisitely detailedaccounts about how existential concerns of being present with the

whole person can be expressed in the clinical encounter. Yalom

(1980) discussed how four existential dichotomies are significantin our lives: freedom versus destiny, meaning versus meaning-

lessness, isolation versus connectedness, and death versus exis-

tence. According to Yalom, we must accept and consistently relateto each one of these dichotomies to have excellent health in adult-

hood. Greening (2004) illustrated how these principles can be

brought into therapeutic practice and help us understand thestruggles of persons in psychotherapy.

THE HUMANISTIC PERSONALITY THEORIES OF

ABRAHAM MASLOW AND CARL ROGERS

Maslow (1954/1970) suggested that psychological health is

more than being well adjusted and free from psychopathology.

Individuals strive to satisfy their needs for survival, safety,belongingness, and esteem. These needs are arranged in a hier-

archical order and decrease in immediacy when persons come to

expect that their needs are reliably gratified. A failure to experi-

ence need satisfaction fixes attention at the respective level andleads, according to Maslow, to psychopathology.

Once the lower needs are satisfied, higher needs for self-actualization may emerge. Maslow (1971) termed these the

metaneeds orBeing-needs. They include strivings to be creative,

to grow, to acquire knowledge, and to develop ones abilities.Maslow noted that metaneeds function in a qualitatively differ-

ent manner from the lower needs. Instead of striving for gratifi-

cation and relief from disequilibria, Being-needs are ends inthemselves. People come to enjoy the process and the intrinsic

rewards of seeking knowledge and growth. These so-called meta-motivations offer a sense of meaning and purpose in life. Masloworiginally assumed that Being-needs and the associated metamo-

tivations would emerge spontaneously once the lower needs have

been met. After many years of observation and qualitative



7/24


research he came to conclude that the gratification of the lower

needs is a necessary but insufficient condition for further growth.

To progress, people need to consciously embrace the so-calledBeing-values, such as justice and truth, and become motivated to

actively seek growth and knowledge. According to Maslow (1968),

self-actualization often requires that a person leave familiar cir-cumstances behind and explore new possibilities in life. This

requires courage, commitment, and an ability to take risks. Maslow

noted individual differences in regard to peoples strength, will, anddetermination. Self-actualizers are creative and spontaneous, and

they have a continued freshness of appreciation. Maslow observed

that self-actualizers have deeper, healthier interpersonal relation-ships than other adults.They respect the autonomy and individual-

ity of others and express genuine empathy. Self-actualizers have

peak experiences, moments of awe, of being profoundly at one withthe universe. Maslow devoted a significant amount of attention to

this phenomenon and became interested in exploring the transper-

sonal dimensions of development later in his life. This projectremained incomplete because of his premature death in 1970.

The personality theories of Carl Rogers and Abraham Masloware often discussed together (see DeCarvalho, 1992, for anexample), which may have resulted from the fact that they are

seen together as the founders of humanistic psychology. Their ter-

minologies also bear similarities. This overlooks the two theoristsimportant differences in regard to optimal development. Rogers

(1951) shared Maslows optimism about positive potential for

development, but his emphasis was different. Rogers felt that

people could increasingly learn to attune to what is internally,organismically, right for them. Given empathy and support, they

could learn to not restrict their sensing of their needs and emotionsbecause of preconceived notions of how they should be. Rogers dis-

cussed actualizing tendencies to describe this growing awareness of

what is personally right for oneself. He conceptualized a growingindividual as becoming increasingly aware of a process of ongoing

internal change, coupled with an acceptance of oneself and oth-

ers. He termed this openness to experienceexistential living, andreferred to people who have achieved this ability as persons of

tomorrow. Rogers emphasized that individuals will inevitably

experience positive development if they are exposed to supportiveenvironmental conditions.

An important difference between the two theories is that Rogers

stayed closer to a concept of excellent psychological health. Maslow



8/24


moved beyond that; he saw self-actualization as a distinct stage of

advanced psychological development. His theory has been shown to

be a good fit with the ideas of the post-Piagetian stage theorists.The post-Piagetians promulgate the idea that personality devel-

opment progresses in a similar manner as cognitive development.

Higher cognitive stages contain the abilities of lower stages, but addsomething that is qualitatively different. In her theory ofego devel-

opment, Jane Loevinger (1976) has delineated how people progress

in distinct stages from self-interest to social conformity, and then togreater complexity and personal autonomy. She cogently argued that

her highest stages, Autonomous and Integrated, are analogous to

self-actualization. Empirical research has shown support for thishypothesis (Cook-Greuter, 1999; Helson, Mitchell, & Hart, 1985).

Loevingers (1976) semiprojective instrument, the Washington

University Sentence Completion Test (SCT), allows for the assess-ment of advanced development. It translates qualitative data into

quantitative stage designations. Based on the completion of rudi-

mentary sentence stems, a person is assigned a developmental stageon a scale from two to nine. The test has facilitated research in the

area of advanced personality development and offered a richness ofnew data about optimal development in adulthood (see Alexander,Heaton, & Chandler, 1994; Cook-Greuter, 1999; M. E. Miller,

1994). Empirical research offers support for the notion that at

higher stages of ego development people tend to display thecharacteristics Maslow described, such as creativity, cognitive

flexibility, tolerance of ambiguity, and increased concerns with

self-expression and authenticity (M. E. Miller & Cook-Greuter,

1994). As Maslow noted, self-actualization is indeed rare; fewpeople in our culture progress to this stage of development.

A COMPARISON BETWEEN EXISTENTIAL

PSYCHOLOGY AND THE HUMANISTIC THEORIES1

The personality theories of Maslow and May share similari-

ties, but they also have significant differences. Maslow (1968)explicitly acknowledged the contributions of existentialism to

humanistic psychology, namely the emphases on the living

person, on the evolving potential of the person, and on the phe-nomenological approach to understanding individuals.

Commonalities between the two theories include that May (1958)

and Maslow (1954/1970) consider maturity as being associated with



9/24


greater complexity and the ability to tolerate paradox. Both theorists

discussed creativity and the commitment to goals as aspects of

maturity. Growth is not necessarily seen as being easy; individualsmay have to leave comfortable, familiar circumstances behind to

embrace a new reality and express their potential. Maslow and May

agreed that maturity involves having core values, an inner senseof knowing of what is right for oneself. How this inner knowing

evolves and the appreciation of the process of development are

usually more important to the mature personality than reachinga specific goal (Maslow 1954/1970; May, 1980). In this way both

theorists emphasized the dynamic aspects of maturity; it is a

process of becoming, of consistently expressing values. The theo-ries also have significant differences, in regard to (1) human

nature and (2) what stimulates growth.

Human nature. Maslow (1968), Rogers (1982), and May (1982)

agreed that we need to bring awareness to the social environ-

ment, because social factors lead to the expression of humantraits, either for better or for worse. Maslow (1954/1970) empha-

sized that everybody has the potential for self-actualization; thushe was strongly focused on aspects of positive potential in humandevelopment. Rogers (1982) emphatically stated that in his opin-

ion, all humans will display compassion and cooperation if they

are provided with the appropriate environmental supports. Thiswas evidence for him that human nature is good and needs to be

nurtured properly. May (1982), on the other hand, was concerned

with the existence of negative and positive forces within the indi-

vidual, and emphasized that the acknowledgement of both ten-dencies allows for the integration and embracing of dichotomies,

which leads to creativity and positive, constructive choices(Greening, 1984). Destructive tendencies need to be acknowl-

edged because the negative potential can become expressed as

violence and aggression. In sum, the main difference between theexistential position and the humanistic position concerns human

nature. Is human nature to be seen as all positive, thriving

toward ever better development, or does human nature containdestructive, evil tendencies that need to be acknowledged and

worked with? To examine the merit of the respective positions, I

will examine the nature of the arguments and the availableresearch-based literature.

Mays (1982) argument is premised on the observation that the

environment is made up of individuals, and that the existence of



10/24


violence and war proves that evil exists in humans. This view

ignores the perspective of systems theory that living systems are

not the additive sum of their individual components but a dynamicexpression of forces that results from complex interactions of the

parts (Goldberg & Goldberg, 2000). Maslow (1971) noted that

that our culture is low in regard to synergy, meaning that theinterests of the individual and of society as a whole are not well

aligned. He pointed to the studies of anthropologists that show

that low synergy is often associated with societal unrest and,especially, war. This means that negativity and aggression may

not be because of evil tendencies within individuals; they may be

structural aspects of societal organization. Maslow never deniedthat people may behave self-centeredly, given bad circumstances,

but that does not negate the fact that they can and will make con-

structive choices under better circumstances. May and Maslowthus differed in regard to where their attentions rested. May saw

a half-empty glass, emphasizing that evil will be expressed if the

circumstances allow for it. Rogers and Maslow saw a half-fullglass and stressed that constructive, life-affirming choices will be

made under the right circumstances.In a review of the available literature on aggression and antiso-

cial behavior, Green (1998) noted that rivaling theories of whether

aggression is because of social context or dispositional factors have

brought about inconsistent research results. Current research sup-ports the conclusion that biological processes influence aggressive

behavior by interacting with conditions in the social environment.

Green pointed out that contemporary researchers have moved away

from a nature-versus-nurture debate. The research emphasis is onthe situatedness of the aggressive behavior: What processes are

initiated by exposure to an aversive interpersonal situation suchthat aggression against the other person is the outcome? (Green,

1998, p. 318).

Growth stimulators. The second major difference between the the-

orists concerns what factors they consider as stimulating growth.

May saw the acknowledgement of freedom and of limitations, ofnonbeing, as the main aspect that prompts development to higher

levels of personal maturity, which is expressed as the embracing of

a paradox. Maslow (1954/1970) did not emphasize this point.Maslows focus is on the satisfaction of the lower needs as the pre-

requisite of further development, as well as on the individuals



11/24


determination and aspiration. Rogers (1982) emphasis is on

growth-enhancing relationships that facilitate inner awareness

and congruence. Maslow (1968), nevertheless, explicitly acknowl-edged that difficult circumstances can be growth enhancing. In

this way, the differences between Rogers, Maslow, and May may

be because of their differing emphases rather than beingdifferences in principle.

Two interesting research projects have inquired into the

nature of existential concerns, psychological health, and person-ality development. Debats (1999) combined quantitative and

qualitative methods in a research project that inquired into

sources of meaning in the lives of young adults. She found thatthe participants were primarily oriented toward fulfilling their

relational needs in addition to being concerned with issues of

livelihood and professional identity. Other-directed service waslargely absent from their concerns. Debats speculates that this

confirms the theories of Maslow and Erik Erikson, (1978) which

state that generative concerns emerge in midlife, after moreimmediate, need-based issues have been addressed. Debats also

found that lack of meaning interacts with psychopathology, leav-ing the question about the directionality of this effect unan-swered. Based on her research findings, she cogently argued that

the perception of purposes and goals does not impart vitality and

meaning, but that the level of commitment and active engage-ment with the perceived goals are the crucial factors. This study

can be seen as confirming both Maslows and Mays theories of

psychological maturation. In addition to illustrating the impor-

tance of need satisfaction, which is a cornerstone of Maslowstheory of self-actualization, it confirms Mays assumption that

commitment, as the result of an active valuing process, impartsmeaning and interacts with psychological health.

In a different research study, King (2001) investigated the

influence of challenging and limiting life events on personalitydevelopment as measured by Loevingers (1976) SCT. She found

that the occurrence of difficulty in itself is not associated with

growth. The author enrolled research participants who had livedthrough significant difficulties in life, such as having a child with

Downs syndrome, and women who experienced divorce after 20

years of marriage. She coded stories that the participants told ofdifficult events. She particularly noted signs of assimilation and

accommodation, terms from Piagets (1977) theory about how

cognitive stage change happens. According to Block (1982), who



12/24


adjusted this aspect of Piagets theory to personality develop-

ment, assimilation means fitting an event into an existing struc-

ture. If assimilation fails, because of the severity of the event orthe constraints of the existing structures, the individual will use

accommodation, which is a reworking of the internal frame of

reference.As expected, King (2001) found that assimilation was not asso-

ciated with gains in personality growth, as measured by the SCT.

Accommodation and gains in maturity resulted when individualsnot only experienced events as difficult, but also saw them as

challenging to their worldview. The author suggested that this

active engagement with difficulties resulted in the emergence ofnew personality structures that lead to higher ego stages. King

proposed that people are motivated by a desire to experience pos-

itive states of well-being, which prompts them to cognitivelyrestructure a negative event into one that creates meaning in

their lives and contributes to their growth. This research allows

for the conclusion that cognitive abilities and personality struc-tures interact with life circumstances, and that the nature of this

interaction is relevant to whether growth occurs.This project lends strong support to Mays (1958) theory of

existential therapy, which is intended to teach clients to con-

structively work with their limitations and to create freedom so

that they can choose values, meanings, and commitments.

TRANSPERSONAL PSYCHOLOGY

Transpersonal psychology is concerned with the entire range

of human functioning, especially processes related to spiritualpractices, altered states of consciousness, and peak experiences.

Ken Wilber (2000) has emerged as the most prominent theorist in

the field.He proposed a model of advanced development that includes

transpersonal stages and defines what constitutes transpersonal

development (Wilber, 1986). This model, like Loevingers (1976)theory of ego development, is based on a Piagetian model of

invariant, qualitative stages that are arranged hierarchically.

According to Wilbers theory, all development falls into three con-secutive tiers: the prepersonal, the personal, and the transper-

sonal; each of those contains three stages. His final stage in the

personal realm is called Vision-logic, and he likens it to Maslows



13/24


self-actualization, to existential awareness, and to Loevingers

Autonomous and Integrated stages. Wilber emphasized advanced

cognitive abilities here, such as dialectic thinking and postformalthought. This stage is followed by the first of his transpersonal

stages, called Psychic. Individuals become conscious of how the

mind works. They start to take an interest in how their percep-tions of the self and the world are influenced by cognitive pat-

terns and by the incessant stream of thoughts.

The shift in consciousness that takes place at the Psychic stageis comparable in nature to the qualitative change that, according

to Loevinger (1976), occurred at earlier levels of ego development.

Individuals at the Psychic stage start to notice that they havean ego, just as they understood earlier that they have a social

role. Stage progression occurs when individuals can go beyond

the constraining sense of being a social role or an ego. They needto become able to shift their attention from being inside the social

role or the ego to a perspective that is larger and more panoramic.

The shift in consciousness that is necessary to see the ego is sig-nificantly harder to accomplish than earlier ones, because there

are few cultural supports available; and individuals are oftenwithout assistance, because this level of development is so rare.

Further stages of development are usually only achievable

through meditation, and most of the descriptions we have avail-

able rely on Eastern sources such as Buddhist and Hindu scrip-tures. Wilber (1986) calls the next stageSubtle and associates it

with meditative stabilization, experiences of bliss and samadhi,

and an experiential understanding of the collective archetypes.

The following stage is termed Causal and is associated with theexperience of effortlessness in meditative absorption, of enlight-

enment and detachment. Wilbers final stage, Unitive, constitutesmoving beyond all experiences of dichotomy, of being inseparable

from cosmic consciousness.

The important contribution of transpersonal psychology to the-ories of optimal functioning in adulthood lies in the conceptual-

ization of development beyond the ego structures that Western

psychology ordinarily assumes to be the personality. In this wayit is a new paradigm; it has expanded our awareness of how per-

sonality can be understood and defined. Social constructionism

(Gergen, 1985) arrives at a similar conclusion coming from a differ-ent direction. According to this school of thought, whatever we con-

sider the person in Western psychology is but a cultural construct

rather than an observation of actual processes. This viewpoint has



14/24


been further elaborated by Cushman (1990, 1991), who argued

that our construction of childhood development is nothing but a

value-laden cultural interpretation of what occurs in early child-hood, rather than being an objective observation of events.

MASLOWS THEORY OF SELF-ACTUALIZATION AND


Maslows (1954/1970) and Wilbers (1986) models of develop-

ment share many similarities; both accept stage theory as an

underlying frame of reference. This agreement has increased theacceptance of those models within humanistic psychology, but

several aspects of the theories are not sufficiently supported by

existing research and should therefore be considered preliminary.First, both theorists propose that ordinary mental health is a

prerequisite for higher development (Maslow, 1954/1970; Wilber,

1986). Empirically, however, we know very little about what moti-vates people to explore transpersonal interests. Engler (1986)

presented convincing arguments that the motivation to explorethe transpersonal realm is not necessarily based on psychologicalhealth and maturity. Based on his clinical observations, he noted

that people with narcissistic or borderline conformations are

frequently drawn to transpersonal practices out of a desire tofeel special and to overcome their inner sense of emptiness.

Nevertheless, they may experience genuine transpersonal states

of consciousness. As Cortright (1997) pointed out, the transper-

sonal literature is full of accounts that transpersonal interestscan emerge at any developmental stage, often unexpectedly for

the individual. Many such individuals do not show signs of excep-tional psychological health. They may be struggling with sub-

stance abuse or have prejudiced, sexist attitudes that bespeak

cultural embeddedness, which, according to Maslow, is tran-scended in self-actualization.

Second, the stage model accepts an implicit assumption of a uni-

directional movement up a developmental ladder. Helson et al.(1985) noted that a significant number of the women who attained

advanced stages of ego development, such as self-actualization,

showed a consistent interest in spiritual practice, and that thesewomen considered this an important aspect of their adult lives.The

women may have attained the advanced stage of ego development

exactly because of their spiritual practice, instead of engaging in



15/24


spiritual practice because of their advanced ego stage, which would

be Wilbers (1989) line of argumentation.Alexander, Rainforth, and

Gelderloos (1991) research showed that meditation promotes egodevelopment, as defined by Loevinger (1976), regardless of the

initial ego stage. This suggests that transpersonal experience

may lead to a restructuring within the domain of personality.Consequently, self-actualization does not seem to be a require-

ment for benefiting from transpersonal practices. Instead per-

sonal maturity and transpersonal experiences seem to have abidirectional relationship.

Wilbers (2000) conceptualization of growth relies to a significant

degree on cognitive structures. He sees evolving cognitive struc-tures, such as increased complexity and systems thinking, as the

leading edge of development, a position previously advanced by

Kohlberg (1969). However, Skoe and von der Lippe (2002) cogentlyargue that cognitive complexity and socio-emotional development,

as reflected in ego stage, are separate strands of development.

Wilbers (1986) argument that they form a continuous line of devel-opment certainly makes for a plausible-sounding theory, but it is

not supported by cross-cultural observations or contemporaryresearch. Nothing in the research-based literature suggests thatindividuals need postformal cognitive development and dialectical

reasoning to progress in their transpersonal development. Medita-

tion appears to be a method of gaining understanding and insightthat is not mediated through ordinary cognitive structures. The

Eastern literature leaves no doubt that many people of high spiri-

tual attainment, such as the historical Buddha, were illiterate

(Kanai, 1995). It is an imposition of Western cultural values toassume that only those who are well educated can have access to

spiritual development. Transpersonal psychology appears to be acultural narrative with its own values and assumptions about what

a person is and what is desirable and possible in development.

Wilbers attempt to cross the paradigmatic boundaries of Westernpsychology and Eastern mysticism has not been entirely successful.

In sum, we can say that the relationships among advanced

psychological development, as conceptualized by Maslow (1971)and Loevinger (1976), the underlying cognitive structures, and

transpersonal development are more complex and dynamic than

has so far been explicated in psychological research. This forms anexiting area of research for future study. The research questions

that readily emerge from the above discussion are as follows: (1) Do

individuals need mental health to progress to higher stages of



16/24


development? (2) Do people need to achieve self-actualization before

they can progress to transpersonal stages of development? (3) What

is the relationship between cognitive complexity and developmentin the realm of personal and spiritual development? The most

promising approach to this exploration would certainly be a lon-

gitudinal project that follows individuals developmental pathsover several decades. We could assess cognitive development,

personality as measured by ego stage, and spiritual maturity

longitudinally and compare how the different developmentstrands interact. In light of the fact that such projects are hard

to carry out, it would be interesting to explore if an available

archival data set, like the one Block (1993) assembled over a 30-year time frame, offers information that could be analyzed from

this perspective.

EXISTENTIAL PSYCHOLOGY AND


The existential and transpersonal psychologies are separatetheories that differ in important aspects, most prominently aboutend stages of development. Transpersonal psychology posits that

the ego should be seen as a form, an idea, that the individual

identifies with, and the end stage of development in this para-digm is conceptualized as a complete resolution of the individual

self-sense within either the godhead or the void (Walsh, 2000). As

a means of achieving this stage, transpersonal developmentalists

advocate the use of methods such as meditation that impartinsights that are usually not achievable with any other means.

Existential psychology is more closely focused on optimum devel-opment within what is conventionally defined as the personality.

The highest stage of development is seen as the maturity to rec-

ognize the dynamic tension that exists between freedom and des-tiny, to make conscious choices in the face of finitude, what

Schneider (2004) calls the fluid center of life (p. 11). Existential

psychologists acknowledge the benefits of peak experiences, suchas awe and the I-thou encounter, but they do not see these as a

means of moving beyond a bounded self in a progressive manner.

Existential and transpersonal psychologists have had an intense,multifaceted relationship that has spanned many decades. In his

1958 publicationExistence (p. 18), May specifically noted the simi-

larities between existentialism and Eastern thought, such as the



17/24


shared emphasis on ontology and beingness, as well as the attempt

to overcome the duality of subject and object.According to May, exis-

tentialists and oriental philosophers view the subjugation of natureas the reason that humans have become estranged from them-

selves. He argued that the interest in Eastern mysticism arises

for the same reason that the existential psychology movementhas emerged, namely the conflicting, dichotomous relationship of

humans and nature, and the consequent loss of meaning.

Once the transpersonal psychology movement came into itsown in the 1970s and 80s, such rapprochement and sharing of

ideas were quickly lost in what became an antagonistic, acrimo-

nious dialogue. May and his colleague Schneider took front seatsopposite Wilber. May (1989) started with a full-blown assault on

Wilber, whom many transpersonal and humanistic psychologists

considered to be the leading thinker in the field (Fischer, 1997;Vaughan & Walsh, 1994). May challenged the absolutist truth

claims of the transpersonalists, the decadence of the emerging

spiritual groups, and the Pollyannaish attitudes in regard to howwe can all achieve perfection through transpersonal practices. In

Mays view, transpersonal psychology is a nave allegiance to theexpansive side of human nature and a denial of the daimonic,dichotomous aspects of existence. He expressed adamantly that

this denial would eventually exert a price in terms of our cultural

development, because the dark side of human nature cannot bedenied or repressed; it needs to be acknowledged and integrated.

May was concerned with the overemphasis within the field of

psychology on that which is individual experience at the expense

of considerations of how communal change can be affected.Schneider (1987, 1989) criticized Wilbers (1986) model of per-

sonality and development on the grounds that a complete tran-scendence of the self is neither possible nor desirable, and that

such transcendence may hide an inability to confront existential

issues of finitude. He also argued that there is no ultimate truththat is uncovered by higher development as Wilber postulated. In

his rebuttal Wilber (1989a, 1989b) argued that transpersonal

psychology has its own epistemology and ways of knowing. Hedefended his model of a qualitative value hierarchy and reiter-

ated his view that transpersonal realization is a higher, more

advanced stage of development. Wilbers response was highlytechnical, overly detailed, and hard to follow. He showed a thinly

veiled sarcasm toward existentialism, portraying it as an inferior

form of thought that cannot go beyond its own limitations. Other



18/24


theorists (Koltko, 1989; Vaughan & Walsh, 1994) jumped into the

debate to say, yes, Wilber is arrogant and confusing, but never-

theless right. In a more recent exchange between Walsh (2001)and Schneider (2001), the former carefully delineates the com-

monalities between existential and transpersonal psychologists,

such as the rejection of superficiality and conformity, and anemphasis on living an examined life. Both authors acknowledged

that the existential and transpersonal psychologies are rather

separate fields of study at this time. Theorists and practitionerswithin one of the fields are usually not well educated in the other

discipline, which has led to mutual misunderstandings and an

inability to properly appreciate the other perspective from withinits own context.

It might be possible to clarify the divergent perspectives of exis-

tential versus transpersonal psychology through empirical research.Principal issues concern developmental goals and the validity of

stage theory. Transpersonalists tend to treat the qualitative stage

hierarchy as real and objective, similar to grades in a school (Wilber,2000). They argue that tenth grade is inevitably more sophisticated

than second grade; therefore progression in an objective manner istaking place. This ascertainment is true, but it is made true by asocietal context that creates specific learning objectives and

designs a curriculum to achieve those goals.Without agreement on

the goals, the stages or grades, the school itself would have nomeaning. Consequently, we can see that stage theory is a means of

organizing information after we have defined what is to be valued

in development. At this time, transpersonal and existential psy-

chologists have no such agreement about values and, without it,neither researchable questions nor methods can be arrived at.

Consequently, the principal disagreements between the two groupsabout endpoints in development cannot be explored through sys-

tematic inquiry, although both groups do carry out projects within

their own frames of reference that they see as confirmatory (seeWalsh, 2001, for an example).

Social constructionism (Gergen, 1985) can serve as a useful

framework, or metanarrative, that allows us to see the subjectivityof values and perspectives that exist within different reality con-

structions. Constructionism has its own implicit values, such as the

value of respecting subjectivity and the context-dependent natureof all viewpoints. The existential and transpersonal psychologies

are thus seen as narratives that rely on differing views of what is

to be valued in human development. Interestingly enough, Wilber



19/24


(2000) and Schneider (2004) share a certain disdain for construc-

tionism. They base their views on the argument that construc-

tionism is devoid of values and presents a form of relativism.Wilber tends to rely on reasoning advanced by the German

philosopher and critical theorist Jrgen Habermas (1988), who

suggested that values are intrinsic to human nature and what isgood can be explicated through dialogue. This position is a rejec-

tion of constructionism in its entirety. Wilber insisted that absolute

truth and an absolute, knowable reality exist. Schneider agreedthat values are desirable and should guide psychological theory,

but he did not agree with Wilber about what those values are and

how they are arrived at. Neither author has contributed to adebate of how they ground the values that they are advancing and

that ultimately represent the foundation of the paradigms.

In short, both theories affirm certain values but they do notwant to acknowledge the subjectivity of values as it is taught

in social constructionism (Gergen, 1985). Constructionism sees

truth as a social product negotiated between people; differentgroups of people socially construct different truths. Consequently,

instead of placing emphasis on using empirical research to clar-ify which is right, we could investigate how different values andbeliefs lead to differential experiences in the lived experience of

people. Possible research projects might delineate how an exis-

tential versus a transpersonal focus in the lives of individualsleads to outcomes that may have differential rewards in the life

course. We could enroll some research participants who were cho-

sen by existential psychologists and others who were chosen by

transpersonalists as embodying desirable aspects of developmentwithin their respective schools of thought. Researchers from both

traditions would be involved in the design, which would emphasizea qualitative, interpretive approach.We could collect a life narrative

from every participant (Josselson, Lieblich, & McAdams, 2003).

Researchers from both orientations could code the stories and offerinterpretations. This would probably be best designed as an open-

ended kind of inquiry where the outcome, that is, the reporting of

the findings, might be less significant than the process of researchand the enrichment of the mutual dialogue.

CONCLUSION

Optimum development in adulthood can be seen from many

different perspectives. What is considered desirable depends on



20/24


the viewpoint taken. The three approaches discussed above share

an emphasis on the individuals intrapsychic development. They

were chosen because they are comparable based on this similar-ity, not because other approaches of personality development are

deemed less worthy of our attention. Alternative positions may

emphasize the persons social or relational capacities. An exampleof the former would be McAdams and de St. Austins (1999) elabora-

tion of Eriksons (1978) theory of generativity, which is focused on

how well adults can accept their responsibilities of caring for othersand society as a whole. Examples of the latter would be the rela-

tional, feminist psychologies (J. B. Miller, 1986; Spencer, 2000) that

stress the individuals ability to connect, empathize, and grow in arelationship. For optimum adulthood, a person needs to grow in

many different areas. The interrelatedness of the different streams

of development remains a field in need of further elaboration.Empirical research remains sparse within the three areas dis-

cussed in the main part of this article. This appears to be due to the

marginalized position of humanistic psychology as a whole, thelack of research funding, and the fact that few graduate schools

offer support for relevant research projects. The most significantamount of research has accumulated in regard to self-actualizationtheory because Loevingers (1976) development of the SCT has

allowed for the operationalization and assessment of higher stages

of development. Most of those projects were carried out byresearchers who have no allegiance to humanistic personality

theory. The projects usually emphasized a variable-centered as

opposed to a person-centered view within a quantitative research

design. Consequently important aspects have been neglected,such as the fact that Loevingers test is a method that does not

grasp the whole person; instead it relies on the interpretation of ver-bal material. Labouvie-Vief and Diehl (1998) and Schultz and

Selman (1998) have convincingly argued that the SCT is predomi-

nantly an assessment of cognitive complexity and that importantdimensions of personality are not sufficiently described through

this method. If we want to respect the humanistic worldviews of the

above-presented theories, it would advisable to flesh out the quan-titative data with qualitative methods, such as life stories

(McAdams, 1993, 1996) or interview materials (Hewlett, 2004), to

gain a better understanding of advanced development. Humanisticresearchers of optimal development will need to rely on their cre-

ativity and the courage to try new ways of exploration if they want

to advance the field.



21/24


NOTE

1. I do not intend to imply that existential personality theory is nothumanistic.

REFERENCES

Alexander, C. N., Heaton, D. P., & Chandler, H. M. (1994). Advancedhuman development in the vedic psychology of Maharishi Mahesh

Yogi: Theory and research. In M. E. Miller & S. Cook-Greuter (Eds.),

Transcendence and mature thought in adulthood (pp. 3970).Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Alexander, C. N., Rainforth, M. V., & Gelderloos, P. (1991).

Transcendental meditation, self-actualization, and psychologicalhealth: A conceptual overview and statistical meta-analysis.Journalof Social Behavior and Personality, 6(5), 189247.

Block, J. (1982). Assimilation, accommodation, and the dynamics of per-sonality development. Child Development, 53, 281295.

Block, J. (1993). Studying personality the long way. In D. C. Funder, R. D.Parke, C. Tomlinson-Keasey, & K. Widaman (Eds.), Studying lives

through time. (pp. 944). Washington, DC: American PsychologicalAssociation.Bugental, J. (1976). The search for existential identity. San Francisco:

Jossey-Bass.Cook-Greuter, S. (1999). Postautonomous ego development: A study of its

nature and measurement. Dissertation Abstracts International,60/06B. (UMI No. AAT 9933122). Retrieved November 8, 2003, fromProquest/UMI database.

Cortright, B. (1997). Psychotherapy and spirit: Theory and practice intranspersonal psychotherapy. Albany, NY: State University of New

York Press.Cushman, P. (1990). Why the self is empty: Towards a historically situ-ated psychology.American Psychologist, 45, 599611.

Cushman, P. (1991). Ideology obscured: Political uses of Daniel Sternsinfant.American Psychologist, 46, 206219.

Debats, D. L. (1999). Sources of meaning: An investigation of significantcommitments in life.Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 39(4), 3057.

DeCarvalho, R. J. (1992). The humanistic ethics of Rollo May.Journal ofHumanistic Psychology, 32(1), 718.

Engler, J. (1986). Therapeutic aims in psychotherapy and meditation. In

K. Wilber, J. Engler, & D. P. Brown, (Eds.), Transformations of con-sciousness (pp. 1753). Boston: Shambhala.

Erikson, E. H. (1978).Adulthood. New York: Norton.Fisher, R. M. (1997). A guide to Wilberland: Some common misunder-

standings of the critics of Ken Wilber and his work on transpersonaltheory prior to 1995.Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 37(4), 3073.

Gergen, K. (1985). The social constructionist movement in modern psy-chology. American Psychologist, 40, 266274.



22/24


Goldberg, I., & Goldberg, H. (2000). Family therapy. In R. J. Corsini &D. Wedding (Eds.), Current psychotherapies (6th ed.) (pp. 375406).Itasca, IL: F. E. Peacock.

Green, R. G. (1998). Aggression and antisocial behavior. In D. T. Gilbert,S. T. Fiske and G. Lindzey (Eds.),Handbook of social psychology (4thed) (pp. 317356). New York: Oxford University Press.

Greening, T. (Ed.) (1984).American politics and humanistic psychology.Dallas, TX: Saybrook Press.

Greening, T. (2004).Four existential challenges and three answers to each.retrieved January 1, 2005, from https://athena.saybrook.edu/resources/assets/January2005RC/ HTP/HTP_challenges_greening.doc

Habermas, J. (1988). On the logic of the social sciences. Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.

Helson, R., Mitchell, V., & Hart, B. (1985). Lives of women who becameautonomous.Journal of Personality, 53(2), 258285.

Hewlett, D. C. (2004). A qualitative study of postautonomous ego devel-opment: The bridge between postconventional and transcendent waysof being.Dissertation Abstracts International, 65/02B. (UMI No. AAT3120900). Retrieved May 5, 2004, from Proquest/UMI database.

Josselson, R., Lieblich, A, & McAdams, D. P. (Eds.). (2003). Up close andpersonal: The teaching and learning of narrative research.Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Kanai L. H. (1995). The rise and decline of Buddhism in India. NewDelhi: Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers.

King, L. (2001). The hard road to the good life: The happy, mature person.Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 41(1), 5172.

Kohlberg, L. (1969). Stage and sequence: The cognitive developmentalapproach to socialization. In D. A. Goslin (Ed.),Handbook of social-ization theory and research (pp. 348480). Chicago: Rand McNally.

Koltko, M. E. (1989). The humanized no-self: A response to Schneiderscritique of transpersonal psychology. Journal of Humanistic

Psychology, 29(4), 482492.Labouvie-Vief, G., & Diehl (1998). The role of ego development in the

adult self. In P. M. Westenberg, A. Blasi, & L. D. Lawrence (Eds.),Personality development. Theoretical, empirical, and clinical investi-gations of Loevingers conception of ego development (pp. 219236).Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Loevinger, J. (1976).Ego development. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Maslow, A. H. (1968). Towards a psychology of being. New York: Van

Nostrand Reinhold.Maslow, A. H. (1970). Motivation and personality (2nd ed.). New York:

Harper & Row. (Original work published 1954)

Maslow, A. H. (1971). The farther reaches of human nature. New York:Viking.May, R. (1958). Contributions to existential psychotherapy. In R. May,

E. Angela, & H. Ellenberger (Eds.),Existence: A new dimension in psy-chology and psychiatry (pp. 3791). New York: Basic Books.

May, R. (1977). The meaning of anxiety (2nd ed.). New York: Norton.(Original work published 1950)



23/24


May, R. (1980). Value conflicts and anxiety. In I. L. Kutash & L. B.Schlesinger (Eds.),Handbook on stress and environment (pp. 241248).San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

May, R. (1981).Freedom and destiny. New York: Norton.May, R. (1982). The problem of evil: An open letter to Carl Rogers.

Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 22(3), 1021.May, R. (1983). The discovery of being. New York: Norton.May, R. (1989). Answers to Ken Wilber and John Rowan. Journal of

Humanistic Psychology, 29(2), 244248.McAdams, D. P. (1993). The stories we live by: Personal myth and the

making of the self. New York: William Morrow.McAdams, D. P. (1996). Alternative futures for the study of human indi-

viduality.Journal of Research in Personality, 30, 374388.

McAdams, D. P., & de St. Austin, E. (Eds.). (1998). Generativity and adultdevelopment. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Miller, J. B. (1986). What do we mean by relationship? Wellesley, MA:Wellesley Center for Women. Retrieved January 20, 2003, fromhttp://www.wcwonline.org/title147. html

Miller, M. E. (1994). World views, ego development, and epistemologicalchanges from the conventional to the postformal: A longitudinal per-spective. In M. E. Miller & S. Cook-Greuter (Eds.), Transcendence andmature thought in adulthood (pp. 147181). Lanham, MD: Rowman &Littlefield.

Miller, M. E.,& Cook-Greuter, S. (1994). From postconventional developmentto transcendence:Visions and theories. In M.E. Miller & S. Cook-Greuter(Eds.), Transcendence and mature thought in adulthood: The furtherreaches of adult development. (pp. xvxxxii). Lanham, MD: Rowman &Littlefield.

Piaget, J. (1977). The development of thought: Equilibration of cognitivestructures. New York: Viking.

Rogers, C. (1951). Client-centered therapy. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Rogers, C. (1982). Reply to Rollo Mays letter. Journal of Humanistic

Psychology, 22(4), 8589.Schneider, K. J. (1987). The deified self: A centaur response to Wilber

and the transpersonal movement.Journal of Humanistic Psychology,27(2), 196216.

Schneider, K. J. (1989). Infallibility is so damn appealing: A response toKen Wilber.Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 29(4), 470481.

Schneider, K. J. (2001). A reply to Walsh. In K. J. Schneider, J. F. T.Bugental, & J. F. Pierson (Eds.), The handbook of humanistic psychol-ogy (pp. 621624). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Schneider, K. J. (2004). Rediscovery of awe: Splendor, mystery, and the

fluid center of life. St Paul, MN: Paragon House.Schneider, K. J. & May, R. (1995). The psychology of existence: An inte-grative, clinicalperspective. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Schultz, L. H., & Selman, R. L. (1998). Ego development and interper-sonal development in young adulthood. In P. M. Westenberg, A. Blasi,& L. D. Lawrence (Eds.),Personality development. Theoretical, empir-ical, and clinical investigations of Loevingers conception of ego devel-opment (pp. 181202). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.



24/24


Skoe, E. A., & von der Lippe, A. (2002). Ego development and the ethicsof care and justice: The relations among them revisited.Journal of

Personality, 70(4), 485508.

Slife, B. D. (2004). Theoretical challenges to therapy practice andresearch: The constraints of naturalism. In M. J. Lambert (Ed.),

Bergin and Garfields handbook of psychotherapy and behaviorchange (5th ed.) (pp. 4483). New York: John Wiley.

Spencer, R. (2000). A comparison of relational psychologies. Wellesley,MA: Wellesley Center for Women. Retrieved January 20, 2003, fromhttp://www.wcwonline.org/title320.html

Vaughan, F., & Walsh, R. (1994). The worldview of Ken Wilber.Journalof Humanistic Psychology, 34(2), 621.

Walsh, R. (2000). Asian Psychotherapies. In R. J. Corsini & D. Wedding

(Eds.), Current psychotherapies (6th ed.) (pp. 407461). Itasca, IL:F. E. Peacock.

Walsh, R. (2001). Authenticity, conventionality, and angst: Existential andtranspersonal perspectives. In K. J. Schneider, J. F. T. Bugental, &J. F. Pierson (Eds.), The handbook of humanistic psychology (pp. 609620).Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Wilber, K. (1986). The spectrum of development. In K. Wilber, J. Engler,& D. P. Brown, (Eds.). Transformations of consciousness (pp. 65106).Boston: Shambhala.

Wilber, K. (1989a). God is so damn boring: A response to Kirk Schneider.Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 29(4), 457469.

Wilber, K. (1989b). Reply to Schneider. Journal of HumanisticPsychology, 29(4), 493500.

Wilber, K. (2000).Integral psychology. Boston: Shambhala.Yalom, I. (1980).Existential psychotherapy. New York: Basic Books.

pfaffenberger a different conceptualizations of optimum development

Documents