Relational and Transcendental Humanism: Exploring the Consequences of a Thoroughly Pragmatic Humanism

The relational and transcendental elements of humanism are considered. Although the relational component of humanism is extraordinarily valuable, the author argues that the transcendental portion of humanism should be abandoned. The implications of a thoroughly pragmatic humanism are explored. ********** Humanism is a complex system of thought that has been influenced by various historical and ideological forces (Davidson, 2000; DeCarvalho, 1990; Halling & Nill, 1995; Hansen, 2000; Sass, 1989). Because there are a multitude of philosophical currents that flow through humanism, various components can be distilled from the overall humanistic paradigm. Dividing humanism into relational and transcendental subcomponents is one way to conceptualize this theoretically multifaceted counseling orientation. Regarding the relational component, the humanistic treatment paradigm offered a richly relational alternative to the reductive, scientifically based orientations of psychoanalysis and behaviorism (Hansen, 2005a; Rogers, 1951). Instead of treating clients as psychological specimens, early humanists argued that counseling should be a highly relational affair, which is grounded in genuineness, empathy, and unconditional positive regard (Rogers, 1957). Humanism is clearly characterized by this strong relational component. In addition to the value it places on relationships, humanism is also rooted in a realist epistemology (Hansen, 2002). Specifically, early humanists emphasized accurate, objective knowledge. This doctrine of knowing is reflected in the idea that counselors should use accurate empathy and that clients should be helped to find their true selves (Rogers, 1957). I refer to this emphasis on accuracy, truth, discovery, and objectivity as the transcendental component of humanism because the humanistic encounter is guided by objective truths that transcend (i.e., exist independent of and apart from) the counseling relationship. Dividing humanism into relational and transcendental components suggests some interesting questions. For example, are both components necessary? How do they relate to one another? Does the transcendental aspect of humanism facilitate or detract from the relational element of humanism? It is the purpose of this article to explore these questions and others that are derived from considering humanism as an ideology that simultaneously emphasizes relationships and transcendence. This is accomplished within the following organizational structure: (a) Relational Humanism, (b) Transcendental Humanism, (c) Critique of Transcendental Humanism, and (d) Discussion and Conclusions. RELATIONAL HUMANISM The idealization of the counseling relationship is a vital component of the humanistic approach to helping (Rogers, 1951, 1957). In contrast to psychoanalytic thought, which conceptualizes the counseling relationship as the distorted displacement of early developmental conflicts (Gabbard, 2004), humanists maintain that an authentic encounter between the client and the counselor is essential for optimal client growth to occur (Rogers, 1951, 1957). Humanistic theory provides both practical guidance and theoretical support for this authentic relationship. In terms of practice, humanistic theorists have highlighted particular conditions that are necessary and sufficient to facilitate the emergence of an optimal counseling relationship (Rogers, 1957). Theoretically, the idealization of an authentic relationship is derived from the humanistic emphasis on antireductionism (Hansen, 2005a; Matson, 1971). Mid-20th-century humanists criticized psychoanalysis and behaviorism for reducing clients to psychic parts and stimulus-response contingencies (Matson, 1971). Like the proponents of Renaissance humanism, which emerged many centuries before, advocates of humanistic psychology argued that people are best understood as irreducibly whole beings (Davidson, 2000). …