Search

President Biden has made uniting a divided nation a major theme of his presidency. Humanistic psychology is well-positioned to provide tools necessary to heal the divisions that plague us. Herein, two humanistic theories are combined in just such an effort: (a) using context-centered therapy to foster shifts from defensive and self-protective "mind"-based engagement to more accepting and appreciative "self"-based responding, and (b) employing person-centered therapy's core conditions for understanding the mind-based anger and upset of our fellow citizens. Combining these perspectives provides a basis for overcoming polarization and fostering the kinds of interpersonal relationships required to carry on together. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We outline a context-centered therapy approach to helping clients cope with the coronavirus pandemic. Context-centered therapy is a constructivist approach that emphasizes shifts in an individual's contexts as the best way to generate therapeutic change. Contexts are defined as sets of presuppositions that shape a person's experiences. We examine how two very common contexts, mind and self, can inform therapists' understanding of how their clients are responding to the coronavirus pandemic. The mind consists of a person's defensive and protective postures in the face of perceived threat, whereas the self takes a broader perspective and emphasizes human connections and interrelatedness. Therapists can use several mind/self contrasts—blame versus responsibility, insufficiency versus sufficiency, being at effect versus being at cause, and avoidance versus mastery—to assist people who are struggling in the face of the coronavirus pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Five responses to Raskin and Debany's (this issue) original target article on a constructivist model of ethical meaning making are discussed. The authors responding to the article raise many important issues about constructivist approaches to ethics. Differences between social constructionism and constructivism, the importance of multiple modalities of knowing, and a continuing hope for rapprochement between constructivist and realist perspectives are briefly explored. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A constructivist model of ethical meaning making is developed. The effort begins by distinguishing three versions of constructivist theory—personal construct psychology, radical constructivism, and social constructionism. Then, the following four premises of an integrated constructivist perspective are presented: (a) People are informationally closed systems, (b) people are active meaning makers, (c) people are social beings, and (d) people construe epistemologically and ontologically. These premises are used to examine and counter criticisms that portray constructivism as endorsing an “anything goes” relativism. This clears a space for the development of a constructivist model of ethical meaning making, outlined in the final section of the article. This model is rooted in personal construct psychology, but is also influenced by radical constructivism and social constructionism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]