Salvar no Evernote

Peter F. Schmid, Paper "A way of being with" (C. Rogers). Prospects
on further developments of a radical paradigm
pfs-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 immediate
encounter
Challenges for the personcentered approach as an encounter approach
The Other
An 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 person
Beyond "egology"
A socioethical dimension leading from the categories "response" and "responseability" to a new
understanding of selfrealization
Dialogic ethics
Engaged and solidary service to the fellow person ("diakonia")
Immediate encounter
instead of preconceived methods, clientcentered ones included
Creative ways of understanding and acting
especially of play and art
Unspectacular inclusion of the body
in the understanding and practice of a truly personal therapy
Group therapy
as the therapeutic setting often to be chosen first
Large groups and communities
developing a theory of their understanding & practice
Creative ways in training and research
directed 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 socio-
political 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
therapeutic endeavor. While goal and skilloriented approaches in psychotherapy are en vogue mainly because of
sociopolitical claims for efficiency, open and holistic concepts and a relationshiporientated understanding become
more important in various schools. Obviously a convergence of very different orientations can be found (not just among
the original and traditional relationship therapies!) a convergence stressing the importance of the relationship
between client and therapist in the very moment of therapy. Putting the focus on the actual present therapeutic
relationship 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 of
therapy both, individual and in groups. In the course of the development of psychoanalytical theory the relationship of
the persons involved beyond transference and countertransference, the intersubjective point of view became more
important. What once was merely called an object relation more and more has been viewed as a process between
subjects. Behavior therapists and systemic practitioners and theoreticians increasingly deal with the therapeutic
personal 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 different
representatives of various orientations to deal with the issue of the present relationship in therapy and with the personal
qualities necessary for this venture. My impression this year is very similar. As a person-centered therapist and
theoretician 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 observe
with astonishment the level of ignorance towards an already quite old paradigm: the only one which is based on the
conviction that the actual relationship between client and therapist and thus the way the therapist acts as a real person
beyond role, function and methods is not only a precondition or a basis of the therapeutic work but is the very essence
of therapy.
Without doubt it is a valuable merit of the person-centered approach that the orientations mentioned encounter the
importance of the personal and of the core conditions and attitudes conducive to therapeutic movement first postulated
and accurately described by Carl Rogers (1957a). Probably almost no therapist who had not heard about the trias of a
person-centered relationship offered by the therapist: authenticity and genuineness, unconditional acceptance and
sensitive empathy. "Without these nothing goes in therapy" a vast majority of therapists probably agree on. "We all do
this kind of relationship work", a lot of colleagues think and say, "we have learned our lesson; we integrated Carl
Rogers. 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 the real therapeutic work has to
start, 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 as
such". There is no person-centered relationship as a means to, no relationship in order to. The genuine, accepting and
empathic presence of the therapist in the relationship is not only necessary but sufficient, Carl Rogers postulated was
ignored 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
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 or
personcentered.
I am convinced that the essence of the PersonCentered Approach, the revolutionary paradigm shift of Carl Rogers, has
not yet been sounded out by far, let alone has it been put into effect, in its radicalism, its profound humanism and in its
critical potential, a potential towards emancipation individually as well as politically. Carl Rogers positions and visions
are not at all outdated, they have not even been caught up with.
What Carl Rogers initiated was a truly person-centered approach focussed on the human being as a person and thus
therapy 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. A
few sentences must do.
As already expressed by its name the PersonCentered Approach is orientated by the person of the human being. This
is 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 human
being in both, his or her unparalleled unexchangability and in his or her social interconnectedness, that is, as person
within society, within his or her respective system; the individual and the relational dimension of being and of becoming
a person, independence and orientation towards relations are dialectically related to each other and are equally
important to a personal view (Schmid 1991; 1997 b; 1997e; 1998a; 1998c). In the person-centered understanding of the
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, dialogue, responsibilty and
solidarity 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 individual
organism and the interconnectedness of the human being. They form the foundations of the understanding of
personalisation of "on becoming a person" (Rogers 1961a).
Offering help in a personcentered understanding means letting oneself in for a personal relation. Deeply standing in the
tradition of personalistic philosophy (also called dialogic or encounter philosophy) that implies putting oneself into play
2
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 for
help to make better use of their so far unused or temporarily blocked inner resources, thus, developing their own
personality and widening their scope of action as well (Rogers 1961a; 1970a; 1980a; Schmid 1989). Explicitly connected
with it is a personality theory which considers every human being capable of living and organizing his or her life and
solving the problems and, on account of their own potential, expects him or her to actualize the ability to develop in an
individually and socially constructive direction, if he or she feels accepted and understood in principle, that is, in a social
environment in which they may feel and behave quite authentically (Rogers 1959a). Thus, an essential trust in the
experiential world of the client and its centrality for psychotherapy is unrenounceable for the PersonCentered
Approach.
Such an approach quite fundamentally rules out any conception of oneself on part of the therapist or helper or teacher
or 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
therapist considers himself as an expert in the correct usage of methods and means, and even excludes any
preconceived 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 means
has fallen apart" encounter takes place, as Martin Buber (1923,19) stated unsurpassably and precisely also grasping the
process of such a relationship.
Therefore the PersonCentered Approach differs radically from all other approaches which in the meantime have all
more 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 obviously
human preconditions so to speak, upon which the actual therapeutic work still has to be constructed. From a person
centered stance the basic attitudes need no supplementation by specific methods reserved for the expert. "Expertism", if
it has to be described, lies exactly in the ability to resist the temptation of behaving like an expert (even against the
clients wishes) that means, solving problems with the help of techniques rather than facing them as persons.
In Carl Rogers' words: To work as person-centered therapist is not only "a way of being", but "a way of being with" in
German to describe this philosophy of life we use, according to Ludwig Binswanger e.g., the term "Miteinandersein", not
only "Mitsein".
The existential and immediate presence as understood by encounter philosophy, the personal beingwith which leads
to a togetherness means that, in his or her psychophysical presence, the person who offers a personcentered relation
opens 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 be
seized by his mop of hair, when hurrying past in the back he was closecropped in the German language we have
the phrase "eine Gelegenheit beim Schopf packen") in the kairos it is important to take advantage of fallow potential
and 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 which
moves him or her deeply, which is counter him or her. Encounter is not simply an experience, it is an "experience
counter"which opposes the affected one. Encounter is an essentially different experience from what an idealistic and
subjectivistic understanding of (solely intrinsic development) presupposes, from an understanding of development or
fulfillment coming completely from itself. However, it is an alien, an Other, another reality, another person, which or who
encounters my reality, which or who encounters me. This makes up the existential dimension and unavoidability of
encounter.
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 the
therapist or/and of the client expose himself or herself to the given Other, he or she can enter in a dialogue even
more so, he or she is called to do so.
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 of
consequences 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 implications
seriously which are a consequence of the understanding of the human being as a person within society and which
above all arise from the experience of personcentered group work and grouppsychotherapy, and if the paradigm shall
remain true to its principles under circumstances different from those of the America at the time of the New Deal a range
of necessary and farreaching changes in the sense of further developments of the approach regarding the image of
man, the theory and the practice crowd into my mind.
Some of these challenges for the approach, as I see them, shall be summarized in form of theses without claiming to be
complete.
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 being
fromtheother and the beingtowardstheother in theory and in practice. Therefore it seems to be correct to
formulate the basic personcentered axiom as a dialectic principle: The tendency of actualizing his or her potential
in a constructive way lives in the human being, but a specific kind of relationship from 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 alter ego but truly a different person. Just as encounter
philosophy has reached beyond Buber and with Emmanuel Lvinas (1961; 1974; 1983), a thinker of
tremendous importance who has hardly been discovered for the PersonCentered Approach, yet has made a
paradigm shift from the "I" to the "Thou" only managing to get closer to the verge of the "We", so the Person
Centered Approach has to give serious thoughts to what it means giving response to a suffering human beings cry
for help, a responseability rooting in fundamental ethics.
Thus, all psychosocial, pedagogic, political, and pastoral etc. acting receives a socioethical dimension leading
from 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 occidental
philosophy (and this also applies for psychology as its "daughter" and psychotherapy as its "granddaughter")
including its socalled humanistic orientation in this century has remained "egology". And, indeed, this fixation on
the I is clearly predominant in the terminology of the numerous selfterms in Humanistic Psychology and despite
all positioning against an objectivation and instrumentalization it finally indicates a reduction of the other, of what
the other means to me. In this connection even a wellknown sentence by Martin Buber (1923, 18) like "I become
through the Thou" all of a sudden sounds quite different: even here, as is to be suspected, everything is still
focused on me. This, however, presents the ideals of the humanistic movement as such in a new light. And
according to Lvinas the following applies: "What once seemed to be a distinctive human quality, the absolute
desire to determine and realize oneself, "selfdetermination" and "selfrealization", has proved the reason of
violence against the other human being. Not the enforcement of the egos objectives must become the basis [...]
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 person
centered anthropology has always been ethics at first. Traditional ethics orient acting by principles which are
deduced from philosophic ideas. However, a philosophy orienting itself by experience, as it undoubtedly
corresponds to the PersonCentered Approach, realizes from the experience in the encounter, which is taken
seriously down to the roots, ethics as the first philosophy. Especially out of the personal experience of encounter
being addressed and thus encouraged by the Other a legitimate claim to an answer and to acting in the
kairos is derived and this is where personcentered ethics come in.
Personcentered ethics is dialogic ethics. In so far it is ethics which never degrades a fellow being to an alter
ego but sees him or her as a call and a provocation. In doing so the fellow being is the Other on principle, the one
strange to me, who surprises me, and who I find myself opposed to, who I have to face neither monopolizing
nor rejecting him face to face. "Encountering a human being means being kept awake by an enigma" states
Lvinas (1959, 120). The presence of the Other which always "comes first" is a call for a respond which I cannot
escape because nobody can respond in my place. We are obliged and responsible to the Other and owe him an
answer. This causes a " priority" of the Other. From that follows a new nonindividualistic understanding of
selfrealization as realization in and out of the relations, in which the individual lives, and which is never possible
without the realization of the Other.
Any help whatsoever is to be understood on principle as such a response to the misery of the Other. Love,
which fundamentally is experienced from the very beginning in the development of the human being (just think of
the child, "conceived" and born into relations), is the deposit of solidarity that has to be made. In empathy
communication becomes encouragement, becomes advocacy and becomes community.
Accordingly, psychotherapy means engaged and solidary service to the fellow person, is "diakony". Like any
psychosocial activity it has a radical servicecharacter. The suffering person demands. This corresponds with the
duty of responseability. From "diakony" emerges dialogue, from personcenteredness room for personal
encounter. This commitment towards the Other cf. the not enough appreciated commitmentconcept of Binder
and Binder (1981, 179274) , a responsibility which originates in the basic dependency of the human being on
his fellow beings, calls for acting also in communication and not for talking. Therefore there can no longer be
any discussion about the understandimng of the PersonCentered Approach as an action approach
[Handlungsansatz] and not merely as a verbal approach, misleadingly called "Gesprchstherapie [talking
therapy]".
If encounter becomes clear as a central category of the approach in 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 out
of a repertoire in case of difficult situations, only shows the lack of trust of the therapist in the client and in him
or herself.
A personcentered way of beingwith demands an inclusion of creative ways of understanding and acting in an
unspectacular 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 towards
effects or presupposed goals of any kind (not to be used in order to), but in the sense of an "actualization
therapy" it is a matter of creative open rooms emerging where human beings are open, accepting and empathic,
living together as persons, playful and curious, free of purpose, where they get involved and bring themselves at
stake, get engaged, take risks, and where they do not hesitate to confront each other as the persons they are.
Thus, the holistic view of the human being is taken seriously. Among that counts his or her corporality and the
unspectacular inclusion of the body in the view of the person and, thus, in the practice of a truly personal therapy
which neither "adds" the body to psychotherapeutic work or concentrates on the body instead of the psyche nor
does it use it, in order to "heal the soul by the body" thus instrumentalizing it (cf. Schmid 1994; 1996b; 1997d). So
the separation of body and soul would all the more be fixed. Instead of this the point is to overcome the misguiding
occidental separation of body and spirit and the separation of psychotherapy and body therapy, which derives from
this, towards a truly anthropological therapy. (I am aware of formulating a challenge that will not be met tomorrow
or 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 person
in the group, because of the realization of the fact that working on conflicts is best done where conflicts originate,
namely in groups, the question is in how far the group is the therapeutic place to be chosen first, whereas the
single relationship as a special and especially protected relationship is indicated only when special protection
is needed or other specific reasons call for it. One can prove that the PersonCentered Approach is a deeply social
and thus actually a group approach contrary to what it is regarded because of its historical development. At the
same time the group is considered to be a central aspect in the future of the approach. This opposes also the
"pathology" of overemphasizing single therapy, e.g. in German speaking countries, to be seen especially in
training programs, different from those in AngloAmerican countries. (Schmid 1996a; 1996d)
This also means the necessity of developing a theory of the understanding and the practice of large groups and
communities a first rank sociopolitical and peace establishing activity. The task is to continue Carl Rogers
engagement for peace and crosscultural communication.
Creative ways in training and research are necessary, offering a broad range of new possibilities for individual
development 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, qualified
training, are we enabled to act as a person even in difficult situations. Although the trend lies with an arrangement
with the social security system and the adaptation to traditional concepts of disorder and illness and although the
temptation very much goes towards administrating conflictuous processes during a persons lifetime i.e. they are
called "illnesses" and we are ensured against illnesses a PersonCentered Approach focuses on recognizing
the chance of a so called "disorder" as crisis. Thus, it is regarded as a decision. In the understanding of the
uniqueness of the kairos which calls for a change oneself, the others, society as a whole it is creativity which
is provoked and demanded instead of classification. The same applies to research: New things are to be found out
in a kind of research directed towards the unexpected instead of the confirmation of the expected. The task is to
relearn the ability of letting oneself be taken by surprise: "One of its best hidden secrets is that the person
centered approach seems to function best where conventional methods (the application of the principles of client
centered 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 overall philosophy of culture, is challenged to
no less than increasingly understanding the conditio humana, the being human in general. (By the way, this needs to
deal with ecological questions as well.)
Obviously a paradigm shift within the approach announces itself in all that. The PersonCentered Approach may well
face a turningpoint of its selfunderstanding. If the underlying image of man is taken seriously it becomes obvious that
the approach needs further development to a truly dialogic and social approach (also in psychotherapy), a creative,
flexible and kairologic approach which becomes also clear in the claim of the anthropology represented by Kierkegaard
and 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 ranked
highly in the frame of an overall therapeutic point of view implying the communities man lives in. Thus the political
significance becomes obvious.
Towards a basic consensus beyond schools
Developing the approach in this way a step could be taken towards a basic orientation
4
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 being
with", a dialogic understanding of therapy and group work, because they carry out the paradigm shift from treatment,
caretaking and counseling to encounter. In doing so they transcend models which concentrate on the individualistic self
as well as on models which exclusively concentrate on a simply systemicoriented approach. As soon as this step is
truly taken not the schools are the issue any more, but the issue is to really understand and practice therapy and group
work as dialogue. Or expressed in a more provoking way: the PersonCentered Approach must intend and aim at
making itself superfluous just as a good therapist has to do.
In order to reach that goal a lot still has to be done.
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 ethic
foundation of psychotherapy and psychosocial work, if one doesnt want to get stuck in unfounded
casuistics and doesnt want to reduce ethics to the moral discussion of single cases, e.g. concerning
abuse. Cf. Schmid 1996a, 521532.
4 Cf. van Kalmthout 1997.
References
Binder, Ute / Binder Johannes (1981), Die klientenzentrierte Psychotherapie bei schweren psychischen
Strungen, Frankfurt/M. (Fachbuchhandlung fr Psychologie)
2
1981
Buber, Martin (1923), Ich und Du, in: Dialogisches Leben, Zrich 1923; quoted after the edition
Heidelberg (Lambert Schneider)
8
1974
Fietkau, HansJoachim (1988), Von Mglichkeiten, Notwendigkeiten und Erfordernissen
personenorientierter Politikberatung am Beispiel der Umweltpolitik, in: GwG (ed.) Orientierung an der
Person. Bd. II: Jenseits von Psychotherapie, Cologne (GwG) 1988, 266272
Fietkau, HansJoachim / Kessel, H. (1981) (eds.), Umweltlernen, Knigstein/Taunus 1981
Frenzel, Peter / Schmid, Peter F. (1996), Von der Herausforderung, die eigene Power zu gebrauchen...
Bericht ber ein Treffen personzentrierter Wissenschafter, Bad Hall, Juli 1996, in: apgkontakte 2
(1996) 3754
Hutterer, Robert / Pawlowsky, Gerhard / Schmid, Peter F. / Stipsits, Reinhold (eds.), ClientCentered
and Experiential Psychotherapy. A paradigm in motion, Frankfurt/M. (1996)
IAPCT 1996 (International Association for PersonCentered Therapy. An Association for the Science
and Practice of ClientCentered and Experiential Psychotherapies and Counseling): From Participants
at a PersonCentered Meeting at Bad Hall, Austria, July 1996, in: apgkontakte 2 (1996) 5557; v. a.
in: Personzentriert; Brennpunkt; GwGZeitschrift et al.
Keil, Wolfgang W. (1992), Grundlagen der Klientenzentrierten Psychotherapie, in: Personzentriert 2
(1992) 933
Lvinas, Emmanuel (1959), Der Untergang der Vorstellung, in: ibd. 1983, 120139; orig. in: Husserl
18591959. Recueil commmoratif publi l'occasion du centenaire du philosophe,
(Phaenomenologica VI), Den Haag (Nijhoff) 1959
(1961), Totalit et infini. Essai sur l'extriorit, Den Haag (Nijhoff) 1961,
7
1980
(1974), Autrement qu'tre ou au del de l'essence, Den Haag (Nijhoff) 1974,
2
1978
(1983), Die Spur des Anderen. Untersuchungen zur Phnomenologie und Sozialphilosophie,
Freiburg (Alber) 1983,
3
1992
Pfeiffer, Wolfgang (1992), Gesundheitsfrderung, Vorsorge und Begleitung im Rahmen der
Sozialarbeit, in: Straumann, Ursula (ed.), Beratung und Krisenintervention. Materialien zu
theoretischem Wissen und interdisziplinrem Bezug, Cologne (GwG) 1992, 8499
Preu, Sigrun (1990), Umweltkrise und personenzentrierter Ansatz, in: Deter, Detlev / Straumann,
Ursula (eds.), Personenzentriert Verstehen, Gesellschaftsbezogen Denken, Verantwortlich Handeln.
Theorie, Methodik und Umsetzung in die psychosoziale Praxis, Cologne (GwG) 1990, 85104
Rogers, Carl R. (1940b), Some newer concepts of psychotherapy, (manuskript) 1940
(1957a), The necessary and sufficient conditions of therapeutic personality change, in: Journal of
Consulting Psychology 21,2 (1957) 95103
(1959a) A theory of therapy, personality, and interpersonal relationships, as developed in the client
centered framework, in: Koch, Sigmund (ed.), Psychology. A study of a science. Vol. III: Formulations
of the person and the social context, New York (McGraw Hill) 1959, 184256
(1961a), On becoming a person. A therapist's view of psychotherapy, Boston (Houghton Mifflin) 1961
(1970a), On encounter groups, New York (Harper & Row) 1970;
(1980a), A way of being, Boston (Houghton Mifflin) 1980
(1986h), A clientcentered / PersonCentered Approach to therapy, in: Kutash, I. L. / Wolf, A. (eds.),
Psychotherapist's casebook. Theory and technique in the practice of modern times, San Francisco
(JosseyBass) 1986, 197208
(1989d), An interview with Carl Rogers, by David Ryback, in: PersonCentered Review 4,1 (1989)
99112
Rogers, Carl R. / Schmid, Peter F. (1991), Personzentriert. Grundlagen von Theorie und Praxis,
Mainz (Grnewald) 1991; 2
nd
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; 2
nd
enlarged and act. ed. 1995
(1991), Souvernitt und Engagement. Zu einem personzentrierten Verstndnis von Person, in:
Rogers/Schmid 1991,15164; 2
nd
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 die
Entwicklungen der letzten Zeit, Talk, Vienna, Oct. 4, 1995
(1996a), Personzentrierte Gruppenpsychotherapie in der Praxis. Ein Handbuch. Vol. II: Die Kunst der
Begegnung, Paderborn (Junfermann) 1996
(1996b), Krperorientiert oder Personorientiert? Aspekte zur Inkompatibilitt krpertherapeutischer
und systematischbender Verfahren mit dem personzentrierten Ansatz, in: apgkontakte 3 (1996) 5
41
(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 is
fundamentally group therapy, in: Hutterer/Pawlowsky/Schmid/Stipsits 1996, 611625
(1997a), "Einem Menschen begegnen, heit von einem Rstel wachgehalten werden." (E. Lvinas).
Perspektiven zur Weiterentwicklung des Personzentrierten Ansatzes, in: Person 1 (1997)
(1997b), Personzentrierte Supervision. Berufliche Entwicklung durch Begegenung, in: Luif, Ingeborg
(ed.), Supervision, Vienna (Orac) 1997, 175188
(1997c), PersonCentered Psychotherapy State of the art. Plenary address, IVth ICCCEP, Lisbon
(manuscript) 1997, in print: Brennpunkt 73 (1997)
(1997d) "Mit dem Krper die Seele heilen"? Der Personzentrierte Ansatz im Gesprch mit der
Krperpsychotherapie, in: Korunka, Christian (ed.), Begegnungen. Psychotherapeutische Schulen im
Gesprch. Dialoge der PersonCentered Association in Austria (PCA), Vienna (WUV) 1997
(1997e), Vom Individuum zur Person. Zur Anthropologie in der Psychotherapie und zur Entwicklung
des Personzentrierten Ansatzes, to be published in: Psychotherapie Forum 1997/98
(1997f), Begegnung von Person zu Person. Zum Beziehungsverstndnis in der Personzentrierten
Psychotherapie, to be published in: Psychotherapie Forum 1997/98
(1998a), On becoming a personcentred approach. A personcentred understanding of the
person, in: Thorne/Lambers 1998
(1998b), Face to face. The art of encounter, in: Thorne/Lambers 1998
(1998c), Im Anfang ist Gemeinschaft. Personzentrierte Gruppenarbeit in Seelsorge und Praktischer
Theologie Beitrge zu einer Theologie der Gruppe, Bd. III, Stuttgart (Kohlhammer) 1998
Swildens, Hans (1992), Die klientenzentrierte Therapie, die prozeorientierte Gesprchstherapie und
die personzentrierte Gesprchsfhrung: drei Tchter des gleichen Vaters, aber aus verschiedener Ehe,
in: Stipsits, Reinhold / Hutterer, Robert (eds.), Perspektiven Rogerianischer Psychotherapie. Kritik und
Wrdigung zu ihrem 50jhrigen Bestehen, Vienna (WUV Universittsverlag) 1992, 5470
Thorne, Brian / Lambers, Elke, PersonCentred Therapy. European perspectives, London (Sage) 1998
van Belle, Harry A. (1990), Rogers' later move toward mysticism: Implications for clientcentered
therapy, in: Lietaer, Germain / Rombauts, Jan / van Balen, Richard (eds.), Clientcentered and
experiential psychotherapy in the nineties, Leuven (Leuven University Press) 1990, 4757
van Kalmthout, Martin (1997), Personoriented psychotherapy. Toward integration of insightoriented,
experiential, clientcentered, personcentered, interpersonal and existential therapies, paper given at
the IVth ICCCEP, Lisbon (manuscript) 1997
Waldschtz, Erwin (1993), Was ist Personalismus?, in: Die Presse, Spectrum, Dec. 24, 1993, XII
Wood, John K. (1994a), A rehearsal for understanding the phenomenon of group, in: PersonCentered
Journal 1,3 (1994) 1832
(1994b), From the PersonCentered Approach to clientcentered therapy. Towards a psychology,
keynote address IIIrd ICCCEP, revised version, Jaguarina (manuscript) 1994; cf.: The Person
Centered Approach. Towards an understanding of its implications, in:
Hutterer/Pawlowsky/Schmid/Stipsits 1996, 163181
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 staff
member of the "Academy for Counselling and Psychotherapy" of the "Institute for PersonCentred Studies" of the APG
in Vienna, 10 books and numerous articles about further developments of the PersonCentered Approach.
Overview papers
Hauptseite English mainpage