Criticisms of Humanistic Theories
The existence of humanistic psychology set off a lot of criticisms. One of the first criticisms was that its concepts were regarded as being vague and subjective. This was due to Maslow's description of a self-actualizing person. He described self-actualizing people as being spontaneous and, loving, self-accepting, and productive. The critics said that that was not a description, and rather called it a description of the theorist's values and ideals. It was noted by M. Brewster Smith, that Maslow offered impressions of his own personal heroes.
Another thing which the critics objected to was that, as Rogers said, "The only question which matters is, 'Am I living in a way which is deeply satisfying to me, and which truly expresses me?'". The individualism encouraged by humanistic psychology - trusting and acting on one's feelings, being true to oneself, fulfilling oneself - can lead to self-indulgence, selfishness, and an erosion of moral restraints. It is noted that those who focus beyond themselves that are most prone to experience social support, enjoy life, and cope with stress in much better ways.
Humanistic psychologists point out that a secure, non-defensive self-acceptance is the first step when it comes to loving others. People who feel intrinsically liked and accepted for the person they are , not just for their merits, demonstrate less self-defensive attitudes.
The last aspersion cast against humanistic psychology is that it is naive, that it does not appreciate the reality of human capacity for evil. Dealing with global climate change, overpopulation, terrorism, and the spread of nuclear weapons, we may begin to feel apathetic from either two rationalizations: one being naive optimism, the other, dark despair. Action required enough realism to provide sufficient concern and enough optimism to fuel hope. It is believed that humanistic psychology provides the needed hope, but it does not provide the necessary realism about evil.
Another thing which the critics objected to was that, as Rogers said, "The only question which matters is, 'Am I living in a way which is deeply satisfying to me, and which truly expresses me?'". The individualism encouraged by humanistic psychology - trusting and acting on one's feelings, being true to oneself, fulfilling oneself - can lead to self-indulgence, selfishness, and an erosion of moral restraints. It is noted that those who focus beyond themselves that are most prone to experience social support, enjoy life, and cope with stress in much better ways.
Humanistic psychologists point out that a secure, non-defensive self-acceptance is the first step when it comes to loving others. People who feel intrinsically liked and accepted for the person they are , not just for their merits, demonstrate less self-defensive attitudes.
The last aspersion cast against humanistic psychology is that it is naive, that it does not appreciate the reality of human capacity for evil. Dealing with global climate change, overpopulation, terrorism, and the spread of nuclear weapons, we may begin to feel apathetic from either two rationalizations: one being naive optimism, the other, dark despair. Action required enough realism to provide sufficient concern and enough optimism to fuel hope. It is believed that humanistic psychology provides the needed hope, but it does not provide the necessary realism about evil.