Positive psychology and humanistic psychology: A reply to Seligman

被引:50
作者
Taylor, E [1 ]
机构
[1] Massachusetts Gen Hosp, Psychol Assessment Ctr, Boston, MA 02114 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1177/0022167801411003
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
Arguments in the current debate between "positive psychology" and humanistic psychology are reviewed with particular emphasis on Martin Seligman's comment that humanistic psychologists do not represent "positive psychology" because they have generated no research tradition, are narcissistic, and are antiscientific. Each one of these claims is dispelled with specific references to the larger humanistic tradition in American psychology, which includes the psychology of William James; the personality-social psychologists of the 1930s and 1940s, such as Allport, Murray, and Murphy; and the humanistic psychologists, per se, of the 1950s and 1960s. Additional examples of how mainstream cognitive-behaviorism has continued to preempt humanistic and transpersonal psychology are also given. The conclusion, however, is that Seligman may be rushing to exclude on a priori grounds the very tradition his own theory represents.
引用
收藏
页码:13 / 29
页数:17
相关论文
共 37 条
[11]  
Hunt Harry T., 1995, On the Nature of Consciousness: Cognitive, Phenomenological, and Transpersonal Perspectives
[12]  
James W., 1899, Talks to Teachers on Psychology: And to Students on Some of Life's Ideals
[13]  
James W., 1890, Principles of psychology
[14]  
Jung C. G., 1923, Psychological types: or the psychology of individuation
[15]  
KOCH S, 1975, NEBRASKA S MOTIVATIO, P478
[16]  
Kuhn Thomas, 1962, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
[17]  
MACMURRAY J, 1931, BOUNDARIES SCI STUDY
[18]  
Mahoney M. J., 1976, Scientist as subject: The psychological imperative
[19]  
Manuel F. E., 1962, The prophets of Paris
[20]  
Maslow A. H., 1966, PSYCHOL SCI