Evaluation Sheet (The Humanistic Approach)
1) The biological approach is reductionist because it identifies psychological
problems as an imbalance of chemicals in the brain, which is entirely treatable by
drugs. Thus, it does not consider the complexity of emotions but rather reduces
every form of behaviour to stimulus and response links. For example, the
biological approach sees emotional actions such as a kiss as a mere physiological
act.
The behaviourist approach can be considered reductionist for largely similar
reasons; one of the primary concepts of the approach is the notion that
individuals learn by association and consequences, and therefore suggests that
all behaviours can be reduced to stimulus and response links.
The cognitive approach is arguably one of the most reductionist, as it directly
compares humans to computers, stating that all ‘inputs’ have a specific ‘output’,
and that mental processes can follow direct guidelines and concrete models.
The psychodynamic approach is reductionist in so far as it relies on a basic set of
structures that attempt to simplify a very complex concept.
2) The weakness of being reductionist is that such an attitude entirely overlooks
more complex processes, and often compromises intricacies and individual
circumstances in order to generalise and apply a set of ultimately vague rules to
a wider population.
3) Holistic explanations often only take into account quantitative analysis, as, in
examining an individual as a whole (mainly through the use of cause studies),
nomothetic principles cannot be established and so the explanation cannot have
a clear set of rules.
4) Freud saw humans as constantly experiencing internal struggles and conflict
due to the tripartite personality (id, ego and superego), and implied that defence
mechanisms and psychosexual stages derived from basic drives (libido)
characterise all humans. Additionally, he saw free will as an illusion.
5) The humanistic approach is undoubtedly overly idealistic, as it fails to
recognise people’s capacity for pessimism and self-destructive behaviour. Some
individuals do not seem to possess a conscience (psychopaths, sociopaths etc.),
such as those mentioned in the question, and this severely limits the applicability
of principles such as congruence and conditions of worth.
6) CCT involves the client identifying the differences between their true self and
their ideal self, but individuals with severe mental disorders such as
schizophrenia as the client suffers from multiple ‘selves’, and will be unable to
identify their ideal self and their true characteristics realistically.
7) Falsification is a principle that states that, for something to be scientific, it
must be able to be proven false. The lack of falsifiability is an issue for humanistic
psychology because a set of more quantitative principles cannot be established;
no theory can be proven wrong, but they similarly cannot be proven correct; the
1) The biological approach is reductionist because it identifies psychological
problems as an imbalance of chemicals in the brain, which is entirely treatable by
drugs. Thus, it does not consider the complexity of emotions but rather reduces
every form of behaviour to stimulus and response links. For example, the
biological approach sees emotional actions such as a kiss as a mere physiological
act.
The behaviourist approach can be considered reductionist for largely similar
reasons; one of the primary concepts of the approach is the notion that
individuals learn by association and consequences, and therefore suggests that
all behaviours can be reduced to stimulus and response links.
The cognitive approach is arguably one of the most reductionist, as it directly
compares humans to computers, stating that all ‘inputs’ have a specific ‘output’,
and that mental processes can follow direct guidelines and concrete models.
The psychodynamic approach is reductionist in so far as it relies on a basic set of
structures that attempt to simplify a very complex concept.
2) The weakness of being reductionist is that such an attitude entirely overlooks
more complex processes, and often compromises intricacies and individual
circumstances in order to generalise and apply a set of ultimately vague rules to
a wider population.
3) Holistic explanations often only take into account quantitative analysis, as, in
examining an individual as a whole (mainly through the use of cause studies),
nomothetic principles cannot be established and so the explanation cannot have
a clear set of rules.
4) Freud saw humans as constantly experiencing internal struggles and conflict
due to the tripartite personality (id, ego and superego), and implied that defence
mechanisms and psychosexual stages derived from basic drives (libido)
characterise all humans. Additionally, he saw free will as an illusion.
5) The humanistic approach is undoubtedly overly idealistic, as it fails to
recognise people’s capacity for pessimism and self-destructive behaviour. Some
individuals do not seem to possess a conscience (psychopaths, sociopaths etc.),
such as those mentioned in the question, and this severely limits the applicability
of principles such as congruence and conditions of worth.
6) CCT involves the client identifying the differences between their true self and
their ideal self, but individuals with severe mental disorders such as
schizophrenia as the client suffers from multiple ‘selves’, and will be unable to
identify their ideal self and their true characteristics realistically.
7) Falsification is a principle that states that, for something to be scientific, it
must be able to be proven false. The lack of falsifiability is an issue for humanistic
psychology because a set of more quantitative principles cannot be established;
no theory can be proven wrong, but they similarly cannot be proven correct; the
