Humanism Vs Existentialism

Humanistic psychology and existentialism are similar; they both entered into psychology as mutual partners of the third force that help a person to overcome a matter nevertheless they are different in another aspect. Both philosophies view people as to able to be an entirely functioning character that can make decisions. Applying one’s own opinion and experiences on their modern situation can dictate what the sequence of action will be as per the humanistic or existential model. In existential approach, the person must realize that every choice that person make come with a certain meaning. The principal difference perhaps is that humanism believes individuals are primarily good, while on other hand existentialism believes people can be neither

Rogers hypothesizes whether there can be a change in personality. After clarifying his assumption, he carries on into the environments and generates the features to meet in person’s existence. Carl Rogers demonstrates humanistic ideologies in clinical surroundings, where he proposes a patient-centered methodology to psychoanalysis. Similar to other humanists, Rogers believes self-actualization to be natural, but also believes it can be developed. Since people each other, he believes that self-actualizing does not need isolation from other desires, and can get clinically addressed. These conditions are what create the Rogerian therapy. The circumstance is identified as congruence; which means that the mentor is genuine and real (Rogers, n.d.). This circumstance is significant because it permits the client to build dependence with the therapist. The therapist’s congruence may be applied for other purposes, such as contravening attitudes or situations of substance that others may have employed upon the client. The client will always maintain experiences, whether good or bad, those fit his self-actualization, and reject expertise that is unconnected to self-actualization. These 'fitting' encounters are treasurable because they encompass our "need for constructive concern." A mentor with an appealing and honest tactic gives the client a

This theory has its root in the romantic-socialistic actions that discovers free will and self-governance as the basic man nature. In “Logotherapy and Existentialism” Frankl tries to reconstruct a prevalent definition in existentialist approach, “being in the world”. Several scholars have used this word in diverse aspects and Frankl tries to offer a true significance that can be applied. The term is applied in many aspects with the utmost significant is its application in Logotherapy. After the term was misconstrued the term Logotherapy followed. By Frankl’s definition, Logotherapy is the management of the client’s attitude toward his unalterable fate (Frankl, 1967). In Frankl’s articles, he gives the example of logotherapy and how roughly something is learned through performance. He recalls a time that he addressed a team of American psychiatrists that were handling victims of a hurricane. Frankl explains that as psychiatrists, there is no true way to help and reassure victims but as learned psychiatrists, they genuinely help promote and administer mental aide. All through the article it is informal to comprehend that Logotherapy is client-focused and how to help them beyond all things. The theory appeals to the sensitive side of a reader to appreciate that the career has dissimilar aspects. In final paragraphs of the article, Frankl expresses his obligation to