Science too, at its inception, is an "l-Thou"

relationship with the world o] perceived objects,

just as therapy at its deepest is an "l.Thou"
relationship with a person or persons.

P e r s o n s or Science?
(Part 2 )

In the first part of his article, "Persons or CARL R. ROGERS

Science?", which we published last month,
Dr. Rogers stressed the conflict between the Prolessor of
scientific and the experiential approaches Psychology and Psychiatry
in psychotherapy, tentatively defining the University of Wiscensi~
scientific as one in which people become ob-
jects, and as such are manipulated, while formulation was in the description Of
the experiential is defined as the subjective, science. I should like, in this section,
and hence not altogether subject to sci-
entific measurement and evaluation. After to attempt to correct that error, and in
presenting the conflict, Dr. Rogers hints at the following section to reconcile the
the possibility of "some broader formulation revised points of view.
which can happily encompass both of these The major shortcoming was, I be-
views without damage to either." The sec-
ond part of Dr. Rogers' article is devoted to lieve, in viewing science as something
this thesis.--Ed. "out there," something spelled with a
capital S, a "body of knowledge," ex-
A CHANGED VIEW OF SCIENCE isting somewhere in space and time.
In the year which has elapsed I n common with many psychologists I
since the foregoing material was thought of science as a systematized
written, I have from time to time dis- and organized collection of tentatively
cussed the issues with students, col- verified fact, and saw the methodology
leagues, and friends. T o some of them of science as the socially approved
I am particularly indebted for ideas means of accumulating this boay of
which have taken root in me.* Grad- knowledge, and continuing its verifi-
ually I have come to believe that the cation. It has seemed somewhat like
most basic error in the original a reservoir into which all and sundry
may dip their buckets to obtain water
- - w i t h a guarantee of 99% purity.
*I would like to mention my special
debt to discussions with, and published and to acknowledge specific obligations. I only
unpublished papers by Robert M. Lipgar, know that in what follows there is much
Ross L. Mooney, David A. Rodgers and which springs from them, through me. I
Eugene Streich. My own thinking has fed have also profited from correspondence re-
so deeply on theirs, and become so inter- gardiug the paper with Anne Roe and
twined with theirs, that I would be at a lo~ Walter Smet.
20 PASTORAL PSYCHOLOGY April

When viewed in this external and im- immersion is complete and subjective,
personal fashion, it seems not un- similar to the immersion of the thera-
reasonable to see Science not only as pist in therapy, described previously.
discovering knowledge in lofty fash- H e senses the field in which he is in-
ion, but as involving depersonalization, terested, he lives it. He does more
a tendency to manipulate, a denial of than "think" about it he lets his or-
the basic freedom of choice which I ganism take over and react to it, both
have met experientially in therapy. on a knowing and on an unknowing
I should like now to view the scientific level. He comes to sense more than he
approach from a different, and I hope, could possibly verbalize about his field,
a more accurate perspective. and reacts organismically in terms of
relationships which are not present in
Science in Persons his awareness.
Out of this complete subjective im-
Science exists only in people. Each mersion comes a creative forming, a
scientific project has its creative in- sense of direction, a vague formulation
ception, its process, and its tentative of relationships hitherto unrecognized.
~ nclusion, in a person or persons. Whittled down, sharpened, formulated
n o w l e d g e - - e v e n scientific knowl- in clearer terms, this creative forming
edge--is that which is subjectively becomes a hypothesis--a statement of
acceptable. Scientific knowledge can a tentative, personal, subjective faith.
be communicated only to those who The scientist is saying, drawing upon
are subjectively ready to receive its all his known and unknown experi-
communication. The utilization of ence, t h a t " I have a hunch that such
science also occurs only through peo- and such a relationship exists, and the
ple who are in pursuit of values which existence of this phenomenon has
have meaning for them. These state- relevance to my personal values."
ments summarize very briefly some- What I am describing is the initial
thing of the change in emphasis which phase of science, probably its most im-
I would like to make in my descrip- portant phase, but one which American
tion of science. Let me follow through scientists, particularly psychologists,
the various phases of science from this have been prone to minimize or ig-
point of view. nore. It is not so much that it has been
denied as that it has b e e n quickly
The Creative Phases brushed off. Kenneth Spence has said
that this aspect of science is "simply
Science has its inception in a par-" . taken for granted."* Like many ex-
ticular person who is pursuing aims, periences taken for granted, it also
values, purposes, which have personal tends to be forgotten. It is indeed in
and subjective meaning for him. As a the matrix of immediate personal, sub-
part of this pursuit, he, in some area,
"wants to find out." Consequently, if * It may be pertinent to quote sentences
he is to be a good scientist, he im- from which this phrase is taken. " . . . the
merses himself in the relevant experi- data of all sciences have the same origin--
ence, whether that be the physics namely, the immediate experience of an ob-
serving person, the scientist himself. That
laboratory, the world of plant or ani- is to say, immediate experience, the initial
mal life, the hospital, the psychological matrix out of which all sciences develop, is
laboratory or clinic, or whatever. This no longer considered a matter of concern
1959 PERSONS OR SCIENCE? 21

jective experience that all science, and gard to my creatively formed subjec-
each individual scientific research, tive hunches which have developed out
has its origin. of the relationship between me and
my material. It is in this context, and
Checking with Reality perhaps only in this context, that the
vast structure of operationism, logi-
The scientist has then creatively cal positivism, research design, tests of
achieved his hypothesis, his tentative significance, etc., have their place.
faith. But does it cheek with reality ? They exist, not for themselves, but as
Experience has shown each one of us servants in the attempt to check the
that it is very easy to deceive himself, subjective feeling or hunch or hy-
to believe something which later ex- pothesis of a person with the objec-
perience shows is not so. H o w can I tive fact.
tell whether this tentative belief has And even throughout the use of
some real relationship to observed such rigorous and impersonal meth-
facts? I can use, not one line of evi- ods, the important choices are all
dence only, but several. I can surround made subjectively by the scientist. To
nay observation of the facts with vari- which of a number of hypotheses
ous precautions to make sure I am shall I devote time ? What kind of con-
not deceiving myself. I can consult trol group is most suitable for avoid-
with others who have also been con- ing self-deception in this particular
cerned with avoiding self-deception, research? H o w far shall I carry the
and learn useful ways of catching my- statistical analysis? H o w much cre-
self in unwarranted beliefs, based on dence may I place in the findings?
misinterpretation of observations. I Each of these is necessarily a subjec-
can, in short, begin to use all the elab- tive personal judgment, emphasizing
orate methodology which science has that the splendid structure of science
accumulated. I discover that stating rests basically upon its subjective use
my hypothesis in operational terms by persons. It is the best instrurrkent
will avoid many blind alleys and false we have yet been able to devise to
conclusions. I learn that control groups check upon our organismic sensing of
can help me to avoid drawing false the universe.
inferences. I learn that correlations,
and tests and critical ratios and a The Findings
whole array of statistical procedures
can likewise aid me in drawing only If, as scientist, I like the way I
reasonable inferences. have gone about my investigation, if
Thus scientific methodology is seen I have been open to all the evidence, if
for what it truly is--a way of prevent- I have selected and used intelligently
ing me from deceiving myself in. re- all the precautions against self-decep-
tion which I have been able to assimi-
for the scientist. He simply takes it for late from others or to devise myself,
granted and then proceeds to the task of then I will give my tentative belief to
describing the events occurring in it and the findings which have emerged. I
discovering and formulating the nature of will regard them as a springboard for
the relationships holding among them." further investigation and further seek-
Kenneth W. Spence, in Psychological
Theory, ed. by IV[. H. Marx, Macmillan, ing.
1951, p. 173. It seems to me that in the best of
7_2 PASTORAL PSYCHOLOGY A:o,-/t
science, the primary purpose is to that I have indeed come across a new
provide a more satisfactory and de- relationship which is relevant to my
pendable hypothesis, belief, faith, for values, and that I am justified in hav-
the investigator himself. To the ex- ing a tentative faith in this relation-
tent that the scientist is endeavoring ship, then we have the beginnings of
to prove something to someone else--- Science with a capital S. It is at this
an error into which I have fallen more point that we are likely to think we
than once--then I believe he is using have created a body of scientific
science to bolster a personal insecuri- knowledge. Actually there is no such
ty, and is keeping it from its truly body of knowledge. There are only
creative role in the service of the tentative beliefs, existing subjectively,
person. in a number of different persons. If
In regard to the findings of science, these beliefs are not tentative, then
the subjective foundation is well what exists is dogma, not science. If
shown in the fact that at times the on the other hand, no one but the in-
scientist may refuse to believe his own vestigator believes the finding then this
findings. "The experiment showed finding is either a personal and deviant
thus and so but I believe it is wrong," matter, an instance of psychopathol-
is a theme which every scientist has ogy, or else it is an unusual truth dis-
experienced at some time or other. covered by a genius, which as yet no
Some very fruitful scientific discov- one is subjectively ready to believe.
eries have grown out of the persistent This leads me to comment on the
disbelief, by a scientist, in his own group which can put tentative faith in
findings and those of others. In the any given scientific finding.
last analysis he may place, more trust
in his total organismic reactions than Communication to Whom?
in the methods of science. There is no
doubt that this can result in serious It is clear that scientific findings
error as well as in scienti{ic discover- can be communicated only to those
ies, but it indicates again the leading who have agreed to the same ground
place of the subjective in the use of rules of investigation. The Australian
science. bushman will be quite unimpressed
with the findings of science regarding
Communication of Scientific Findings bacterial infection. He knows that ill-
ness truly is caused by evil spirits. It
Wading along a coral reef in the is only when he too agrees to scien-
Caribbean this morning, I Saw a blue tific method as a good means of pre-
fish--I think. If you, quite independ- venting self-deception, that he will be
ently, saw it too, then I feel more con- likely to accept its findings.
fidence in my own observation. This But even among those who have
is what is known as intersubjective adopted the ground rules of science,
verification, and it plays an impor- tentative belief in the findings of a
tant part in our understanding of sci- scientific research can only occur
ence. If I take you (whether in con- where there is a subjective readiness
versation or in print or behaviorally) to believe. One could find many ex-
through the steps I have taken in an amples. Most psychologists are quite
investigation, and it seems to you too ready to believe evidence showing that
that I have not deceived myself, and the lecture system produces significant
 1959 P E R S O N S OR SCIENCE? 23

increments of learning, and quite un- of this subjective fact is that in the
ready to believe that the turn of an physical sciences particularly, we have
unseen card may be called through an gradually adopted a very large area of
ability labelled extra-sensory percep- experience in which we are ready to
tion. Yet the scientific evidence for believe any finding which can be
the latter is considerably more impec- shown to rest upon the rules of the
cable than for the former. Likewise scientific game, properly played.
when the so-called " I o w a studies" first
came out, indicating that intelligence The Use of Science
might be considerably altered by en-
vironmental conditions, there was But not only is the origin, process,
great disbelief among psychologists, and conclusion of science something
and many attacks on the imperfect sci- which exists only in the subjective
entific methods used. The scientific experience of p e r s o n s - - s o also is its
evidence for this finding is not much utilization. "Science" will never de-
better today than it was when the Iowa personalize, or manipulate or control
studies first appeared, but the subjec- individuals. It is only persons who can
tive readiness of psychologists to, be- and will do that. This is surely a most
lieve such a finding has altered great- obvious and trite observation, yet a
ly. A historian of science has noted deep realization of it has had much
that empiricists, had they existed at meaning for me. I t means that the use
the time, would have been the first to which will be made of scientific find-
disbelieve the findings of Copernicus. ings in the field of personality is and
It appears then that whether I be- will be a matter of subjective person-
lieve the scientific findings of others, al choice--the same type of choice as
or those of my own studies, depends a person makes in therapy. T o the ex-
in part on my readiness to put a ten- tent that he has defensively closed off
tative belief in such findings.* One areas of his experience from aware-
reason we are not particularly aware ness, the person is more likely to make
choices which are socially destructive.
T o the extent that he is open to all
* One example from my own experience
m a y suIfice. In 1941 a research study done
phases of his experience we may be
under my supervision showed that the future sure that this person will be more like-
adjustment of delinquent adolescents was ly to use the findings and methods of
best predicted by a measure of their real- science (or any other tool o r capacity)
istic self-understanding and self-accept- in a manner which is personally and
ance. The instrument was a crude one, but
it was a better predictor than measures of
socially constructive.** There is, in
family environment, hereditary capacities, actuality then, no threatening entity of
social milieu, and the like. At that time I "Science" which can in any way affect
was simply not ready to believe such a
finding, because my own belief, like that of it. (For a report of these two studies see
most psychologists, was that such factors "The role of self understanding in the
as the emotional climate in the family and prediction of behavior" by C. R. Rogers,
the influence of the peer group ~rere the B. L. Kell, and H. McNeil, Jour. of Con-
real determinants of future delinquency and sultlng Psychol., vol. 12, 1948, pp. 174-186.)
non-delinquency. Only gradually, as m y ex- ** I have spelled out much more fully the
perience with psychotherapy continued and rationale for this view in two recent papers
deepened, was it possible for me to give my --"The Concept of the Fully Functioning
tentative belief to the findings of this study Person," and "Toward a Theory of
and of a later one (1944) which confirmed Creativity."
24 P A S T O R A L PSYCHOLOGY

our destiny. There are only people. in and based upon the immediate, sub-
While many of them are indeed jective experience of a person. It
threatening and dangerous in their de- springs from the inner, total, organ-
fensiveness, and modern scientific ismic experiencing which is only par-
knowledge multiplies the social threat tially and imperfectly communicable.
and danger, this is not the whole pic- It is one phase of subjective living.
ture. There are two other significant It is because I find value and re-
facets. (1) There are many other per- ward in human relationships that I
sons who are relatively open to their enter into a relationship known as
experience and hence likely to be so- therapeutic, where feelings and cog-
cially constructive. (2) Both the sub- nition merge into one unitary experi-
jective experience of psychotherapy ence which is lived rather than ex-
and the scientific findings regarding it amined, in which awareness is non-
indicate that individuals are motivated reflective, and where I am participant
to change, and may be helped to rather than observer. But because I
change, in the direction of greater am curious about the exquisite order-
openness to experience, and hence in liness which appears to exist in the
the direction of behavior which is en- universe and in this relationship I can
hancing of self and society, rather than abstract myself from the experience
destructive. and look upon it as an observer, I
To put it briefly, Science can never use all of the hunches which grow out
threaten us. Only persons can do that. of the living experience. T o avoid de-
And while individuals can be vastly ceiving myself as observer, to gain
destructive with the tools placed in a more accurate picture of the Order
their hands by scientific knowledge, which exists, I make use of all the
this is only one side of the picture. canons of science. Science is not an
We already have subjective and ob- impersonal something, but simply a
jective knowledge of the basic prin- person living subjectively another
ciples by which individuals, may phase of himself. A deeper understand-
achieve the more constructive social ing of therapy (or of any other prob-
behavior which is natural to their or- lem) may come from living it, or from
ganismic process of becoming. observing it in accordance with the
rules of science, or from the com-
A NEW INTEGRATION munication within the self between the
What this line of thought has two types of experience. As to the
achieved for me is a fresh integration subjective experience of choice, it is
in which the conflict between the "ex- not only primary in therapy, but it is
perientialist" and the "scientific" tends also primary in the use of scientific
to disappear. This particular integra- method by a person. I have even come
tion may not be acceptable to others, to see that freedom of choice is not
but it does have meaning to me. Its necessarily antithetical to the deter-
major tenets have been largely implicit minism which is a part of our frame-
in the preceding section, but I will try work for thinking scientifically. Since
to state them here in a way which [ have recently tried to spell out this
takes cognizance of the arguments be- relationship elsewhere* I will not take
tween the opposing points of view. the space to do so here.
Science, as well as therapy, as well * In my paper on "The Concept of the
as all other aspects of living, is rooted Fully Functioning Person."
26 PASTORAL PSYCHOLOGY

the subjective--if in any way I cut

TWOWORKSHOPSFORMINISTERS, off my perception from the full range
of its actual sensitivity--then I am
THEIRWIVESANDFAMILIES likely to be socially destructive, wheth-
at the Retreat Center of the er I use as tool the knowledge and in-
Glenview Communit~ Church on struments of science, or the power and
Lake Geneva in Wisconsin emotional strength of a subjective
Church Administration Workshop relatic~nship. A n d on the other hand
June 28 - July 3 (5 days) if I am open to my experience, and
Pastoral Counseling Workshop can permit all of the sensings of my
August 9 - 15 (6 days) intricate organism to be available to
Opportunity for a limited number of experi- my awareness, then I am likely to use
enced men in church administration or coun- myself, my subjective experience, and
seling to spend a week in the fruitful exchange
my scientific knowledge, in ways
of ideas, m~thods and problems, Not a " r e ' c u e
to the seminary" ,~ourse, but rather a high level which are realistically constructive.
sharing of experiences with men who have b e -
c o m e experts through their years of work in
This then is the degree of integration
these fields. Each group is limited to 12 fam- I have currently been able to achieve
ilies. between two approaches first experi-
For Information and application form write to: enced as conflicting. It does not com-
Summer Workshops pletely resolve all the issues posed in
Glenview Community Church the earlier section, but it seems to point
1000 Elm Street toward a resolution. It rewrites the
Glenview, I|linois problem or reperceives the issue, by
putting the subjective, existential per-
son, with the values which he holds,
W h a t ~[ will do with the knowledge at the foundation and the root of the
gained through scientific m e t h o d - - therapeutic relationship and of the sci-
whether I will use it to understand, entific relationship. F o r science too, at
enhance, enrich, or use it to control, its inception, is an " I - T h o u " relation-
manipulate and d e s t r o y - - i s a matter of ship with the world of perceived ob-
Subjective choice dependent upon the jects, just as therapy at its deepest is
values which have personal meaning an " I - T h o u " relationship with a per-
for me. If, out of fright and defensive- son or persons. A n d only as a subjec-
ness , I block out from my awareness tive person can I enter either of these
large areas of experience--if I can relationships.
see only those facts which support my
present beliefs, and am blind to all This article is reprinted by permission of
o t h e r s - - i f I can see only the objective the author and the "American Psychologist,"
aspects of life, and cannot perceive Vol. 10, pp. 267-278.

Stagnation in Science
HERE were two age-old tendencies towards stagnation in scientific thought
T which those of youthful spirit had always to resist. One was the human
weakness of accepting the uncorroborated say-so of eminent authorities, and
the other was the human stupidity of regarding natural science as something
divisible into water-tight compartments.--E. C. L~oE