This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Friedman, M. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Reflections on the Buber-Rogers Dialogue

421 Hilmen Place, Solana Beach, CA 92075.

After setting the stage of the dialogue between Martin Buber and Carl Rogers in Michigan in 1957, which the author moderated, the article discusses the close relationship between Rogers's writings and Buber's "healing through meeting." The first major issue that arose in the dialogue was that of "the problematic of mutuality"-Rogers's seeming insistence that Buber's I-Thou relationship implies total mutuality in the therapy relationship and Buber's stress that there is a normative limitation of mutuality both because of the structure of the therapy relationship and the limits of resources of the client. The second major issue was that of acceptance and confirmation. Rogers held that through the therapist's acceptance of the client, the client actualizes himself or herself. Buber held that acceptance is the beginning of relationship but that real healing through meeting demands confirmation too, which includes helping the client in his or her inner conflict between the desire to find and follow one's unique personal direction and the aimless whirl that resists direction. Rogers equated acceptance and confirmation because he held that human nature is good and therefore to be trusted. Buber held that the human being is neither good nor evil but polar. Rogers tended to make dialogue the means to self-actualization, whereas Buber saw self-actualization as the by-product of dialogue.

Journal of Humanistic Psychology, Vol. 34, No. 1, 46-65 (1994)
DOI: 10.1177/00221678940341004


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				R. M. Reeves The Costatement: Objective Evidence for a Science of Subjectivity Journal of Humanistic Psychology, April 1, 2006; 46(2): 209 - 233. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. Gopal Krishnamurti and Spirituality: A Comment on Wren-Lewis's View Journal of Humanistic Psychology, January 1, 1995; 35(1): 89 - 96. [Abstract]