Contents
About 1952 or 1953, when I was escaping from winter in warm countries, I wrote an article entitled «The Concept of a Fully Functioning Human». It was an attempt to describe a person who would have appeared as a result of the most successful psychotherapy. I was somewhat intimidated by the fluid, relatively individualistic personality that seemed to emerge as the logical outcome of the psychotherapy process. There were two questions before me: Was my logic correct? And if so, was such a person of value to me? To give myself the opportunity to reflect on these questions, I reproduced the article and then distributed hundreds of copies of it to interested people. As I became more confident of the thoughts it contained, I submitted it for consideration to one of the major psychological journals. The editor promised to publish it, but thought that it should be presented from the standpoint of a more traditional psychological theory. He proposed many significant changes. This made me feel that, probably in the form in which it was written, the article was not acceptable to psychologists, and I abandoned the idea of publishing it. Since then, the article has continued to be the focus of many people’s attention. For example, Dr. Hayakawa wrote an article on the same concept in the semantics journal Etc. As a result, this article was one of the first that came to my mind when thinking about this book.
However, when I re-read it, I found that many of its main themes and thoughts have already been reflected and perhaps better expressed in other works that I have included in this book. Therefore, with some reluctance, I again put it aside and presented here another work that expresses my point of view on the good life. This work was based on the article on a fully functioning human and, in my opinion, presented in a more concise and readable form the main aspects of the previous work. My only concession to the past is that I have included a subtitle in the title of this chapter.
* * *
Most of my views on the meaning of the good life are based on my experience of working with people in a very intimate, trusting relationship called psychotherapy. Thus, my views are based on experience or feelings, as opposed to, for example, scientific or philosophical justification. By observing people with disorders and problems who yearn to achieve a good life, I got an idea of what they mean by this.
I should have made it clear from the outset that my experience is due to the vantage point of a particular trend in psychotherapy that has developed over many years. It is quite possible that all types of psychotherapy are basically similar to each other, but since I am less sure of this now than before, I would like to make it clear to you that my psychotherapeutic experience has developed in line with the direction that seems to me to be the most efficient. This is client-centered psychotherapy.
Let me try to briefly describe what this psychotherapy would look like if it were optimal in every way. I feel that I learned the most about the good life from the experience of psychotherapy, during which many changes took place. If psychotherapy were optimal in all respects (both intensive and extensive), the therapist would be able to enter into an intense subjective personal relationship with the client, treating him not as a scientist to an object of study, not as a doctor to a patient, but as a person to to a person. The therapist would then feel that his client is clearly a person of varying merit, of high value regardless of position, behavior, or feelings. It would also mean that the therapist is sincere, does not hide behind a façade of defenses, and meets the client by expressing the feelings he is experiencing on an organic level. This would mean that the therapist can allow himself to understand the client; that no internal barriers prevent him from feeling what the client feels at every moment of their relationship; and that he can express to the client some part of his sympathetic understanding. This means that it would be convenient for the therapist to fully enter into this relationship without knowing cognitively where it leads; and that he is pleased that he has created an atmosphere that enables the client with the greatest freedom to become himself.
For the client, optimal psychotherapy would mean exploring ever more unfamiliar, strange, and dangerous feelings in oneself; research, which is possible only because the client gradually begins to understand that he is accepted without any conditions. Therefore, he becomes acquainted with those elements of his experience, the awareness of which in the past was denied, because they were too threatening and destructive for the structure of his ideas about «self». In these relationships, he finds that he experiences these feelings in their entirety, to the end, so that at the moment he is his fear or anger, tenderness or strength. And when he lives with these various intensities and varied feelings, he finds that he does not lose the sense of «himself», that he is all these feelings. He sees that his behavior changes constructively in accordance with his new felt sense of «self.» He comes to realize that he no longer needs to be afraid of what his experiences may contain, that he can freely welcome all experiences as part of his changing and developing Self.
This is a small sketch of what client-centered psychotherapy comes close to, if it is optimal. I present it here simply as the context in which my ideas of the good life were formed.
Observation with a negative conclusion
As I tried to live by understanding the experiences of my clients, I gradually came to one negative conclusion about the good life. It seems to me that the good life is not a frozen state. In my opinion, this is not a state of virtue, contentment, nirvana or happiness. These are not conditions that a person must meet, which he must fulfill or actualize. Using psychological terms, we can say that this is not a state of weakening desire, reducing tension and not homeostasis (Homeostasis is a dynamic equilibrium state of any system, maintained by counteracting external or internal factors that violate this balance. — Approx. ed.).
It seems to me that the use of these terms suggests that when one or more of these states is reached, the purpose of life is also reached. Of course, for many people, happiness or fitness are synonymous with a good life. Even social scientists have often said that the purpose of life is to reduce tension, achieve homeostasis, or balance.
Therefore, I realized with surprise and some dismay that my personal experience does not confirm either of these positions. If I focus on the experience of some individuals who have reached the highest degree of progress during the psychotherapeutic relationship and in subsequent years, seem to show real progress towards a good life, then, in my opinion, their condition cannot be accurately described by any of the above terms denoting some form of static existence. I think they would consider themselves offended if they were to be described by the word «adapted»; and they would find it wrong to describe themselves as «happy,» «pleased,» or even «updated.» Knowing them well, I would consider it incorrect to say that their drive intensity is lowered, or that they are in a state of homeostasis. So I have to ask myself if it is possible to generalize their cases, if there is any definition of the good life that fits the facts of life that I have observed. I believe that it is not at all easy to give an answer, and my further statements are very hypothetical.
Observation with a positive conclusion
If I try to summarize the description of this concept, I believe it will come down to something like this:
- The good life is a process, not a state of being.
- This is a direction, not a destination.
- This direction is chosen by the whole organism in conditions of psychological freedom to move anywhere.
- This organismically chosen direction has certain common features that are manifested in a large number of different people, each of which is unique and one of a kind.
In this way, I can combine these statements into a definition that can at least serve as a basis for consideration and discussion. , and this direction is characterized by a certain generality.
Process characteristics
Let me identify the characteristic qualities of this process of movement, the qualities that emerge in psychotherapy in each client.
Increased openness to experience
First, this process is associated with an increasing openness to experience. This phrase is becoming more and more meaningful to me. Openness is diametrically opposed to protection. The defensive reaction I described earlier is the body’s response to an experience that is perceived or will be perceived as threatening, as inconsistent with the individual’s idea of himself or himself in relation to the world. This threatening experience temporarily ceases to be such, since it is either distorted upon awareness, or denied, or not allowed into consciousness. It can be said that I actually cannot correctly understand all my experiences, feelings and reactions, which are significantly at odds with my ideas about myself. During psychotherapy, the client finds all the time that he is experiencing such feelings and relationships that before that he was unable to be aware, was unable to «possess» them as part of «himself», his «I».
However, if a person could be completely open to his experience, every stimulus coming from the organism or from the outside world would be transmitted freely through the nervous system, without the slightest distortion by any defense mechanism. There would be no need for a «subconscious» mechanism by which the organism is warned in advance of any experience that threatens the personality. On the contrary, regardless of whether it is a stimulus of the surrounding world that affects the sensory nerves with its shape, shape, color or sound, whether it is a trace of a memory of a past experience, or a visceral sensation of fear, pleasure or disgust, a person will “live” this experience, which will be fully accessible to his consciousness.
Thus, it turns out that one of the components of the process that I call «the good life» is the movement from the pole of defensive reactions to the pole of openness to one’s experience. A person becomes more and more able to hear himself, to experience what is happening in him. He is more open to his feelings of fear, depression, pain. He is also more open to his feelings of courage, tenderness, and reverence. He can live freely by his subjective feelings, insofar as they are in him, and he is free to be aware of them. He is able to live the experience of his body to a greater extent, and not close it from awareness.
Increasing desire to live in the present
The second quality of the process that seems to me to be a good life has to do with the growing desire to live life to its fullest in every moment. This idea is easily misunderstood; it is still unclear to me. However, let me try to explain what I mean.
I think if a person were completely open to new experiences and had no defensive reactions, every moment of his life would be new. The complex combination of internal and external stimuli that exists at the moment has never existed before in this form. Therefore, this person would think: «What I will be in the next moment, and what I will do, grows out of this moment and cannot be predicted in advance either by me or others.» We have often met clients expressing just such feelings.
To express the fluidity inherent in a good life, one can say that the Self and the personality in the course of it arise from experience, and not experience is interpreted and distorted to fit the predetermined structure of the Self. This means that you find yourself a participant and observer of the ongoing processes of organismic experience, and not someone who exercises control over them.
Living in the present moment means the absence of stillness, strict organization, the imposition of structure on experience. Instead, there is a maximum of adaptation, revealing the structure in experience, the current, changing organization of the «I» and personality.
It is this desire to live in the present moment, in my opinion, is clearly manifested in people involved in the process of a good life. It can almost be said with certainty that this is her most essential quality. It is connected with revealing the structure of experience in the course of living this experience. On the other hand, most people almost always bring pre-formed structure and evaluation into experience and, without noticing it, distort the experience and squeeze it into the required framework so that it fits preconceived ideas. At the same time, they get annoyed that, due to the fluidity of experience, fitting it to our carefully constructed framework becomes completely unmanageable. When I see clients approaching a good, mature life, one of its characteristics is that their mind is open to what is happening now, and in this real process they discover a structure that turns out to be inherent in it.
Increases confidence in your body
Another characteristic of a person who lives a good life is an increasing trust in his body as a means of achieving the best behavior in every situation in the present.
When deciding what to do in a given situation, many people rely on principles, on the rules of conduct established by some group or institution, on the judgments of others (starting with his wife and friends and ending with Emilia Post (Emilia Post — at that time a famous in the US, the author of a book on good manners in good society, or how they behaved in a similar situation in the past.However, when I observe clients whose life experiences have taught me so much, I find that they are able to trust their whole organismic response to new situations more, because, by being open to their experience, they are increasingly convinced that what “feels right” turns out to be a reliable guide to behavior that brings them true satisfaction.
When I tried to understand the reason for this, I found myself reasoning as follows. A man fully open to his experience would have access to all the factors at his disposal in a given situation: social demands, his own complex and probably conflicting needs; memories of similar situations in the past, the perception of the unique qualities of this situation, etc. On the basis of all this, he would build his behavior. Of course, this information would be very complex. But he could allow his whole organism, with the participation of consciousness, to consider each stimulus, need and demand, its relative intensity and importance. From this complex weighing and balancing, he could deduce those actions that would best satisfy all his needs in a given situation. Such a person can be compared by analogy with a giant electronic computer. Since he is open to his experience, all the data of sensory impressions, memory, previous communication, the state of visceral and internal organs are entered into the machine. The machine takes in all of these multiple stress and force data and quickly figures out how to proceed so that the most cost-effective vector to satisfy the needs in a given situation is obtained. This is the behavior of our hypothetical person.
Most of us have flaws that lead to errors in this process. They consist in the inclusion in the calculations of information that does not belong to this particular situation, or in the exclusion of information that does. There are erroneous behaviors when memories and previous knowledge are introduced into calculations, as if they were this reality, and not just memories and knowledge. Error can also occur when certain frightening experiences are not allowed into consciousness; therefore, they are not included in the calculations or are entered into the machine in a distorted form. But our hypothetical person would consider his body to be quite trustworthy, and therefore all available data would be used and presented in a correct rather than distorted form. Hence, his behavior would perhaps be closer to satisfying his needs to increase opportunities, establish connections with others, and so on.
In this weighing, balancing and calculating, his organism would by no means be infallible. Based on the available data, he would always give the best possible answer, but sometimes this data could be incomplete. However, due to openness to experience, any errors that lead to unsatisfactory behavior would soon be corrected. Calculations would be in a constant process of adjustment, because they would be constantly tested in practice, in behavior.
You may not like my computer analogy. Let me turn again to the experience of those clients that I knew. As they become more open to their experience, they find they can trust their reactions more. If they feel they want to express their anger, they do so and find that it’s not that scary at all. For they are equally aware of their other desires, and are capable of expressing affection, participation, and similar forms of attitude towards people. They are surprised to find that they can intuitively decide how to behave in complex and hectic human relationships. And only later do they realize how reliable were their internal reactions that led to correct behavior.
The process of fuller functioning
I would like to present a more coherent picture of the good life by bringing together the three threads that describe this process. It turns out that a mentally free person more and more perfectly fulfills his purpose. He becomes more and more capable of a full-blooded life in each of his feelings and reactions. He is increasingly using all his organic mechanisms in order to feel the concrete situation inside and outside him as correctly as possible. He uses all the information in his mind that his nervous system can supply, while realizing that his whole organism can be wiser than his consciousness. He is more able to give his entire free, complexly functioning organism the opportunity to choose from the many possible options for behavior that will really satisfy him at the moment. He is more able to trust his organism in its functioning, not because it is infallible, but because he can be completely open to the consequences of his actions and will be able to correct them if they do not satisfy him.
He will be more able to experience all his feelings, less afraid of any of them, he will be able to sift through the facts himself, being more open to information from all sources. He is fully involved in the process of being and «becoming himself» and therefore finds himself really and truly socialized. He lives more fully in the present moment and learns that this is the right way to be. He becomes a more fully functioning organism and a more perfectly functioning person because he is fully aware of himself, and this awareness pervades his experience from beginning to end.
Any idea of what the good life is raises many questions. My view of the good life presented here is no exception. I hope that the implicit conclusions hidden in it will still serve as food for thought. But two or three questions I would like to discuss now.
A new look at the relationship between freedom and necessity
The connection with the first implicit inference may not be immediately apparent. It deals with the old problem of «free will.» With your permission, I will try to show how I see this problem in a new light.
For some time I have been perplexed by the psychotherapeutic paradox between freedom and determinism. Some of the most powerful subjective experiences of the client in the psychotherapeutic relationship are those when he feels he has the power to make a free choice. He is free — to become himself or hide behind a facade, to move forward or backward, to behave as a destructive destroyer of himself and others, or to make himself and others stronger — in the literal sense of the word, he is free to live or die, in both — psychological and physiological — senses. of these words. However, as soon as I enter the field of psychotherapy with objective research methods, I, like many other scientists, commit myself to total determinism. From this point of view, every feeling and action of the client is determined by what preceded it. There is no such thing as freedom. This dilemma, which I am trying to describe, exists in other areas as well — it is just that I have outlined it more clearly, and this does not make it any less insoluble.
However, this dilemma can be seen in a new way if it is considered within the framework of the definition I have given of a fully functioning person. It can be said that in the most favorable psychotherapeutic conditions, a person rightfully experiences the most complete and absolute freedom. He desires or chooses the course of action that is the most economical vector in relation to all internal and external stimuli, because this is precisely the behavior that will most deeply satisfy him. But this is the same course of action, about which one can say that, from another convenient point of view, it is determined by all the factors of the present situation. Let’s contrast this with the picture of a person with defensive reactions. He wants or chooses a certain course of action, but finds that he cannot behave according to his choice. He is determined by the factors of a particular situation, but these factors include his defensive reactions, his denial or distortion of significant data. Therefore, he is sure that his behavior will not fully satisfy him. His behavior is determined, but he is not free to make an effective choice. On the other hand, a fully functioning person not only experiences, but also uses absolute freedom, when he spontaneously, freely and voluntarily chooses and desires that which is absolutely determined. I am not so naive as to suggest that this completely solves the problem of the subjective and the objective, freedom and necessity. However, it matters to me because the more a person lives a good life, the more he feels free to choose and the more his decisions are effectively translated into his behavior.
Creativity as part of a good life
It seems to me quite clear that the person involved in what I have called the “good life” is a creative person. With his receptive openness to the world, with his faith in his ability to form new relationships with others, he will be the kind of person who will have creative products and a creative life. He will not necessarily be «adapted» to his culture, but he will almost certainly not be a conformist. At any time and in any culture, he will live creatively, in harmony with his culture, necessary for him to meet his needs in a balanced way. Sometimes, in certain situations, he could be very unhappy, but still he would continue to move towards becoming himself, and behave in such a way as to satisfy his deepest needs as much as possible.
I think that evolutionary scientists would say about such a person that he would be more likely to adapt and survive under changing environmental conditions. He would be able to adapt well and creatively to both new and existing conditions. He would represent a suitable vanguard of human evolution.
Fundamental trust in human nature
It will become clear later that another conclusion relevant to the point of view I have presented is that fundamentally the biological being, the «nature» of freely functioning man, is constructive and trustworthy. Based on my twenty-five years of psychotherapeutic experience, I inevitably come to this conclusion. If we are able to free the individual from defensive reactions, to open his perception both to the wide range of his own needs and to the demands of those around him and society as a whole, we can be sure that his subsequent actions will be positive, creative, moving him forward. There is no need to worry about who will socialize him, since the need for relationships with other people, for communication is one of his own deep needs. As he becomes more and more himself, he will be more socialized. There is no need to worry about who will restrain his aggressive impulses, for if he is open to all his impulses, his needs for receiving and giving love will be just as strong as his aggressive or possessive impulses. He will be aggressive in situations where aggression is actually required, but he will not have an irresistibly growing need for aggression. If he moves towards openness to all his experience, his overall behavior in this and other areas will be more realistic and balanced, suitable for the survival and further development of such a highly socialized animal as man.
I share little of the almost dominant notion that man is fundamentally irrational and that if his impulses are not controlled, he will end up destroying himself and others. Human behavior is rational to the point of refinement when it moves along a strictly planned complex path towards the goals that its organism seeks to achieve. The tragedy is that our defensive reactions do not allow us to realize this rationality, so that consciously we move in one direction, and organismally in another. But in our man, who lives a good life, the number of such barriers decreases, and he participates more and more in the rational actions of his body. The only necessary control over impulses that such a person has is the natural internal balancing of one need with another and the search for behaviors aimed at the most complete satisfaction of all his needs. The practice of excessively satisfying one need (for aggression, sex, etc.) at the expense of satisfying others (needs for friendships, affection, etc.), which is so characteristic of people with defensive reactions, would be greatly reduced. A person would take part in the most complex activity of the body in self-regulation — the management of its mental and physiological functions — in order to live in ever greater harmony with oneself and other people.
A more fulfilling life
The last thing I would like to mention is that the good life involves a wider range of life, brighter than the «narrowed» existence that most of us lead. To be part of this process is to be involved in the often frightening or satisfying experiences of a more receptive life that has a greater range and variety. It seems to me that clients who have advanced considerably in psychotherapy have a more subtle sense of pain, but they also tend to have a more intense sense of ecstasy; they feel their anger more clearly, but the same can be said about love; they feel their fear more deeply, but so does courage. And the reason why they can live more fully, with a greater range of feelings, is that they are deeply confident in themselves as reliable tools for interacting with life.
I think it becomes clear to you why such expressions as «happiness», «pleasure», «bliss», «satisfaction» do not seem to me quite suitable for describing the process that I called the «good life», although a person in the course of a good life from time to time and experiences similar feelings. Here, adjectives such as “enriching”, “exciting”, “rewarding”, “promising”, “meaningful” would be more suitable. I am convinced that the good life is not for the faint-hearted. It is associated with the expansion and growth of its capabilities. It takes courage to plunge fully into the flow of life. But what is most admirable about a person is that, being free to choose a good life for himself, he chooses precisely the process of becoming.