The value of this video and others you have done is astonishing, not because of the quality of the theories (which is highly valuable in and of itself) but because of the context in which you deliver and rely the information. I believe the reason people don't act on this information is due to the bleak understanding and perception of topics.
I take Rogers idea of people being intrinsically 'good' being defined more closely as people being 'positively oriented' in that, given the right conditions, people will move in a positive direction towards becoming a more complete and genuine individual. Living a 'good' life where you are engaged in the process of life. Therapy is then about creating these conditions to allow the individual to know who they are at present; a result of actually having a real conversation where the therapist who is nonjudgmental and completely sincere and honest. When they can know where they are they can then be free to gravitate towards their positive destination in life
Here and Now is not Rogers. It is Gestalt. Also, Rogers has a precise manner of communicating "truth" to the client through unconditional positive regard. He was definitely one of my favorite psychotherapists. Thank you for the presentation.
I've got my first client centered therapy session soon because cbt only made me worse. This really appeals to my way of thinking though I think. Any advice?
Well made presentation. I have issues with this method, it seems it overestimates the premise that humans share some intrinsic 'goodness'. I know it'a a long and cumbersome debate to try to prove that men are good or evil by nature, as I believe we have certain qualities of both in different measures. Does embracing what is perceived as a bad quality, whether by the individual or the environment, leads to a dangerous spread of moral relativism? I think acceptance and empathy towards a human being, should not lead to accepting a bad or dangerous quality of that human, otherwise it would be validating and enforcing it more. For most people, there must exist some moral and behavioral outlines that could push them towards meaningful development and the avoidance of total decay and corruption.
Fadi, you bring up interesting points and criticisms, but you're misunderstanding the context of Carl Rogers' framework and ideas. In this context, the word "acceptance" has more to do with unconditional positive regard and an empathic, nonjudgmental relationship. The idea is that by accepting the individual as they are, the individual can begin to become more open to their own experiences. This in turns allows the person to grow. As for humans having an intrinsic goodness, that doesn't really capture what Rogers says. The analogy would be that a plants tends to grow when in the appropriate environment (proper sunlight, nutrients in the soil, ecosystem, water, lack of predators, and so on), and that humans also tend to grow psychologically in a positive direction given the right environmental factors. The critical factor in the environment is whether or not the person has growth promoting relationships with trustworthy, caring, nonjudgmental, self assured, empathetic people. Moral relativism is a dangerous, but that is outside the scope of "acceptance" as it pertains to this particular context Nonetheless, great points and interesting dialogue on your part.
This is a very great clip! I am in the process of developing a training for Motivational Interviewing and I want to introduce Rogerian Theory since person centered counseling is at the heart of MI. Am I able to use this clip to help people further understand Rogerian theory?
You hereby have my permission to use this video in your presentation. If you need anything further, feel free to look up my email at the University of West Georgia.
Exposes an issue with counselor neutrality well. Lovely and kind as Carl was, he doesn't get how important politics and wider political structures are to someone who is african- american, because he hasn't had to deal with these issues directly. I feel a large part of this mans exploration of his way of being was dismissed here. If you are white and western and feel your pretty aware of how it much be to be BME, reading Peggy McIntosh 46 special circumstances and conditions of whiteness is illuminating!!
Hmm... well, I doubt that Rogers would claim that he's somehow able to understand every group and sub-group's particular experience within our culture. In fact, he seems to take pains (in the first chapter of On Becoming a Person, for instance) to point out that his view -- both theoretically and clinically -- is a product of his own particular history and set of experiences, which may or may not be germane to anyone else's life. So... it seems to me that from a Rogerian perspective, the important thing is not to claim to understand things that are beyond our experience. The important thing is to do what we can to help our fellow human beings on the path of life -- to at least make an effort to be a benefit to our fellow travelers, even if it means that we're sometimes seeing things imperfectly or unclearly in the process. After all, what would be worse than trying to help someone whose experience in life we can only vaguely understand? Wouldn't the worse thing be to use our imperfect understanding as an excuse not to try to help that person at all?
Eric Dodson Sorry, the comment here was put for the previous clip on 'Hurt and Anger' but auto play moved on before I noticed. I agree with you that we cannot immediately 'know' someones phenomenological perspective. My feeling however is that when being in a therapeutic relationship exploring this and clarifying meaning with the client helps both the respect and trust within that relationship. Sometimes fear of not knowing and getting it wrong, can led to not exploring and defensiveness. I feel this client was touching on the feeling that being angry was a process he choose to repress because it previously/currently had socio political associations for him as a black man and he didn't want part of an angry way of being. I would like to check my understanding of this with the client!! This appeared to be important to him as a meaning in life process in regard to anger. Exploring this could be illuminating for the client and Rogers. I don't mean to 'dis' Rogers but I did want to comment on how I saw the piece and all discussion I find to be educational and for the greater good as long as it's not taken as a personal attack! Thanks for your good work putting up the clips, really good resource.
... what a coincidence , just now . i made ' c rogers therapy ' when teenager . in reading his famous book - at that time , at least - ' i am OK , you are OK ' .
Aaaghh!!! It was going so well until you said that Rogerian therapy is 'reflecting back to the client what the client is saying'. It is about providing the therapeutic conditions, as attitudes, while holding faith that the client's own organismic actualising tendency will keep them moving forward, as they continue to process their experiencing in an accepting, non-judgmental atmosphere with someone who is being openly trying to empathically understand the client's phenomenology and frame of reference. And congruence is more than openness, it is alignment between the ongoing, poorly symbolised valuings of the innate, organismic temperament and the socially conditioned values structures of conscious cognition: i.e. the integration of limbic responses with the flow of awareness, with the self increasingly able to accept and articulate the entirety of their experiencing. Congruence = mindful authenticity.
My critique of Rogers is that there's no evidence for loads of things he says or believes. It is way too vague, non-scientific and I really doubt his theories can withstand the latest discoveries of neuroscience. One can go on and on talking about self for years and get more and more superficial about many things. The Rogerian approach seems too simplistic to me and ineffective on several circumstances (addiction, heavier mental illness, etc) as well as offering no real structured understanding, prognosis, strategies or homework to really change life. It's a very American style of talking about self and self and self and self and so on...
Have you read any of Carl Rogers' books and listened to him talk in interviews? He consistently checked his work against the best scientific research at the time. The client centered theory is still scientifically valid today. I have a friend who is a highly skilled, well trained social worker that uses scientifically backed principles & approaches in order to increase the probability of successfully helping clients that experience psychosis. My friend utilizes a variety of effective methods that are backed by science, which includes various components of Rogers' work.
rogerian therapy is very good for people are not that sick. he can help you be more healthy, but if you have a lot of psychpathology, you'll need another approach. imo
As a middle-age person returning to education, I find Carl Rogers’ approach to psychology fascinating and commendable!
Awesome! As a student studying Psychology, I really appreciate what you're doing!
Thanks, Shane... and thanks for taking the time to watch & comment. Eric
I come back to this video a lot. I love it!
Dr. Dodson, percibí tus videos geniales. Tenerte como amigo es un gran privilegio.
acceptance. empathy. genuineness
Be emphatic, accept others and value others
Be honest
Become who you are.
Don't limit yourself. Be you.
Represent to others what they say
This is a very informative video. I like the fact that it was able to provide a broad overview of the works of Carl Rogers in so few slides.
You did such an amazing job condensing the work of Dr. Rogers into its most significant ideas. Thanks :)
Carl Rodgers was quoted in Awareness by Anthony De Melo. This cleared up Rogerian Psychological philosophy thank you.
helped me understand my teacher.
Thank you very much!!!
This is a really great video! appreciate it a lot. hope you continue to make these
I'm studying counselling and this guy is who we are researching at the moment. thankyou x
The value of this video and others you have done is astonishing, not because of the quality of the theories (which is highly valuable in and of itself) but because of the context in which you deliver and rely the information. I believe the reason people don't act on this information is due to the bleak understanding and perception of topics.
This was a really helpful video. We jumped into Rogers today in class and I wish I'd watched this first. Great.
As always, a wonderful, stimulating summary. Thank you.
I take Rogers idea of people being intrinsically 'good' being defined more closely as people being 'positively oriented' in that, given the right conditions, people will move in a positive direction towards becoming a more complete and genuine individual. Living a 'good' life where you are engaged in the process of life. Therapy is then about creating these conditions to allow the individual to know who they are at present; a result of actually having a real conversation where the therapist who is nonjudgmental and completely sincere and honest. When they can know where they are they can then be free to gravitate towards their positive destination in life
This is an impressive little series Dodson. You're a bit of a hero.
This is very good video! I like how the pictures underline what you are saying :)
Excellent video. Thanks for renewing my spirit and hope of a better life.
Here and Now is not Rogers. It is Gestalt. Also, Rogers has a precise manner of communicating "truth" to the client through unconditional positive regard. He was definitely one of my favorite psychotherapists. Thank you for the presentation.
Great video! Thanks for the refresher!
Dense, but so, so well put together. Thank you for this very helpful video.
Very good summary, thanks for this content.
It's very difficult to deal with them, instead of that prayer is the best
Superb. Thank you sir!
Just great!! Thank You!
Amazing video
Why is the paradox of change theory attributed to Fritz Pearls if Carl Rogers was the one who said that?
I'm writing a 5 page essay on humanistic psychology for English and it's due tomorrow so this helps a lot
Llama Wayne 5 PAGE??? 😱😱 Wow and I was stressed about my 5 paragraphs 😅
Hi! Thank you for great source! May I know what reference book or text you used to get those information?
I've got my first client centered therapy session soon because cbt only made me worse. This really appeals to my way of thinking though I think. Any advice?
person centered approach is so good
Well made presentation.
I have issues with this method, it seems it overestimates the premise that humans share some intrinsic 'goodness'. I know it'a a long and cumbersome debate to try to prove that men are good or evil by nature, as I believe we have certain qualities of both in different measures. Does embracing what is perceived as a bad quality, whether by the individual or the environment, leads to a dangerous spread of moral relativism? I think acceptance and empathy towards a human being, should not lead to accepting a bad or dangerous quality of that human, otherwise it would be validating and enforcing it more. For most people, there must exist some moral and behavioral outlines that could push them towards meaningful development and the avoidance of total decay and corruption.
Beautiful said James. I find the Maslow and Carl framework fascinating.
Fadi, you bring up interesting points and criticisms, but you're misunderstanding the context of Carl Rogers' framework and ideas.
In this context, the word "acceptance" has more to do with unconditional positive regard and an empathic, nonjudgmental relationship. The idea is that by accepting the individual as they are, the individual can begin to become more open to their own experiences. This in turns allows the person to grow.
As for humans having an intrinsic goodness, that doesn't really capture what Rogers says. The analogy would be that a plants tends to grow when in the appropriate environment (proper sunlight, nutrients in the soil, ecosystem, water, lack of predators, and so on), and that humans also tend to grow psychologically in a positive direction given the right environmental factors. The critical factor in the environment is whether or not the person has growth promoting relationships with trustworthy, caring, nonjudgmental, self assured, empathetic people.
Moral relativism is a dangerous, but that is outside the scope of "acceptance" as it pertains to this particular context
Nonetheless, great points and interesting dialogue on your part.
Great summary. Subscribed!
I studied Rogers, of course, on my counselling skills course
but bascily i agree with his general theory. i have seen it work wonders in practice.
Really appreciate this from a psychology student's pov! Or maybe one better: a human! Cheers :D
EvinByrne Yeah... nice move to shift it toward the human point of view generally. Thanks for taking the time to watch and to comment. Eric
Wowwwww s we should not think about others warnings just we accept the way we r,🧚🍫🥰
Thank you for sharing, on my level 3 Counselling and this helped alot. atb Si
This is a very great clip! I am in the process of developing a training for Motivational Interviewing and I want to introduce Rogerian Theory since person centered counseling is at the heart of MI. Am I able to use this clip to help people further understand Rogerian theory?
Keirkagaard is 10 (12) minutes?
nevrermind, I found it
Mr. Dodson - how may I contact you directly in reference to the fact I plan to use your video in a presentation. Well done, by the way!
You hereby have my permission to use this video in your presentation. If you need anything further, feel free to look up my email at the University of West Georgia.
Responding now from my Park U address, sir
Exposes an issue with counselor neutrality well. Lovely and kind as Carl was, he doesn't get how important politics and wider political structures are to someone who is african- american, because he hasn't had to deal with these issues directly. I feel a large part of this mans exploration of his way of being was dismissed here. If you are white and western and feel your pretty aware of how it much be to be BME, reading Peggy McIntosh 46 special circumstances and conditions of whiteness is illuminating!!
Hmm... well, I doubt that Rogers would claim that he's somehow able to understand every group and sub-group's particular experience within our culture. In fact, he seems to take pains (in the first chapter of On Becoming a Person, for instance) to point out that his view -- both theoretically and clinically -- is a product of his own particular history and set of experiences, which may or may not be germane to anyone else's life. So... it seems to me that from a Rogerian perspective, the important thing is not to claim to understand things that are beyond our experience. The important thing is to do what we can to help our fellow human beings on the path of life -- to at least make an effort to be a benefit to our fellow travelers, even if it means that we're sometimes seeing things imperfectly or unclearly in the process. After all, what would be worse than trying to help someone whose experience in life we can only vaguely understand? Wouldn't the worse thing be to use our imperfect understanding as an excuse not to try to help that person at all?
Eric Dodson Sorry, the comment here was put for the previous clip on 'Hurt and Anger' but auto play moved on before I noticed. I agree with you that we cannot immediately 'know' someones phenomenological perspective. My feeling however is that when being in a therapeutic relationship exploring this and clarifying meaning with the client helps both the respect and trust within that relationship. Sometimes fear of not knowing and getting it wrong, can led to not exploring and defensiveness. I feel this client was touching on the feeling that being angry was a process he choose to repress because it previously/currently had socio political associations for him as a black man and he didn't want part of an angry way of being. I would like to check my understanding of this with the client!! This appeared to be important to him as a meaning in life process in regard to anger. Exploring this could be illuminating for the client and Rogers. I don't mean to 'dis' Rogers but I did want to comment on how I saw the piece and all discussion I find to be educational and for the greater good as long as it's not taken as a personal attack! Thanks for your good work putting up the clips, really good resource.
... what a coincidence , just now . i made ' c rogers therapy ' when teenager . in reading his famous book - at that time , at least - ' i am OK , you are OK ' .
That book is Thomas Harris, MD
Yes, thank you. I think this is Great for Me and becoming the best Peer Specialist I can be!!! :)
lady dee My goal is to be a Peer specialist and I have gravitated to Rogers!!
Aaaghh!!! It was going so well until you said that Rogerian therapy is 'reflecting back to the client what the client is saying'. It is about providing the therapeutic conditions, as attitudes, while holding faith that the client's own organismic actualising tendency will keep them moving forward, as they continue to process their experiencing in an accepting, non-judgmental atmosphere with someone who is being openly trying to empathically understand the client's phenomenology and frame of reference. And congruence is more than openness, it is alignment between the ongoing, poorly symbolised valuings of the innate, organismic temperament and the socially conditioned values structures of conscious cognition: i.e. the integration of limbic responses with the flow of awareness, with the self increasingly able to accept and articulate the entirety of their experiencing. Congruence = mindful authenticity.
5:00
1:15 the first real brazzers guy
So I don't have to have the same morning routine that billionaires have? I knew it!
❤️
My critique of Rogers is that there's no evidence for loads of things he says or believes. It is way too vague, non-scientific and I really doubt his theories can withstand the latest discoveries of neuroscience. One can go on and on talking about self for years and get more and more superficial about many things. The Rogerian approach seems too simplistic to me and ineffective on several circumstances (addiction, heavier mental illness, etc) as well as offering no real structured understanding, prognosis, strategies or homework to really change life. It's a very American style of talking about self and self and self and self and so on...
Have you read any of Carl Rogers' books and listened to him talk in interviews? He consistently checked his work against the best scientific research at the time. The client centered theory is still scientifically valid today. I have a friend who is a highly skilled, well trained social worker that uses scientifically backed principles & approaches in order to increase the probability of successfully helping clients that experience psychosis. My friend utilizes a variety of effective methods that are backed by science, which includes various components of Rogers' work.
watch 2017 personality lecture num 10 of jordan peterson
Funny you should call his approach very American, because his complete focus on the subject as such strikes me as very continental
fucking great
rogerian therapy is very good for people are not that sick. he can help you be more healthy, but if you have a lot of psychpathology, you'll need another approach. imo
Oh man ... this one sounds a lot like psycho-babble. Even relevant any more?
All of this is common sense, this is idiotic