A 1959 Study On the Ideas of Carl Rogers and Abraham H. Maslow - 6:25 PM, 2/12/2012

http://www.amsciepub.com/doi/abs/10.2466/pr0.1959.5.3.685

Chris Ardern had Dean Gotcher on his show, Watchmen Weekly, a few days ago. Gotcher is an expert on the Hegelian Dialectic, the Frankfurt School of transformational Marxists who migrated to this country in the late thirties, psychologized cultural Marxism and the highly influential use of all this in our public schools.. The Frankfurt School guys established themselves as highly influential intellectuals in our major universities. Theodore W. Adorno was a professor at The University of California at Berkeley and Herbert Marcuse was first at Brandeis University.

Several psychologists worked with Adorno on the authoritarian personality project, including Else Frenkel-Brunswik, Daniel Levinson, and Nevitt Sanford. In a phone conversation and an E Mail, William Coulson, one of the founders of the encounter group movement with Carl Rogers, said that Abraham H. Maslow worked on the Authoritarian Personality project and that Maslow "hung out with the Frankfurters."

Carl Rogers and Abraham H. Maslow were not members of the German Frankfurt School, but were American psychologists. Rogers was influenced by American educator John Dewey at Teacher's College, Columbia University. Dewey was part of the Leipzig School, founded by Wilhelm Wundt, the German experimental psychologist, and Dewey was clearly anti-Christian. And Rogers was a professor of Psychology and Psychiatry at the University of Wisconsin until about 1964. He was one of my professors when I was a grad student there in social-personality psychology.

I did a research project on the ideas of Rogers and Maslow as a graduate student. It was published in Psychological Reports in 1959. Some of what I quoted from Rogers and Maslow in the published journal article sounds good. But it - and the entire psychologized Marxist movement - turned out to be destructive of both the American family and American Christian faith.

Dean Gotcher in his writings and lectures (now available as audios) explains how this came about. The weakening of the family and Christian faith were both goals Adorno focused upon in his 1950 book, The Authoritarian Personality, which opened the door to transformational Marxism in America, a non-violent form of Marxism, which took over much of our culture since 1950.

In my 1959 Psychological reports article I say "The central idea of the personality theories of both Rogers and Maslow is the idea of growth (self-actualization, development, becoming, or psychological health). Maslow suggests that self-actualizers (outstandingly creative
individuals such as Beethoven and Goethe) have the ability to grow, are superior to
others in their perception of the environment, have greater autonomy, greater
freshness in their appreciation of experience, greater spontaneity,
greater acceptance of self and others, and are able to live fully in each experience. In
several recent papers Rogers ( 1954, 1959) has defined certain
directional tendencies in the individual who has successfully undergone therapy. For Rogers
these directional tendencies are clearly asymptotic or ideal. Implicit
in Rogers' definition is the concept of the fully functioning person, " . . . a
concept of the ultimate in the actualization of the human organism." According to Rogers,
the fully functioning person will be more open to experience (he will have
better perception of the environment), will experience himself as the locus of
evaluation (he will rely upon his own judgments rather than those of others),
and will move toward being a process rather than being some fixed goal.
Maslow's definition of self-actualization and Rogers' definition of the
fully functioning person have much in common. Both definitions emphasize
superior perception of the environment, greater reliance by the individual upon
his own judgments rather than those of others..."

"Maslow's theory of self-actualization could be tested directly by determining
the extent to which the characteristics he proposed are in fact intercorrelated
in behavior of highly creative individuals. Rogers' theory of the
fully functioning person could also be tested using individuals who have successfully completed
therapy. But highly creative individuals and clients who successfully
complete therapy are not readily available in large numbers for psychological
research. Thus, the theories of Rogers and Maslow were generalized to hold also
for college students since they were the only Ss available in large numbers. As
an extension of Rogers' and Maslow's definitions, it is proposed that
the following behaviors, beliefs, and self-perceptions will be significantly intercorrelated
when college sophomores are Ss. "

"The following traits were predicted to be intercorrelated as measured by questionnaires and situation tests:

"Affirmation of change. The developing individual accepts and values
change in himself, in others, and in all aspects of life.

Affirmation of impulses. Psychological development proceeds on an
emotional level, although a rigid dichotomy between intellectual and emotional
levels is not implied . The developing individual moves toward being himself
by accepting all his desires and impulses.

(my note, 2012: The acceptance of and attempt to satisfy desires in the theories of Rogers and Maslow helped establish the drive within the counterculture to satisfy desires, and to have sex outside of marriage, smoke pot, take LSD and behave in other then socially unacceptable ways. And, the influence directly from Adorno and Marcuse of the Frankfurt School helped to create the early counterculture from about 1962 to 1970. The counterculture represented a major revolt against Christianity and family values, and it, plus the use of transformational Marxism in the public schools, did much to transform an entire generation, the Baby Boomers, born from 1946 to 1964. The Public School System influenced by transformational Marxism did not in an explicit way promote the smoking of pot, use of LSD, teenagers having sex with many successive partners, or hippie dress and long hair. But the Public Schools did teach many of the ideas of the Frankfurt School (Theodor Adorno and Herbert Marcuse), Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow).

Belief in creativity. Creativity is defined as the ability to combine
familiar elements in new ways. Something is produced which never existed
before or which was never produced before by the individual. Our developing
individual values the process of creating something new because the creative
process is satisfying for him and contributes toward his own development. By
creating he discovers what he is and how he stands in relation to his
environment.

More reliance upon one's own judgment rather than upon the judgment
of others. When the developing individual feels that the judgments or
perceptions of others are incorrect or incongruous with his own frame of reference,
he rejects them and accepts his own.

The valuing of serious "high culture' rather than "mass culture." The
developing individual values "high culture" because he finds greater
satisfaction in experiencing it, because he is able to express himself by structuring it, and
because it contributes more to his development than "mass culture." In
perceiving "mass culture" the individual has to do little structuring himself and
thus cannot find adequate expression for his own ,needs, values, and interests.

The valuing of participative experiences rather than passive or
nonparticipative experiences. In actively participating in an activity an individual
is able to express himself and moves toward a greater realization of his own
potentialities.

Greater ability to perceive correctly the environment and to respond
adaptively. Manipulation of the environment for the individual's own goals
can be taken as evidence that his perception of it is at least
partially accurate.

For the purposes of this research, the environment to be perceived is controlled
so that we can speak of "accuracy of perception."

Greater inner-directedness. The individual's own value system, which
is a result of his unique experiences, governs his behavior rather
than the value systems of the many groups or sub-cultures with which he comes into contact.
Since his own value system is in command rather than that of a culture
or subculture; it is not static but changeable."

Again, all this sounds good, but within it is an attack upon Christian faith, the family and the belief in objective reality, perceptions of reality which can be shared by many in the culture.

"Specifically, it is predicted that there will be a significant
correlation between each of the following nine measures. Dymond's Q-adjustment Test is construed as a measure of the first construct above (a high score indicates high
adjustment). The new Belief Q-sort is conceived as a measure of constructs two, three, four, and five (see description below). The Maslow
Security-Insecurity Test (S-I Test), on which a low score indicates security, is also construed
as a measure of the first construct. The simulated group situation, in
which a high score indicates nonconformity, attempted to measure the sixth construct. The Mass-High Culture Test was conceived as a measure of the seventh construct (a high score indicates creative interests) and the
Active-Passive Test was conceived as a measure of the eighth construct (a high score indicates active or participative interests). The first and second reproductions of
a clinical interview (a high score indicates ability to correctly
reproduce verbal material) attempt to measure the ninth construct. The James External Control Test was a possible measure of the tenth construct (a low score
indicating innerdirectedness). Finally, game playing was construed as a measure of the ninth
construct ( see description below ) .It is predicted that all of the above measures except the James External Control Test will correlate negatively with the Maslow S-I Test, and that all
measures except the Maslow S-I Test will correlate negatively with the James
External Control Test. The correlation between the James test and the Maslow
test should be positive. All other correlations should be positive.

METHOD
Subjects.-Fifty college sophomores, 13 males and 37 females from introductory
psychology classes at the University of Wisconsin, were Ss. All volunteers
were tested in all of the situations and tests, i.e., no selection of
Ss was made. Tests and situations.-The personality tests and situations will be discussed
in their order of presentation.

1. During the first hour session all Ss were given Dymond's Q-adjustment
Test (Rogers & Dymond, 1954) according to Dymond's directions for
administration. Most of the 74 items of this test are short statements descriptive of
the self. The maximum score that an S can attain is 74 if he places 37 items
indicating good adjustment on the "like me" side at scale positions 5,
6, 7, and 8 and all 37 items representing poor adjustment on the "unlike me" side
at positions 4, 3, 2, and l. This test was construed as a measure of an S's perception
of himself as psychologically healthy. The mean and range of scores of the
Wisconsin sophomores reported in Table 1 can be compared with the data on
clients undergoing therapy as reported by Rogers and Dymond ( 1954).
2. During the second hour session the Belief Q-sort was given.

"Dymond's Q-adjastment Test, Muslow's S-I Test, and James External Control
Test.-Pearson product-moment correlations were computed between each
of these tests and between these tests and the situational measures, and are
reported in Table 2 (Guilford, 1950, p. 159). The intercorrelations of
these three tests are significant and in the predicted direction. These three tests did not
correlate significantly with any of the three situations and with two exceptions
did not correlate significantly with the Belief Q-sort, the Mass-High Culture
Test, or the Active-Passive Test. The James test and the Q-adjustment Test did
correlate with the Belief Q-sort. Thus, these tests seem to form a
unified cluster, independent of the other measures.

When the Q-adjustment Test, the Maslow S-I Test, and the James External Control
Test are dropped from the table of correlations, the remaining six measures
form a more unified whole. With eight exceptions, involving intercorrelations
of the four situations and the correlations with the Active-Passive
Test, the correlations are significant and positive, as predicted.

The prediction that all of the nine measures would correlate significantly
with each other was not upheld."

The empirical results of this study are not real important - in part because it was just an intercorrelation work based upon data from questionnaires and situational measures. The methodology of correlating data from paper and pencil questionnaires, which was the method used by Adorno in The Authoritarian Personality study, with situational measures was somewhat new for the time period of the fifties.

I had never seen this 1959 journal article of mine on the Internet before several days ago. It is from another era, and my views on Carl Rogers and Abraham H. Maslow have changed a lot since the late fifties. They were both important transformational agents who left their mark upon this nation. They, along with the Frankfurt School, influenced the public school system, and helped to bring in the end time mentality, which includes the severe weakening of the family, the loss of Christian faith in the truth of Jesus Christ, and the dumbling down of America.

For some idea of the influence of transformational Marxism on the Amnerican educational system see Dean Gother at

http://authorityresearch.com/2006-06 Bloom's Taxonomy and Marxism.htm

"Benjamin Bloom and his Taxonomies compared to Karl Marx, by Dean Gotcher, June 2006
(Revised 02-09-08)

And especially see:

http://authorityresearch.com/2006-06 Bloom's Taxonomy and Marxism.htm#BLOOMS_TAXONOMIES

Below, I am quoting Dean Gotcher from his article on Bloom's Taxonomies:

"Every certified facilitator.educator in this nation, Christian "teachers" as well, are trained to use the system of Bloom's Taxonomies. That system is recognized in some fields as "General Systems Theory." Whatever it is called it is the same paradigm which was used in the Garden in Eden by Eve to justify defiance toward God and His Word. The "affective objectives" Bloom mentions above is the "ought's" of fallen, rebellious mankind, the imagination of mans heart out of which all the evils of his fallen nature manifest themselves; "Out of the heart of man proceed" what I call the shopping list of iniquities. The heart of man, unrestrained, is Pandora's Box, a box (in ancient Greek it was known as a jar) full of evils. Once it is opened it can not be closed, or is closed only in time to keep hope from escaping. To achieve the liberating of these forces within the creation the restraints and the standards, "the student's fixed beliefs" (imposed upon them by their parents) must be "challenged" wherein the student will feel free to discuss and justify them. This is exactly the same system or procedure Satan used on Eve in the Garden.

That system is manifested in Karl Marx's statement "Once the earthy family is discovered to be the secret of the heavenly family , the former must be destroyed in theory and in practice." Feuerbach Thesis #4 In other words, once the traditional family, which demands obedience and chastens those who disobey them and their commands, is discovered to be the same system whereby God is able to communicate to the next generation, where He likewise demands obedience and chastens those who disobey him and his commands, the traditional family, according to Karl Marx, must be destroyed/annihilated both in the way people think and in the way they behave.a paradigm shift must take place. The traditional family must be seen by society as an agency which generates abnormal behavior. Culture will not tolerate the initiation or sustaining of such behavior and will put pressure upon any agency or institution which promotes or follows such teaching style.culture war.

“Using social environmental forces to change the parent’s behavior toward the child.”
T. W. Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality, 1950, p. 6

Again, once the traditional family is comprehended as using the same system of thinking (paradigm) as God's.demanding obedience and chastening those who disobey, the traditional family, which also demands obedience from their children and chasten those who disobey, must be categorized (taxonomized) as a major source of abnormal behavior. The next generation must learn how to "rationally" justify to themselves that traditional parental behavior is harmful to the health of the individual, the community, and society and must learn how to unite with others (the community) in creating a climate which will assist in the eradication of such behavior. "