The tradition of existential-humanistic developmental psychology (ehdp), the roots of which extend back to the early 1800s, is largely unknown. Because it has never been formally identified as a discrete current of thought, ehdp is not mentioned in college textbooks or the developmental literature. In fact, existential-humanistic developmental psychologists have rarely spoken of their own tradition, even as they built on the work of their predecessors. This supports Wertz’s (1992) findings that humanistic psychologists have not been careful enough in addressing the diversity of their movement and its historical precedents.
In light of these observations, Eugene Mario DeRobertis, PhD, sought to identify the founders of ehdp and provide a brief introduction to their respective contributions—a study described in his article, “Historical Foundations of Existential-Humanistic Developmental Psychology,” published in The Humanistic Psychologist. DeRobertis found that ehdp was built on the pioneering work of a heterogeneous group of people from American humanistic psychology, European existential and phenomenological psychology, social and self-styled psychoanalysis, personalistic psychology, comparative psychology, Gestalt psychology, education and pedagogy, philosophy, and anthropology. The first wave of ehdp emerged between the 1800s and 1950, which was followed by a second wave from 1950 to 1980. It entered its third phase in 1980 (DeRobertis, in press). By examining the historical foundations of this tradition (i.e., its first two waves), DeRobertis revealed four broad guiding themes.
First, ehdp emphasizes the whole person situated in their developmental context. One consequence of this contextual mindfulness is a critique of developmental psychology as harboring an implicit set of Western cultural values in its theory and research. This ethnocentrism privileges the technocratic ideal of ego functioning and a related (stereotypically masculine) “power over” orientation toward the world. Thus, ehdp harbors an as yet unrecognized contribution to the growing trend of cultural awareness in psychology (e.g., Stewart, 2012).
Second, ehdp advances an approach to time that deviates from linear clock time. This tradition emphasizes how time is lived from the first-person vantage point of the developing person. For example, ehdp examines how the developing person negotiates the lived tension between regressive tendencies for self-protection or adaptation and progressive, growth-oriented tendencies. The latter is emphasized in studies of creative power, self-organization, goal setting, agency, and self-determination. Through these focal areas, ehdp offers new perspectives for studying health and wellness in contemporary psychology.
Third, rather than restricting itself to considerations of the anatomical body, ehdp roots its view of human development in an experiential field of tactile engagement with the primary caregiver. Phenomena like touching, holding, and handling are deemed foundational for human development, especially in relation to empathic mirroring and play. The living bodily relationship with primary caregivers lays the foundation for the emergence of cognitive processes that are rich in feeling and value, in contrast to those that are detached and calculative.
Fourth and finally, ehdp is grounded in an enduring call to pedagogy. It has always maintained a deep and abiding interest in learning and education. This pedagogical orientation is holistic, relational, and bound to considerations of ethics and responsibility.
link
