Rogers Vs Maslow

Humanistic psychology is the field most related to the study of positive human experience. Abraham Maslow and Carl Rogers’ are from a Humanistic approach to thought and are two of the founders of Humanistic psychology. Rogers’ and Maslow engaged with an idea of self-actualization and characteristics to accomplish it. Carl Rogers’' therapy was created from his belief that people have the ability to move themselves toward better functioning by finding and expressing their genuine selves. Maslow’ therapy was the process by which individuals could become self-actualized, a state in which they had access to the full range of their talents and strengths. These talents and strengths, which Maslow referred to as characteristic of a self-actualized

Maslow distinguished specific characteristics of such individuals, for example, uniqueness, effortlessness, independence, equity, goodness, feeling of fruition, and so forth. Likewise, he paid consideration on an idea called peak experiences that were seen more regularly in self-actualized individuals than in others. According to Maslow, an individual's creative journey is an upward evolution from learning to solve fundamental needs, such as the need for food and shelter, through a natural progression that eventually reached beyond issues of self-esteem to a top tier known as self-actualization. In Maslow's theory, each stage builds on itself, implying to some degree a developmental process in which it is difficult, if not impossible, to push ahead until every stage has been completed. (Whitlock, G. 2011, pg. 72-79) Maslow turned into a pioneer in the advancement of new modalities of treatment utilizing psychotherapeutic strategies created as a part of his practice over numerous years and at last turned into a celebrated scholar and teaching using his concept of the hierarchy of needs and self-actualization (Morgan, J. H.

Unlike in most approaches that highlight on the abnormalities of individuals, humanistic highlights on positive mentality. Rogers’ and Maslow were somewhat to blame for neglecting to incorporate evil into humanistic psychology. Humanistic psychology could be legitimately attacked as short-sighted and naïve. Maslow had unquestionably been more sensible than Rogers’, who talked incessantly about “the innate goodness of human nature”, however both basically had avoided the topic in their psychological approaches. Maslow had not adequately recognized that even self-actualizing people could commit evil and then find a way to rationalize or justify it. (Hoffman, E, 2009, pg.