97

Knowing and tbe Unknown: An Existential Epistemology

in a Postmodern Context

lools noffmoo
*

Louls.Poffman[8ockles.edu


A8S1kAC1

LxlsLenLlal psychology and posLmodern LhoughL share skepLlclsm abouL Lhe ablllLy of human belngs Lo
grasp ob[ecLlve LruLh, lf lL even exlsLs. Powever, Lhere are also lmporLanL dlsLlncLlons beLween
posLmodern and exlsLenLlal ways of knowlng. 1hls arLlcle provldes a crlLlcal comparlson of posLmodern
and exlsLenLlal eplsLemologles, wlLh parLlcular focus on how a dlalogue beLween Lhese vlewpolnLs can
sLrengLhen boLh perspecLlves. arLlcular aLLenLlon ls glven Lo Lhe exlsLenLlal glvens, whlch represenL
unlversal sLruggles wlLhouL provldlng any clalms of unlversal answers, LhaL ls, ob[ecLlve LruLh. 1he paper
concludes dlscusslon how a posLmodern exlsLenLlal eplsLemology could provlde an ldeal framework for
psychoLherapy lnLegraLlon.



LxlsLenLlal psychology and posLmodern phllosophy share many slmllarlLles ln Lhelr
eplsLemology and general world vlew, however, Lhere are also some essenLlal dlfferences.
CfLen, Lhese dlfferences are Lendencles raLher Lhan absoluLe dlsLlncLlons. 1hls paper wlll
provlde a comparlson of Lhe Lwo eplsLemologles suggesLlng LhaL Lhrough dlalogue boLh
approaches can be sLrengLhened. lurLhermore, lL ls malnLalned LhaL an exlsLenLlal-lnLegraLlve
approach wlLh posLmodern senslLlvlLles provldes an ldeal foundaLlon for psychoLherapy
lnLegraLlon.

CCMAkISCN CI LIS1LMCLCGILS

Postmodern epistemo/oqy
A prlmary challenge of wrlLlng abouL posLmodern eplsLemology ls LhaL Lhere are noL one, buL
many, posLmodernlsms. lurLhermore, posLmodern eplsLemology ls besL undersLood ln a
hlsLorlcal conLexL. Larly posLmodern Lheorles were prlmarlly reacLlonary, focuslng on
deconsLrucLlng Lhe modernlsL paradlgm (Poffman & kurzenberger, 2008). 1hls led Lo many
mlscharacLerlzlng Lhe prlmary feaLure of posLmodernlsm as belng deconsLrucLlon. Powever,
conLemporary posLmodern Lheorles lncorporaLed more consLrucLlve Lendencles. Lven Lhese
more consLrucLlve movemenLs malnLaln LhaL ob[ecLlve LruLh ls noL someLhlng LhaL can be
known.
8osen (1996, as clLed ln Lrwln, 1999) provldes a summary of consLrucLlvlsL eplsLemologles
whlch applles Lo mosL, lf noL all, posLmodern eplsLemologles. Pe wroLe, Whlle Lhere are a
varleLy of consLrucLlvlsL models, Lhey all hold ln common Lhe eplsLemologlcal bellef LhaL a
LoLally ob[ecLlve reallLy, one LhaL sLands aparL from Lhe knowlng sub[ecL, can never be fully

*
School of rofesslonal sychology, unlverslLy of Lhe 8ockles. Correspondence concernlng Lhls arLlcle
should be addressed Lo Louls Poffman: unlverslLy of Lhe 8ockles, 333 L. lkes eak Avenue, Colorado
Sprlngs, CC, 80903

l would llke Lo Lhank uavld n. Llklns, hu, for hls suggesLlons and edlLorlal feedback.


Bumana.Nente - Issue 11- 0ctobei 2uu9

98

known" (p. 334) 8osen ldenLlfles Lwo cornersLones of posLmodern eplsLemology: (a) calllng
lnLo quesLlon Lhe posslblllLy of a known ob[ecLlve LruLh and (b) shlfLlng Lhe prlmary focus Lo
Lhe lndlvldual's sub[ecLlve experlence. Lrwln (1999) Lakes a less anLagonlsLlc vlew Loward
ob[ecLlve LruLh Lhan many posLmodernlsLs. AlLhough he agrees wlLh Lhe ma[orlLy of
posLmodernlsLs LhaL ob[ecLlve LruLh ls noL aLLalnable ouLslde of mlnd and language" (p. 334),
he does noL go Lhe nexL sLep Lo sLaLe Lhere ls noL an ob[ecLlve reallLy.
1hls sLance agalnsL ob[ecLlve LruLh ls mosL sLrongly revealed ln posLmodernlsm's anlmoslLy
Loward meLanarraLlves. MeLanarraLlves are all-encompasslng lnLellecLual frameworks such as
sclence, loglc, phllosophy and rellglon, LhaL are supposed Lo seLLle argumenLs abouL whaL ls
Lrue" (Legg & SLagakl, 2002, p. 386). osLmodernlsLs ofLen use Lhe Lerm opptesslve Lo descrlbe
meLanarraLlves because Lhey are Lyplcally lmposed upon people. lor example, Lhose adherlng
Lo sclenLlsm, an ldeologlcal bellef ln Lhe superlorlLy and ob[ecLlvlLy of Lhe sclenLlflc way of
knowlng, ofLen aLLempL Lo converL" oLhers Lo Lhelr way of Lhlnklng and are condescendlng Lo
Lhose who allgn wlLh dlfferenL eplsLemologlcal poslLlons. ln facL, adherenLs of sclenLlsm remlnd
one of Lhe rellglous lndlvlduals who are so convlnced of Lhe superlorlLy of Lhelr poslLlon LhaL
Lhey spend much of Lhelr Llme Lrylng Lo converL oLhers. osLmodernlsLs, by conLrasL, are
crlLlcal of any slngular way of knowlng and opL for mulLlple ways of knowlng or whaL ls referred
Lo as eplsLemologlcal plurallsm" (Poffman & kurzenberger, 2008). ln oLher words,
posLmodernlsm prefers Lo draw on many dlfferenL approaches Lo knowledge lnsLead of relylng
excesslvely on any one approach. Pere, however, posLmodernlsLs are ofLen qulLe lnconslsLenL.
AlLhough Lhey expllclLly advocaLe for varled eplsLemologles, Lhey ofLen rely excluslvely upon
raLlonal ways of knowlng.
ln a wldely clLed arLlcle on Lhe dlfferences ln whaL he calls consLrucLlvlsms," 8askln (2002)
sLaLes LhaL alLhough Lhere are many Lypes of consLrucLlvlsms Lhe slmllarlLles among are
greaLer Lhan Lhe dlfferences. Common across Lhe consLrucLlvlsms ls Lhe bellef LhaL a maLerlal
reallLy cannoL be known,
1
wlLh a few excepLlons called llmlLed reallsm." 1hls ls conslsLenL wlLh
Lhe ldea LhaL an lndlvldual's worldvlew ls consLrucLed, noL slmply a sub[ecLlve mlrror of whaL ls
real." AlLhough mosL consLrucLlvlsLs allow for boLh soclal and personal lnfluences on Lhe
consLrucLlon of how one sees and experlences Lhe world, personal consLrucLlvlsLs for more on
personal consLrucLlons whlle soclal consLrucLlonlsLs
2
focus more on Lhe soclal lnfluences.
lL should be polnLed ouL LhaL posLmodernlsm's break from modernlsm ls noL abouL Lhe
cooteot of koowleJqe as much as bow loJlvlJools telote to ot bolJ koowleJqe. Anderson (1993)
sLaLes, [posLmodernlsm] has Lo do wlLh a change noL so much ln whaL we belleve as ln how
we belleve" (p. 2). ln oLher words, one can belleve Lhe same conLenL ln premodern, modern,
and posLmodern paradlgms, buL why and how Lhey belleve lL, as well as how Lhey supporL lL,
dlffers. lor example, ln Lhe WesL durlng Lhe premodern area Lhe prlmary eplsLemology was
revelaLlon, or revealed knowledge from Cod or an ulLlmaLe auLhorlLy (see Poffman &
kurzenberger, 2008). 8ellglous knowledge was vlewed as ob[ecLlve LruLh and, generally
speaklng, was unquesLlonable. ln Lhe posLmodern era, Lhe same knowledge would be vlewed
as consLrucLed and noL real" (of course, some posLmodern rellglonlsLs mlghL conslder Lhelr
bellefs a personal or soclal lnLerpreLaLlon of Lhe ob[ecLlve LruLh and Lherefore a close
approxlmaLlon of Lhe LruLh). 1hus, Lhe same bellef ls approached and supporLed ln dlfferenL
ways ln dlfferenL eplsLemologlcal paradlgms. Cne can see how Lhe posLmodern approach
challenges Lhe more rlgld adherence Lo speclflc rellglous bellefs and creaLes a greaLer
openness Lo oLher lnLerpreLaLlons.

1
MaLerlal reallLles are a speclal Lype of ob[ecLlve LruLh LhaL are ofLen referred Lo as reallsm."
2
8askln polnLs ouL LhaL soclal coosttoctlvlsts prefer Lhe language of coosttoctloolsm over coosttoctlvlsm.
Louis Boffman - Knowing anu the 0nknown

99

lor a second example of how one may hold Lo Lhe same bellef buL lnLerpreL and supporL lL
ln a dlfferenL way, conslder Lhe followlng: ln Lhe modern era, sclenLlflc knowledge, especlally
knowledge by uslng Lhe sclenLlflc meLhod, ls Lyplcally vlewed as ob[ecLlve LruLh. Powever, ln
Lhe posLmodern era, Lhe same knowledge or bellef ls undersLood more ln Lerms of one's
lnLerpreLaLlon and coosttoctloo of Lhe research flndlngs. Also posLmodernlsm and
consLrucLlonlsm emphaslze Lhe soclal and pollLlcal facLors whlch lmpacL Lhe lnLerpreLaLlon of
Lhe sclenLlflc research and ofLen deLermlne Lhe approach and meLhods of Lhe research lLself.
1hus ln Lhe posLmodern era sclence ls vlewed as a Lherapy or as slmply one eplsLemologlcal
sLance among oLhers. 8ellglous bellefs, Loo, are vlewed as Lheory. 1hls does noL mean Lhey are
noL Lrue, buL Lhe posLmodern perspecLlve emphaslzes our lnablllLy Lo know whaL ls ob[ecLlvely
Lrue. ln shorL, whaL was consldered ob[ecLlve facL ln Lhe premodern and modern eplsLemology
ls Lyplcally consldered Lheory ln posLmodern eplsLemologles.
llnally, alLhough all posLmodern eplsLemologles agree LhaL we do noL have Lhe ablllLy Lo
know ob[ecLlve LruLh, one of Lhe debaLes ln posLmodernlsm ls wheLher Lhere ls such a Lhlng as
ob[ecLlve LruLh. 8askln (2002) polnLs ouL LhaL Lhere are posLmodernlsLs who belleve Lhere ls
some klnd of ob[ecLlve LruLh and our knowledge, whlle sub[ecLlve, may approxlmaLe lL, aL leasL
aL Llmes. CLher posLmodernlsLs, however, malnLaln LhaL Lhe only LruLh" ls our lnLerpreLaLlon.
1hus, posLmodernlsLs dlsagree on wheLher or noL Lhere ls ob[ecLlve LruLh buL almosL all agree
LhaL wheLher Lhere ls or noL, lL can never be fully known.

4pp/icotions to psychotheropy
Pansen (2006) beglns hls appllcaLlon of posLmodern eplsLemology Lo psychoLherapy pracLlce
by asserLlng LhaL All LradlLlonal counsellng Lheorles, Lhen, were concelved ln a modernlsL
eplsLemlc conLexL . LhaL ls, Lhere was an assumed correspondence beLween Lhe LheoreLlcal
map and Lhe acLual psychologlcal LerrlLory" (p. 291). AlLhough oversLaLed, Pansen's
observaLlon ls lmporLanL ln conLexLuallzlng psychologlcal Lheorles ln Lhe hlsLory of psychology.
lf personallLy Lheory and psychoLherapy pracLlce do noL begln Lo Lake posLmodernlsm lnLo
conslderaLlon, Lhey wlll qulckly become ouLdaLed and lrrelevanL Lo many of Lhe cllenLs Lhey are
lnLended Lo serve. 1hls does noL requlre LhaL we dlsregard Lhe currenL Lheorles LhaL were
developed durlng Lhe modern perlod. lnsLead, we need Lo vlew Lhem ln a new, posLmodern
way and allow Lhe Lheorles Lo evolve. lor example, mosL early psychoanalyLlc and
psychodynamlc approaches, lncludlng lreudlan, neo-lreudlan, and ob[ecL relaLlons Lheory,
were prlmarlly modernlsLlc. Powever, Lhe newer conLemporary psychoanalyLlc Lheorles, such
as Lhose by SLephen MlLchell (1988) and MarLha SLark (2000), are clearly posLmodern. 1hus, ln
Lhe psychoanalyLlc movemenL Lhere ls a clear evoluLlon of Lheory from modern Lo posLmodern
perspecLlves.
1he mosL powerful posLmodern lnfluence on Lhe fleld of psychoLherapy ls Lhe changlng
paradlgms ln ouLcome research. sychology, Lhrough Lhe 1990s and early 2000s, sLlll relled
prlmarlly on a very modernlsLlc ouLcome research modallLy: Lhe emplrlcally supporLed
LreaLmenLs. 1hls ouLcome paradlgm malnLalned LhaL quanLlLaLlve research, undersLood as
ob[ecLlve sclence, could deLermlne whlch Lheraples were mosL effecLlve. 1he sLandards of
research and ouLcome measures used ln Lhls paradlgm were hlghly blased ln favor of whaL
Llklns (2009) refers Lo as shorL-Lerm, llnear Lheraples." Cradually, Lhere has been large scale
dlscredlLlng of Lhe emplrlcally supporLed LreaLmenL movemenL. lnLeresLlngly enough, lL ls noL a
posLmodern deconsLrucLlon, buL raLher whaL could be deemed as a hlghly sophlsLlcaLed
modernlsL analysls, LhaL has called Lhls movemenL lnLo quesLlon. 1hrough varlous lndependenL
meLa-analyses and revlews of Lhe llLeraLure, lL was deLermlned LhaL Lhe ouLcome sLudles used
Lo susLaln Lhe emplrlcally supporLed LreaLmenL movemenL dld noL, ln reallLy, provlde Lhe

Bumana.Nente - Issue 11- 0ctobei 2uu9

100

evldence clalmed and were Lhus a farce, even from a modernlsL perspecLlve (Pubble, uuncan,
& Mlller, 1999, norcross, 2002, Wampold, 2001, see also Llklns, 2009, for a deLalled revlew).
1hus, modernlsL analyses and argumenLs deconsLrucLed Lhe modernlsL fallacy of Lhe
emplrlcally supporLed LreaLmenL (LS1) movemenL and paved Lhe way for Lhe poLenLlally
posLmodern movemenL of evlJeoce boseJ ptoctlce lo psycboloqy (8ll) LhaL ls now beglnnlng
Lo domlnaLe Lhe fleld. 1he deflnlLlon of L8, however, ls sLlll belng consLrucLed. Wampold,
CoodhearL, and LevanL (2007) noLe:

Lvldence ls noL an unamblguous Lerm and ls usually undeflned, buL Lhe Lerm exlsLs ln a conLexL
and has a parLlcular meanlng. Lvldence ls noL daLa, nor ls lL LruLh. Lvldence can be LhoughL of as
lnferences LhaL flow from daLa. (Wampold, CoodhearL, and LevanL 2007, pp. 616-617)

Compare Lhls Lo Pansen's (2006) poslLlon: lnvesLlgaLlve efforLs, even supposed ob[ecLlve
sclenLlflc ones, cannoL yleld LruLhs LhaL Lranscend Lhe assumpLlve mlnd-seLs of Lhe
lnvesLlgaLors" (p. 293). Clearly, posLmodernlsm ls lnfluence Lhe Lhlnklng ln psychology and Lhe
paradlgm ls shlfLlng. 1he modernlsLlc ttotb LhaL characLerlzed Lhe emplrlcally supporLed
LreaLmenL movemenL ls belng replaced by Lhe posLmodern approach of L8.
Lvldence has been lnLenLlonally deflned ln L8 much more broadly Lhan lL was ln Lhe
emplrlcally supporLed LreaLmenL movemenL, alLhough, as noLed, Lhls ls sLlll belng debaLed. A
broader vlew of evldence lncludes esLabllshed Lheory, quallLaLlve research, case sLudles, and
cllnlcal experlence as well as emplrlcal research. ln posLmodern sLyle, L8 does noL so much
change Lhe value of sclenLlflc research buL, raLher, lL changes Lhe way LhaL we undersLand
sclenLlflc research. lL ls now slmply one of many volces ln Lhe plurallsm of eplsLemologles
consldered Lo be useful.
L8 has lnLroduced ptloclples Lo replace Lhe narrowness of speclflc tecbolpoes of Lhe
LS1's. lor example, Lhose commlLLed Lo LS1's advocaLed for manuals LhaL were Lyplcally sLep-
by-sLep guldes for Lhe admlnlsLraLlon of Lechnlques. ln conLrasL, L8 recognlzes LhaL
conLexLual facLors are Lhe prlmary deLermlnanLs of change ln Lherapy. 1hese conLexLual facLors
lnclude such Lhlngs as Lhe LherapeuLlc relaLlonshlp, empaLhy, and a 8aLlonal LhaL explalns Lhe
cllenL's problems and how Lo allevlaLe Lhem (see Llklns, 2009). AlLhough lacklng Lhe speclflclLy
and concreLeness of Lechnlques, a conLexLual facLors approach Lo psychoLherapy allows one Lo
adapL Lhe LherapeuLlc approach Lo flL Lhe unlqueness of Lhe cllenL. 1hus, by undersLandlng
posLmodern ouLcomes we arrlved aL posLmodern Lherapy - a Lherapy LhaL ls adapLable Lo Lhe
personal and soclal parLlcularlLles of Lhe lndlvldual cllenL and ls noL rlgld and prescrlpLlve as
was Lhe case wlLh manuallzed procedures and so-called emplrlcally supporLed Lechnlques.
Pansen (2006) advocaLes LhaL posLmodern appllcaLlons Lo psychoLherapy should vlew
Lheorles as narraLlve sLrucLures wlLh pragmaLlc uLlllLy. Pe sLaLes, Lheorles are narraLlve
sLrucLures uLlllzed for rheLorlcal purposes, deslgned Lo persuade Lhe sufferer Lo conslder
experlence from a dlfferenL vanLage polnL" (p. 293). 1hese Lheorles, Lhen, are evaluaLed by
Lhelr pragmaLlc uLlllLy. 1he conLexLual facLors approach Lo L8 shows LhaL provldlng a
plauslble explanaLlon for Lhe cllenL's problems and uslng Lhls as a foundaLlon for Lhe
LherapeuLlc work ls more lmporLanL Lhan Lhe parLlcular Lechnlques used. ln oLher words,
posLmodern and L8 perspecLlves suggesL LhaL modallLles and Lechnlques are relaLlve and
LhaL one Lherapy ls as effecLlve as Lhe nexL as long as lL ls adapLed Lo Lhe cllenL and Lhe cllenL
embraces lL.
A modernlsL problem sLlll remalns ln L8, one LhaL may need an exlsLenLlal soluLlon. 1he
domlnanL perspecLlve wlLhln L8 ls sLlll one of hedonlsLlc lmpulse: Lo lncrease pleasure and
decrease paln. 1he good of happlness and Lhe bad of sufferlng remalns lnLacL as an oppresslve
Louis Boffman - Knowing anu the 0nknown

101

meLanarraLlve for many who would look beyond Lhese shallow concepLlons of humanlLy and
whaL oughL Lo be soughL ln LherapeuLlc ouLcomes. A Lrue posLmodernlsL psychology noL only
allows for varled means of psychoLherapy, buL also remalns open Lo a varleLy of ouLcomes LhaL
can be deemed successful. lL ls necessary Lo keep Lhe posslblllLles open Lo good sufferlng,
beauLy ln sadness, and Lraglc happlness.

xistentio/ epistemo/oqy
LxlsLenLlal psychology from lLs orlglns can be undersLood parLlally as a rebelllon agalnsL
modernlsm. As modernlsm was dlspelllng wlLh emoLlons, human llmlLaLlon, and sub[ecLlve
ways of knowlng, klerkegaard led Lhe way lnLo deeper emerslon lnLo Lhese experlences. ln
psychology, whlle Lhe behavlorlsLs advocaLed for excesslvely raLlonallsLlc and maLerlallsLlc
vlews of psychology, 8ollo May and !ames l. 1. 8ugenLal agaln rebelled Lhrough lnLroduclng
exlsLenLlallsm Lo psychology. LxlsLenLlallsm, lL could be argued, paved Lhe way for
posLmodernlsm. A somewhaL dlfferenL poslLlon could also be held malnLalnlng LhaL
exlsLenLlallsm was an early form of posLmodernlsm.
AL lLs core, exlsLenLlal psychology ls onLologlcal and eplsLemologlcal. lL ls onLologlcal lnsofar
as lL ls concerned wlLh Lhe baslc sLudy of exlsLence: WhaL does lL mean Lo exlsL? Many
approaches Lo psychology, ln parLlcular Lhe psychoLherapeuLlc orlenLaLlons, seek Lo conLrol or
overcome one's exlsLence. LxlsLenLlallsLs, lnsLead, seek Lo be honesL abouL Lhe human
condlLlon and undersLand lL as lL ls (Poffman, 2009a). Puman naLure ls noL someLhlng Lo
overcome, buL raLher some wlLh whlch we all musL face. Successful ouLcomes ln exlsLenLlal
Lherapy are abouL learnlng how Lo embrace our humanlLy, noL overcome lL.
LxlsLenLlallsm ls eplsLemologlcal ln LhaL lL ls always asklng Lhe quesLlon of how we know"
abouL exlsLence. lL ls Lhe eplsLemology of exlsLenLlallsm LhaL really seLs lL aparL from mosL
oLher branches of psychology. Whlle much of Lhe fleld of psychology has focused on ob[ecLlve
LruLh, quanLlLaLlve research, and generallzablllLy, exlsLenLlallsm has focused on sub[ecLlve
LruLh, quallLaLlve research, and Lhe lndlvldual's unlque experlence. 1hls ls noL Lo say LhaL
ob[ecLlve LruLh or quanLlLaLlve research are noL consldered or accepLed, buL raLher LhaL lL was
noL glve Lhe same unquesLloned auLhorlLy LhaL lL en[oyed ln Lhe branches of psychology rooLed
ln modernlsm.

Myth os o primory unit of existentio/ epistemo/oqy
May (1991) advocaLed LhaL myLh ls a baslc unlL of meanlng and knowlng. MyLh also suggesLs a
cerLaln way of knowlng LhaL emphaslzes LhaL knowledge ls lnherenLly lncompleLe and musL
rely Lo some degree on falLh. May was deeply concerned abouL Lhe growlng degradaLlon of Lhe
ldea of myLh and Lhe gradually accepLed change ln Lhe popular undersLandlng of myLh as belng
false. lnsLead, May used Lhe very posLmodern undersLandlng LhaL myLh was someLhlng LhaL
could noL be proven Lrue. sychologlcal Lheory, mosL sclenLlflc facLs," rellglon, and pollLlcal
ldeology are all examples of myLhlcal sysLems. 1hey are ways of aLLempLlng Lo make sense ouL
of Lhe world, or an organlzaLlon sLrucLure for meanlng.
When myLhs become relfled, or when Lhey are belleved Lo be facL, Lhey ofLen lose Lhelr
susLalnlng power and become desLrucLlve. lundamenLallsL rellglon ls a prlme example of Lhls.
When rellglon ls relfled lnLo facL, lnsLead of bellef or falLh, Lhen lL ls ofLen used Lo [usLlfy a lack
of Lolerance for LhaL whlch ls dlfferenL. Slnce Lhe SepLember 11 LerrorlsL aLLacks on Lhe 1wln
1owers and enLagon, lslamlc fundamenLallsm has been used as a popular example of Lhls.
Powever, all ma[or world rellglons have Lhelr desLrucLlve fundamenLallsLs groups. MyLh, Lhen,
ls a more powerful form of meanlng, or of Lhe LruLh, Lhan Lhe known facLs."
Poffman (2009b) bullL upon Lhe ldeas of May sLaLlng LhaL myLhs represenL Lhe unlversallLy
of Lhe exlsLenLlal glvens and Lhe parLlcularlLy of Lhe culLural response" (p. 264). An lmporLanL

Bumana.Nente - Issue 11- 0ctobei 2uu9

102

and, ln my vlew valld, crlLlclsm of much of Lhe exlsLenLlal wrlLlng ls LhaL lL Loo ofLen became an
excesslvely lndlvlduallsLlc approach LhaL does noL adequaLely Lake lnLo conslderaLlon sysLems
and culLure. ln 1be cty fot Mytb, May addresses Lhls very lmpllclLly, buL yeL dlrecLly. Pe uses
many lllusLraLlons of WesLern culLural myLhs as sources of meanlng, and even necessary ln
developlng personal meanlng sysLems. Pe vlewed Lhe decreaslng value of myLh as dlrecLly
connecLed Lo many problems ln Lhe WesL such as sulclde and subsLance abuse.
1hls use of myLh places meanlng and worldvlew aL Lhe lnLersecLlon of Lhe personal and Lhe
collecLlve. An lndlvldual ls responslble for Lhelr worldvlew and Lhelr meanlng sysLems, [usL as
Lhey are responslble for Lhelr behavlors. Powever, lL would be naive Lo belleve LhaL one can
have a worldvlew lndependenL of culLure. lor exlsLenLlallsLs, llmlLaLlons, or flnlLeness, ls a baslc
glven. ln all Lhlngs we are llmlLed.

xperience ond knowinq
LxlsLenLlal psychology, desplLe lLs absLracL appearance, ls focused on llved experlence and
embodled ways of knowlng. Slmllar Lo posLmodernlsm, Lhls generally means LhaL mulLlple
ways of knowlng are glven credence. Schnelder (1998) lllusLraLed LhaL exlsLenLlal LheraplsLs
ofLen use Lhe word experlenLlal" Lo mean dlfferenL Lhlngs. lor some, such as ?alom, lL refers
prlmarlly Lo Lhe here-and-now experlence. Schnelder, however, uses lL Lo refer prlmarlly Lo
klnesLheLlc experlence, whlch ls essenLlally bodlly ways of knowlng. 1he klnesLheLlc realm
ofLen ls preverbal and held aL Lhe unconsclous realm. lor lndlvlduals who lack Lhe more
consclous awareness, Lhe klnesLheLlc realm can be lnformaLlve aL Lhe unconsclous or
subconsclous levels of undersLandlng. 1he bodlly or klnesLheLlc realm ls also a hlghly sub[ecLlve
realm, lndlcaLlng LhaL lL ls heavlly based ln one's personal experlence.

pistemo/oqico/ 5imi/orities ond uifferences
AL Lhls polnL, lL should be falrly evldenL LhaL Lhere are many slmllarlLles beLween Lhe
posLmodern and exlsLenLlal approaches. ln facL, Lhe slmllarlLles sLrong enough LhaL lL would be
easy Lo malnLaln LhaL exlsLenLlal psychology ls a posLmodern psychology. l would argue,
however, LhaL Lhls depends upon wblcb postmoJetolsm and wblcb exlsteotlol psycboloqy ls
belng referred Lo. WlLh LhaL ln mlnd, l would malnLaln LhaL an open dlalogue could produce a
unlque posLmodern exlsLenLlal psychology LhaL bullds upon Lhe slmllarlLles of Lhese
approaches.

5imi/orities
1he llsL of slmllarlLles ls noL lnLended Lo be exhausLlve, buL raLher Lo focus on Lhe mosL
lmporLanL slmllarlLles, especlally perLalnlng Lo eplsLemologlcal lssues:

1. LxlsLenLlal and posLmodern psychologles boLh Lake serlously Lhe phllosophlcal and
eplsLemologlcal aspecLs of psychologlcal Lheory.
2. 8oLh approaches emerged early on as a rebelllon agalnsL modernlsm and, ln parLlcular,
modernlsm's lack of acknowledgemenL of lLs llmlLaLlons.
3. LxlsLenLlal psychology and posLmodernlsm are deeply concerned wlLh sub[ecLlve ways
of knowlng and place greaLer emphasls on Lhls Lhan whaL ls Lyplcal ln mosL
phllosophlcal and psychologlcal Lheorles.
4. 8oLh approaches emphaslze mulLlple ways of knowlng, lncludlng many non-LradlLlonal
ways of knowlng.
Louis Boffman - Knowing anu the 0nknown

103

3. osLmodernlsm and exlsLenLlal psychology are skepLlcal of Lhe ablllLy Lo know
ob[ecLlve LruLh, lf lL does exlsL. When lL ls granLed LhaL some ob[ecLlve LruLh exlsLs,
Lhere ls recognlLlon of our lnablllLy Lo fully grasp lL.
6. LxlsLenLlal psychology and posLmodernlsm boLh recognlze Lhe personal and culLural
elemenLs lnvolved ln knowlng, wlLh varlaLlons on whlch ls emphaslzed more.

uifferences
MosL of Lhe dlfferences llsLed ln Lhls secLlon could be debaLed, whlch agaln focuses back Lo Lhe
dlscusslon LhaL Lhere are many posLmodernlsms and many exlsLenLlal psychologles. Among Lhe
key dlfferences are:

1. osLmodernlsm Lends Lo be less embodled ln lLs ways of knowlng Lhan exlsLenLlal
psychology.
2. osLmodernlsm ofLen Lles reallLy closely Lo language. Whlle exlsLenLlallsm would ofLen
agree wlLh Lhls, lL also allows for oLher ways of knowlng lncludlng Lhe posslblllLy of
preverbal experlence and knowledge.
3. osLmodernlsm ls lnLenLlonal abouL advocaLlng for mulLlple ways of knowlng, yeL llLLle
aLLenLlon ls really glven Lo Lhe non-raLlonal ways of knowlng, such as experlenLlal
knowlng, LhaL ls emphaslzed more ln exlsLenLlal psychology.
4. LxlsLenLlal psychology ls more open Lo cerLaln Lypes of unlversal LruLhs. lor example,
Lhe exlsLenLlal glvens, LhaL ls deaLh, freedom/responslblllLy, and Lhe human deslre for
meanlng, are lnLended Lo be unlversal sLruggles LhaL all people musL lnherenLly face.
Whlle posLmodernlsLs may noL deny exlsLenLlal glvens such as deaLh, Lhey ofLen
sLruggle wlLh uslng Lhe label of Lhls as unlversal.

IMLICA1ICNS CI 1nL LkIS1LN1IAL-CS1MCDLkN DIALCGUL

roducLlve dlalogues allow for someLhlng new Lo emerge ouL of Lhe exchange. lurLhermore, lf
dlalogues are Lruly open, Lhen lL requlres one Lo suspend [udgmenL Lo a degree on bellefs
whlch conLradlcL one's own whlle slmulLaneously holdlng on loosely Lo one's own
assumpLlons.

Lessons for xistentio/ Psycho/oqy
LxlsLenLlal psychology has LradlLlonally been underdeveloped on Lhe Loplcs of culLure and
dlverslLy, whlch are lmporLanL Lhemes ln posLmodernlsm. unLll recenLly, dlverslLy had been
vlrLually lgnored ln Lhe exlsLenLlal llLeraLure (see Poffman, ?ang, kaklauskas, & Chan, 2009,
Schnelder, 2008, Schnelder & krug, 2010). lor exlsLenLlallsm Lo have an lmpacL ln Lhe
posLmodern, globallzed word, lL wlll be necessary Lo develop more formallzed Lheory and
appllcaLlon ln cross-culLural and dlverse seLLlngs. AlLhough Lhls process has begun, exlsLenLlal
psychology ls sLlll behlnd on Lhls Loplc.
1he exlsLenLlal psychology llLeraLure ls largely devold of clear, comprehenslve
eplsLemologlcal sLaLemenLs. ln many ways, lL fell prey Lo Lhe same mlsLake of Lhe early
deconsLrucLlvlsLs ln posLmodernlsm, buL exlsLenLlal has been less successful aL movlng beyond
Lhls. AlLhough lL ls evldenL LhaL exlsLenLlallsLs use mulLlple eplsLemologles and favor sub[ecLlve
approaches, Lhese are noL sufflclenLly developed. Some of Lhls ls because exlsLenLlallsm has
been less concerned abouL absLracL Lheory for Lheory's sake. lLs aLLenLlon has been more on
Lhe llved appllcaLlons of eplsLemology. osLmodernlsm hlsLorlcally sLruggled wlLh Lhe slmllar
problems, however, lL began faclng Lhese challenges earller Lhan exlsLenLlal psychology. Clven
Lhe slmllarlLles beLween Lhe values and lnLeresLs beLween Lhese approaches, especlally relaLed

Bumana.Nente - Issue 11- 0ctobei 2uu9

104

Lo ways of knowlng, exlsLenLlallsm may beneflL by lncorporaLlng many of posLmodernlsm's
language and Lheory relevanL Lo eplsLemology.

Lessons for Postmodernism
osLmodernlsm ofLen does noL llve ouL lLs advocacy for mulLlple eplsLemologles and ofLen
relles heavlly on an overly raLlonallsL way of knowlng. lurLhermore, posLmodernlsm Loo ofLen
remalns ln Lhe realm of absLracL LhoughL noL maklng lL Lo Lhe polnL of acLlon. LxlsLenLlallsm
could help ground posLmodernlsm Lhrough lnLegraLlng Lhe more embodled ways of knowlng
and connecLlng Lhe absLracL LhoughL Lo Lhe llved realms of acLlon.
Second, posLmodernlsm's lnslsLence LhaL Lhere are no ob[ecLlve LruLhs ofLen reaches Lhe
polnL of absurdlLy. lor lnsLance, lL could be debaLed as Lo wheLher Lhe exlsLenLlal glvens really
are a clalm Lo be unlversals. Cn Lhe surface, lL appears evldenL Lhey are unlversal clalms, or
meLanarraLlves, ln LhaL lL Lhe exlsLenLlal glvens expllclLly sLaLe Lhese are lssues LhaL all people
wlll face. Powever, l would malnLaln LhaL Lhe exlsLenLlal glvens do noL quallfy as
meLanarraLlves. AlLhough Lhe exlsLenLlal glvens are reallLles one much face, as l have noLed
elsewhere (Poffman, 2009b), Lhese glvens do noL necesslLaLe any parLlcular answer.
LxlsLenLlallsm has, ln facL, lnLenLlonally remalned neuLral on clalms aL unlversal, or correcL,"
answers Lo Lhe glvens, someLlmes quesLlonlng lf such answers exlsL. lf Lhe glvens also provlded
a clalmed unlversal answer, such as eLernal llfe Lhrough Cod, Lhen Lhey could rlghLly be
consldered a meLanarraLlve. lnsLead, exlsLenLlallsm purporLs LhaL Lhe answer ls culLurally and
personally deLermlned, whlch parallels Lhe personal and soclal consLrucLlvlsms.
osLmodernlsLs, lL seems, are ofLen so afrald of accldenLly advocaLlng for meLanarraLlves
LhaL Lhey someLlmes sLruggle Lo say anyLhlng meanlngful abouL shared reallLy. 8elevanL Lo Lhe
clalms of unlversals, lL ls hard Lo deny Lhe reallLy of some glvens - LhaL we wlll dle, Lhe
lnevlLable connecLlon beLween freedom and responslblllLy, LhaL we are relaLlonal belngs, LhaL
humans seek meanlng from Lhelr experlence, and LhaL emoLlons are parL of Lhe human
experlence.
3
Powever, alLhough all people are lmpacLed by Lhese Lhemes Lo exlsLence, lL ls
hard Lo flnd any unlversal agreemenL on Lhe rlghL" answers Lo Lhese sLruggles. MeLanarraLlves
are beLLer undersLood as unlversal narraLlves on how one should respond Lo Lhe exlsLenLlal
glvens, noL Lhe glvens Lhemselves.

LkIS1LN1IAL-IN1LGkA1IVL 1nLkA AS A 8ASIS ICk IN1LGkA1ICN

kotiono/ ond process of inteqrotion
8efore beglnnlng Lo lnLegraLe psychoLheraples, lL ls lmporLanL Lo begln Lhe quesLlons, why ls
lnLegraLlon deslrable?" and how ls lnLegraLlon done?" 1he why of lnLegraLlon ls Lo lncrease
Lhe effecLlveness and adapLablllLy of psychoLherapy. Powever, as l wlll dlscuss, Lhls may have
llLLle Lo do wlLh lnLegraLlng more effecLlve Lechnlques and approaches Lo Lherapy. lnsLead, Lhe
prlmary beneflL of lnLegraLlon may be ln Lhe flexlblllLy or adapLablllLy lL adds Lo Lhe
psychoLherapy approach agalnsL fundamenLallsm ln psychoLherapy.
lndeed, all psychoLherapy orlenLaLlons have Lhelr fundamenLallsLs, or LheraplsLs who
belleve Lhelr approach Lo Lherapy ls superlor Lo all oLhers and should be applled ln a raLher
speclflc manner. 1hls menLallLy ls sLrongly conLradlcLed by conLemporary ouLcome research
LhaL suggesLs mosL psychoLheraples are equal ln effecLlveness and lL ls Lhe common or

3
1here are many dlfferenL Lakes on how Lo label and classlfy Lhe exlsLenLlal glvens. lrequenLly, mosL
auLhors ldenLlfy four Lo flve glvens. lor a more deLalled overvlew of Lhe glvens, see ?alom (1980),
Poffman (2009a), Peery (2009), or Schnelder and krug (2010).
Louis Boffman - Knowing anu the 0nknown

103

conLexLual facLors LhaL exLend across Lherapy orlenLaLlons LhaL really accounL for change
(Llklns, 2009). 1he challenge Lo psychoLherapy fundamenLallsms ls LhaL Lhey are noL able Lo
adapL Lo parLlcular cllenL needs and sLyles, whlch should become more evldenL shorLly.
AddlLlonally, lL seems Lhere ls someLhlng lnherenL ln Lhe approach of lndlvlduals LhaL adhere Lo
rlgld fundamenLallsms ln LherapeuLlc appllcaLlon LhaL negaLlvely lmpacLs Lherapy relaLlonshlps.
Cenerally, fundamenLallsm Lends Lo have a narclsslsLlc and condescendlng Lone assoclaLed
wlLh lL.
Pow lnLegraLlon occurs ls maybe Lhe more lmporLanL quesLlon. 1hls can be answered by
comparlng eclectlc and loteqtotlve approaches. LclecLlc approaches Lo Lherapy drawn on a
hlghly pragmaLlc frame of lf lt wotks, ose lt. 1hey allow Lhe LheraplsL Lo raLher randomly draw
from dlfferenL psychoLherapy orlenLaLlons uLlllzlng whaLever appears Lo flL besL ln Lhe
momenL. lnLegraLlve psychoLherapy also lnLends Lo allow LheraplsLs Lo draw on Lechnlques
from dlfferenL Lherapy orlenLaLlons, buL does so ln a more LhoughLful way. lrom an lnLegraLlve
perspecLlve, Lhere sLlll needs Lo be a foundaLlon Lo one's approach Lo Lherapy whlch serves as
a gulde Lo whaL should be lnLegraLed when (Poffman, 2009a). lor example, Wolfe (2008) and
8unLlng and Payes (2008) provlde Lwo examples of lnLegraLlng cognlLlve-behavloral Lherapy
wlLh exlsLenLlal Lherapy. 1hese Lwo approaches Lo Lherapy are hlghly dlfferenL and an eclecLlc
approach drawlng on Lhese Lwo approaches ls llkely Lo fall. 1o lllusLraLe, exlsLenLlal Lherapy
ofLen Lrles Lo uLlllze or harness anxleLy for moLlvaLlon and as a gulde Lo Lhe Lherapy process.
Conversely, many cognlLlve-behavloral approaches seek Lo reduce or ellmlnaLe anxleLy, whlch
would Lhen decrease Lhe effecLlveness of anxleLy as a gulde. urawlng from boLh Lhese
approaches eclecLlcally could easlly lead Lo LheraplsLs worklng agalnsL Lhemselves.
1he lnLegraLlve approaches by Wolfe (2008) and 8unLlng and Payes (2008) demonsLraLe a
greaLer awareness of Lhls poLenLlal problem. 1hese models suggesL LhaL cognlLlve-behavlor
Lherapy can be used ln aL leasL Lwo dlsLlncLlve ways when lnLegraLed wlLh an exlsLenLlal
approach. llrsL, Lhe cognlLlve-behavloral sLraLegles can be used Lo help allevlaLe Lhe lnlLlal
crlsls, Lhen allowlng for cllenLs Lo move on Lo worklng on Lhe more subsLanLlve, exlsLenLlal
lssues. Second, Lhe cognlLlve-behavlor sLraLegles can be used Lo provlde coplng resources for
when cllenLs move lnLo worklng on dlfflculL exlsLenLlal lssues, whlch ofLen brlng up some
palnful experlences. ln uslng cognlLlve sLraLegles ln Lhls manner, Lhe producLlve slde of anxleLy
can sLlll be uLlllzed when dolng Lhe depLh work whlle managlng more lnLense or exLreme
emoLlonal sLaLes LhaL may lnLerfere wlLh producLlve depLh work.
1he basls for effecLlve lnLegraLlon can be elucldaLed Lhrough a dlscusslon of Lhe conLexLual
facLors of psychoLherapy effecLlveness. Llklns (2009) provldes one of Lhe mosL useful and
Lhorough revlews of Lhese conLexLual facLors drawlng from Lhe varlous meLa-analyses and
crlLlcal revlews of Lhe research. Many of Lhese facLors perLaln Lo relaLlonal elemenLs of
psychoLherapy. Powever, some of Lhe mosL lnLeresLlng conLexLual facLors for Lhe purpose of
Lhls arLlcle focus on Lhe LheraplsL's and cllenL's bellef plauslble explanaLlon for Lhe cllenL's
problems and heallng or growLh. Accordlng Lo Llklns, Lhe research llLeraLure suggesLs LhaL
Lechnlques do make a dlfference, however, lL ls noL Lhe speclflc Lechnlque, buL raLher LhaL
Lechnlque ls one ln whlch Lhe LheraplsL and cllenL can belleve. lrom an effecLlveness
perspecLlve, bellevloq lo wbot yoo Jo os o tbetoplst ls qeoetolly mote lmpottoot tboo wbot yoo
octoolly Jo!
4
1hls baslc undersLandlng ls beglnnlng Lo change Lhe face of psychoLherapy. 1he
prlor debaLe of whlch approach Lo psychoLherapy ls besL ls qulckly becomlng nonsenslcal.

4
1here are llmlLaLlons Lo Lhls. Some Lypes of Lherapy, such as 8eblrLhlng 1herapy and 8eparaLlve or
Converslon 1herapy, have been shown Lo be dangerous and ofLen do cause harm. 1hls sLaLemenLs
should noL be lnLerpreLed ln Lhe relaLlvlsLlc exLreme LhaL lf you can explaln and [usLlfy lL, lL should
beneflL Lhe cllenL.

Bumana.Nente - Issue 11- 0ctobei 2uu9

106

lnsLead, whaL ls lmporLanL for Lherapy Lo be effecLlve ls Lo belleve ln whaL you are dolng. lrom
Lhe cllenL's vlew, lL ls lmporLanL LhaL Lhey, Loo, are able Lo belleve ln whaL ls belng done by Lhe
LheraplsL. lrom Lhls perspecLlve, lL ls less lmporLanL Lo deLermlne whlch approach Lo Lherapy
Lhe research suggesLs ls besL for a cllenL who checks Lhe parLlcular demographlc boxes and
more lmporLanL Lo glve conslderaLlon as Lo whlch approach Lo Lherapy flLs wlLh Lhe cllenL's
values, bellef sysLem, and relaLlonal sLyle.
ln reLurnlng Lo Lhe dlscusslon abouL Lherapy orlenLaLlon fundamenLallsm, aL flrsL glance lL
would appear LhaL Lhls may be good for Lherapy. AfLer all, Lhese LheraplsLs ofLen sLrongly
belleve ln whaL Lhey do. Powever, Lhey also are noL as able Lo adapL Lo Lhe speclflc needs of
Lhe cllenL and Lend Lo lmpose Lhelr bellefs on Lhelr cllenL. lundamenLallsL LheraplsLs focus on
Lhe LheraplsL's bellefs abouL Lherapy wlLhouL adequaLe conslderaLlon Lo Lhe cllenL's needs,
deslres, and preferences. 1hls dlsconnecL lmpacLs Lhe cllenL's bellef ln Lherapy as well as Lhe
relaLlonal facLors. 1heraplsLs, Lherefore, need Lo be able Lo adapL Lo Lhelr cllenL's speclflc
needs and sLyle ln order Lo be effecLlve. lrom posLmodern and exlsLenLlal perspecLlves, Lhls
should noL be a surprlse.
lrom Lhe posLmodern perspecLlve, earller l referred Lo Lhe Pansen (2006) quoLe, Lheorles
are narraLlve sLrucLures uLlllzed for rheLorlcal purposes, deslgned Lo persuade Lhe sufferer Lo
conslder experlence from a dlfferenL vanLage polnL" (p. 293). 1hls perspecLlve lf hlghly
conslsLenL wlLh May's (1991) vlew on myLh and Poffman's (2009b) appllcaLlon of Lhls.
sychoLherapy orlenLaLlons are dlfferenL myLhs or narraLlves. CllenLs ofLen enLer Lherapy
because Lhey have losL falLh ln Lhelr myLhs or Lhelr myLhs are no longer worklng for Lhem.
1heraplsLs, Lhen, help cllenLs explore Lhelr myLhology whlle offerlng some alLernaLlve
perspecLlves. 1he obvlous danger, here, ls LhaL lL can become qulLe easy Lo lmpose a
myLhology upon a cllenL, parLlcularly lf Lhe LheraplsL ls persuaslve enough. 1he [ob of Lhe
LheraplsL ls Lo help Lhe cllenL reconslder, adapL, and change Lhelr myLhs, noL Lo change Lhem
for Lhem. arL of Lhls may, aL Llme, lnclude sharlng a new myLhology, one rooLed ln Lhe
psychoLherapy orlenLaLlon of Lhe LheraplsL. Powever, Lhe LheraplsL should remaln vlgllanL ln
assesslng when Lherapy ls movlng agalnsL Lhe cllenL's values and deslres.
lL ls my hope LhaL Lhe new paradlgms ln psychology - Lvldence-8ased racLlce ln
sychology, conLexLual facLors, and posLmodernlsm - brlng a new approach Lo assesslng whlch
Lherapy ls Lhe besL flL for whlch cllenLs. 1heraplsL-cllenL maLchlng should noL be an ob[ecLlve
process, buL raLher ls hlghly sub[ecLlve. CllenLs should be encouraged Lo conslder whlch
LheraplsL ls Lhe besL flL for Lhem and noL [usL be compllanL wlLh whomever Lhey geL asslgned Lo
or randomly choose from a LheraplsL llsL. Slmllarly, Lhe eLhlcal LheraplsL should begln Lhe
Lherapy process noL Lrylng Lo convlnce Lhe cllenL LhaL Lhey are Lhe besL LheraplsL for Lhem, buL
raLher Lrylng Lo ldenLlfy lf Lhe cllenL ls Lhe rlghL flL for Lhelr approach Lo Lherapy. 1he professlon
of psychology should look susplclously on Lhe LheraplsL who Lhlnks every cllenL ls a good flL for
hlm or her, and should develop beLLer recourses Lo help cllenLs become lnformed consumers. l
wlll close Lhls secLlon wlLh a dlscusslon of cllenL-LheraplsL maLchlng ln posLmodern Llmes.

Postmodern c/ient-theropist motchinq
ln Lhe pracLlce ln whlch l see cllenLs, we adhere Lo a pollcy of provldlng free lnlLlal consulLaLlon
ln order Lo help cllenLs flnd Lhe besL LheraplsL. When a cllenL schedules a consulLaLlon, we
work Lo help Lhem undersLand Lhe varleLy of LheraplsLs LhaL we have avallable aL our cllnlc as
well as undersLandlng whaL opLlons are avallable elsewhere ln Lhe communlLy. We clearly
sLaLe Lo Lhe poLenLlal cllenL LhaL we are lnvesLed ln helplng Lhem flnd Lhe rlghL LheraplsLs for
Lhem. As our pracLlce provldes exlsLenLlal and oLher relaLed depLh psychoLheraples, Lhls means
LhaL many cllenLs are noL Lhe rlghL flL for our pracLlce. lor example, when a cllenL comes Lo an
Louis Boffman - Knowing anu the 0nknown

107

lnlLlal consulLaLlon and makes lL clear LhaL Lhelr prlorlLy ls expedlency and sklll developmenL, lL
ls evldenL LhaL Lhey are noL Lhe rlghL flL for our pracLlce and we refer Lhem elsewhere. CLher
Llmes, a cllenL may reporL LhaL Lhey are overwhelmed currenLly, and ln need of some qulck
rellef, buL also wanL Lo explore Lhe deeper facLors LhaL helped conLrlbuLe Lo Lhls slLuaLlon. ln
Lhls case, our pracLlce can be a good flL Lhrough employlng an exlsLenLlal-lnLegraLlve approach,
such as LhaL dlscussed by Wolfe (2008) or 8unLlng and Payes (2008) prevlously.
unforLunaLely, mosL LheraplsLs are noL LaughL how Lo lead a cllenL Lhrough a process of
cllenL-LheraplsL maLchlng ln Lhls manner. AddlLlonally, economlc pressures and compeLlLlon for
cllenLs ofLen LalnLs Lhe LheraplsL's moLlvaLlon when conslderlng lf a cllenL ls Lhe rlghL flL. Many
LheraplsLs, Loo, provlde Lhe Lype of Lherapy LhaL keeps Lhem ln Lhe good graces of Lhlrd parLy
provlders lnsLead of provldlng Lhe besL and mosL approprlaLe Lherapy for cllenLs. ln many
counLrles Loday, Lherapy cannoL be separaLed from Lhe economlc and pollLlcal power
sLrucLures. When Lhls occurs, lL ls Lhe cllenL who ls negaLlvely lmpacLed more Lhan Lhe
LheraplsL.
1he conLexLual facLors revoluLlon does have Lhe poLenLlal Lo change Lhe fleld of
psychoLherapy and brlng a revlLallzed eLhlcal approach Lo LherapeuLlc pracLlce. 1he blggesL
barrler Lo Lhls revoluLlon may be Lhese pollLlcal and economlc forces. lf Lhe conLexLual facLors
movemenL ls Lo succeed ln a broad way, changes wlll be requlred beglnnlng aL Lhe Lralnlng
level. SLudenLs wlll need Lo be Lralned on how Lo maLch cllenLs wlLh Lhe approprlaLe Lype of
Lherapy based upon Lhe cllenL's values, noL Lhe ob[ecLlve research. 1hls means LheraplsLs wlll
need Lo be famlllar wlLh a wlde array of LherapeuLlc approaches and Lhelr values, noL [usL Lhelr
own, ln order Lo make effecLlve referrals. 1heraplsLs ln Lralnlng wlll also need Lo be Lralned on
how Lo work eLhlcally wlLhln Lhe pollLlcal and economlc pressures LhaL lmplnge upon Lhe fleld
of psychoLherapy. 1hls wlll noL be an easy shlfL ln a fleld, buL lL ls one LhaL ls desperaLely
needed.

4 postmodern existentio/ism for inteqrotion
Several facLors make a posLmodern exlsLenLlal approach a falrly ldeal framework for
lnLegraLlon. llrsL, boLh posLmodern and exlsLenLlal values advocaLe for recognlLlon of
llmlLaLlons. no one approach, even an lnLegraLlve approach, can be adapLed Lo work wlLh all
cllenLs. AddlLlonally, no LheraplsL, no maLLer how adapLable, can work successfully wlLh all
cllenLs. 1he besL Lheraples, and Lhe besL LheraplsLs, are ones whlch begln by clearly
acknowledglng Lhelr llmlLaLlons.
Second, Lhe emergenL Lrend for Lhe conLexLual facLors ls hlghly posLmodern and exlsLenLlal.
1hls should noL be lnLended Lo clalm LhaL elLher posLmodern psychology or exlsLenLlal
psychology ls Lhe basls for Lhe common facLors. lndeed, Lhe common facLors lle beyond Lhe
Lherapy orlenLaLlons as a model for how Lo undersLand Lhe way varlous orlenLaLlons work.
Powever, Lhese approaches very naLurally advocaLe for a value sysLem conslsLenL wlLh Lhe
common facLors approach. An exlsLenLlal-lnLegraLlve approach also ls one LhaL has long
advocaLed for many of Lhe relaLlonal common facLors as essenLlal ln Lhe cllenL change process.
1hlrd, posLmodern and exlsLenLlal approaches are anLl-dogmaLlc. 1here could be noLhlng
less posLmodern Lhan a fundamenLallsL approach Lo posLmodernlsm, and noLhlng less
exlsLenLlal Lhan a fundamenLallsL approach Lo exlsLenLlallsm. Cf course, Lhere are people who
could rlghLly flL Lhese labels, however, Lhelr approach ls necessarlly lnLernally lnconslsLenL.
lourLh, exlsLenLlallsm ls a very fluld approach Lo Lherapy LhaL ls noL rooLed ln Lechnlques.
1hls allows for greaL adapLablllLy when used as a foundaLlon for lnLegraLlng oLher approaches.
Some exlsLenLlal LheraplsLs, such as ?alom (1980), even go as far as sLaLlng LhaL exlsLenLlal
psychoLherapy ls noL an orlenLaLlon aL all. AlLhough l would dlsagree wlLh Lhls appralsal, l
would agree LhaL exlsLenLlal Lheraples lack of sLrucLure, whlch makes lL look very dlfferenL

Bumana.Nente - Issue 11- 0ctobei 2uu9

108

from oLher Lherapy orlenLaLlons, also allows lL Lo be more adapLable when lnLegraLlng
psychoLherapy approaches.

CCNCLUSICN
LxlsLenLlallsm and posLmodernlsm, ln Lhe phllosophlcal and Lhe psychologlcal realms, share a
greaL deal of commonallLy. Powever, Lhere are also polnLs of dlvergence LhaL provlde a basls
for dlalogue. ln Lhls paper, l have examlned some of Lhe key slmllarlLles and dlfferences,
prlmarlly as Lhey relaLed Lo eplsLemology and psychoLherapy. 1hls was noL lnLended Lo be a
comprehenslve comparlson, and lndeed Lhere are oLher challenglng dlfferences lf one moves
beyond Lhe dellmlLlng facLors or psychoLherapy and eplsLemology. Powever, Lhere ls greaL
poLenLlal for an lnLegraLlon of posLmodern and exlsLenLlal ldeas lnLo a foundaLlon for broader
psychoLherapeuLlc lnLegraLlon.


8I8LICGkAn

Anderson, W. 1. (1993). lnLroducLlon: WhaL's golng on here? ln W. 1. Anderson (Ld.), 1be
ttotb oboot tbe ttotb. ue-coofosloq ooJ te-coosttoctloq tbe postmoJeto wotlJ new
?ork: 1archer/uLnam. pp. 1-11.
8unLlng, k. & Payes, S. C. (2008). Language and meanlng: AccepLance and commlLmenL
Lherapy and Lhe Ll model. ln k. !. Schnelder (Ld.), xlsteotlol-loteqtotlve
psycbotbetopy. ColJeposts to tbe cote of ptoctlce new ?ork: 8ouLledge. pp. 217-234.
Llklns, u. n. (2009). nomoolstlc psycboloqy. A cllolcol moolfesto. Colorado Sprlngs, CC:
unlverslLy of Lhe 8ockles ress.
Lrwln, L. (1999). ConsLrucLlvlsL eplsLemologles and Lheraples. 8tltlsb Iootool of ColJooce
ooJ coooselloq, 27, 333-363.
Pansen, !. 1. (2006). Counsellng Lheorles wlLhln a posLmodernlsL eplsLemology: new roles
for Lheorles ln counsellng pracLlce. Iootool of coooselloq ooJ uevelopmeot, 84, 291-
297.
Peery, M. (2009). Clobal auLhenLlclLy. ln L. Poffman, M. ?ang, l. kaklauskas, & A. Chan
(Lds.), xlsteotlol psycboloqy ost-west (pp. 203-219). Colorado Sprlngs, CC:
unlverslLy of Lhe 8ockles ress.
Poffman, L. (2009). lnLroducLlon Lo exlsLenLlal psychoLherapy ln a cross-culLural conLexL: An
LasL-WesL dlalogue. ln L. Poffman, M. ?ang, l. !. kaklauskas, & A. Chan (Lds.),
xlsteotlol psycboloqy ost-west (pp. 1-67). Colorado Sprlngs, CC: unlverslLy of Lhe
8ockles ress.
Poffman, L. (2009). Cordo's ghosL: An lnLroducLlon Lo exlsLenLlal perspecLlves on myLhs. ln
L. Poffman, M. ?ang, l. !. kaklauskas, & A. Chan (Lds.), xlsteotlol psycboloqy ost-
west (pp. 239-274). Colorado Sprlngs, CC: unlverslLy of Lhe 8ockles ress.
Poffman, L. & kurzenberger, M. (2008). 1he mlraculous ln menLal lllness. ln !. P. Lllens (Ld.),
Mltocles. CoJ, scleoce, ooJ psycboloqy lo tbe potoootmol (vol. 3, pp. 63-93).
WesLporL, C1: raeger 8ooks.
Louis Boffman - Knowing anu the 0nknown

109

Poffman, L., SLewarL, S., Warren, u., & Meek, L. (2009). 1oward a susLalnable myLh of self:
An exlsLenLlal response Lo Lhe posLmodern condlLlon. Iootool of nomoolstlc
lsycboloqy, 49, 133-173.
Poffman, L., ?ang, M., & kaklauskas, l. !., & Chan, A. (Lds.). (2009). xlsteotlol psycboloqy
ost-west. Colorado Sprlngs, CC: unlverslLy of Lhe 8ockles ress.
Pubble, M. A., uuncan, 8. L., & Mlller, S. u. (Lds.). (1999). 1be beott ooJ sool of cbooqe.
WashlngLon, uC: Amerlcan sychologlcal AssoclaLlon.
Legg, C. & SLagakl, . (2002). Pow Lo be a posLmodernlsL: A user's gulde Lo posLmodern
rheLorlcal pracLlces. Iootool of lomlly 1betopy, 24, 383-401.
May, 8. (1991). 1be cty fot mytb. new ?ork: uelLa.
MlLchell, S. A. (1988). kelotloool coocepts lo psycboooolysls. Ao loteqtotloo. Cambrldge,
MA: Parvard unlverslLy ress.
norcross, !. C. (Ld.). (2002). lsycbotbetopy telotloosblps tbot wotk. Cxford: Cxford
unlverslLy ress.
8askln, !. u. (2002). ConsLrucLlvlsm ln psychology: ersonal consLrucL psychology, radlcal
consLrucLlvlsm, and soclal consLrucLlonlsm. Amerlcan CommunlcaLlon !ournal, 3(3).
8eLrleved from hLLp://www.ac[ournal.org/holdlngs/vol3/lss3/speclal/raskln.hLm
Schnelder, k. !. (1998). LxlsLenLlal processes. ln L. S. Creenberg, !. C. WaLson, & C. LleLaer
(Lds.), nooJbook of expetleotlol psycbotbetopy (pp. 103-120). new ?ork: Cullford.
Schnelder, k. !. (Ld.). (2008). xlsteotlol-loteqtotlve psycbotbetopy. ColJeposts to tbe cote
of ptoctlce. new ?ork: 8ouLledge.
Schnelder, k. !. & krug, C. 1. (2010). xlsteotlol-bomoolstlc tbetopy. WashlngLon, uC:
Amerlcan sychologlcal AssoclaLlon.
SLark, M. (2000). MoJes of tbetopeotlc octloo. norLhvale, n!: !ason Aronson.
Wampold, 8. L. (2001). 1be qteot psycbotbetopy Jebote. MoJels, metboJs, ooJ floJloqs.
Mahwah, n!: Lawrence Lrlbaum AssoclaLes.
Wampold, 8. L., CoodhearL, C. u., & LevanL, 8. l. (2007). ClarlflcaLlon and elaboraLlon on
evldence-based pracLlce ln psychology. Ametlcoo lsycboloqlst, 62, 616-618.
Wolfe, 8. L. (2008). LxlsLenLlal lssues ln anxleLy dlsorders and Lhelr LreaLmenL. ln k. !.
Schnelder (Ld.), xlsteotlol-loteqtotlve psycbotbetopy. ColJeposts to tbe cote of
ptoctlce (pp. 204-216). new ?ork: 8ouLledge.
?alom, l. u. (1980). xlsteotlol psycbotbetopy. new ?ork: 8aslc 8ooks.








Bumana.Nente - Issue 11- 0ctobei 2uu9