|
Academics
Departments Special Interest
Navigation
|
A History of Psychology's Value Systems
An ethical psychologist, it is said, must be neutral and unbiased. But is a neutral psychology possible? A well-known psychology historian, Thomas Leahey, argues persuasively that psychology has never been neutral, and that it has always been grounded in a system of values.
And even though it seeks protection under the mantle of "science," Leahey explains, psychology is a discipline which is rooted in philosophy.
Because psychology exerts such a profound influence on society--shaping cultural views of normality, maturity and sexuality--it is important that we acknowledge and understand its implicit value system.
Modern Psychological Value Systems
Leahey explains that psychology was once clearly understood to be the practical application of a philosophy. This philosophy was based in moralism and religious principles, emphasizing man's need to be attuned to his spiritual nature.
But by the end of the l9th century, the newer scientific, rationalistic tradition arose in opposition. Psychology sought to break all ties with its philosophical roots and to be the objective, empirical and "value-free" science of human nature. We thought we had found a philosophically neutral psychology; but rather, says Leahey, we had merely substituted "the values of scientism."
Feelings as the New Gauge of Morality
Then in the 1960's, in reaction against scientism and its emphasis on rationalism, the Human Potential Movement came to prominence, preaching emotional openness and "being true to oneself." This movement taught that every man has a blueprint for a preexisting, "authentic self" which he has an obligation to discover. Growth was no longer seen as a product of intelligence and problem-solving (following the rationalistic tradition), or character development (following the earlier, religiously-based tradition), but more as a product of emotional development.
The Human Potential Movement influenced psychology into a new version of moral authority: looking inward for moral direction, and relying heavily on the gauge of personal feelings. Because it grounds itself in the study of the individual, such a psychology must decree, Leahey says:
"that the rules by which we should live life come from within each one of us, rather than from outside, and that these new rules can be discovered...by finding out how we really feel about things...
"Psychology teaches introspection as the final judge of right and wrong" (1991).
Humanistic psychology preaches the philosophy of full acceptance of the person, as he is, without expectations. Following psychologist Carl Rogers' client-centered philosophy, therapists today are generally expected to remain neutral, non-directive, and to resist contaminating the therapy through a value system.
While posing as a value-free science, Leahey says, psychology attempts to create its own idea of the good society.
The Origins of Psychology's "Good Society"
In the 1920's, Leahey explains, Americans were "struggling toward a redefinition of 'life as centered on self.'" Then, anthropologist Margaret Mead wrote Coming of Age in Samoa, which immediately became a runaway bestseller.
Mead described a Polynesian paradise in which heterosexuality, homosexuality, and promiscuity were enjoyed without conflict; husbands and wives engaged in extramarital sex without jealousy or possessiveness; and children were raised communally by the village. Guilt, stress, existential angst, and achievement orientation did not pose social problems in this modern-day utopia.
Mead's philosophy--that society could cast off the moral code by which it had been living, because its restraints were unnecessary--"gave psychologists the central role in constructing the new society... Mead's Samoa, a culture entirely outside the traditions of the West, became the social scientists' Holy Grail, a blueprint for them to follow in constructing the New Man."
Also aiding this revolution was the powerful influence of traditional Freudian psychoanalysis, which tended to view social restraints on sexuality as a source of much needless emotional conflict.
The Emphasis on Self
Psychology's modern "cult of the self" is quintessentially American, Leahey explains--so much so, that it has been taken as normative:
"The contradiction between pretending to have no values, and holding the value of individual growth, was not noticed by American psychologists because their central value was so American, as to be transparent... Continuing growth and development seem as natural and necessary to Americans as...the never-changing ideal divine order had seemed to Europeans of the Middle Ages. In our world of self-made individuals, psychological techniques that fostered continual growth and change appeared value-free " (1922).
How we define personal growth, however, has changed during the past century.
"Character," Leahey says, "was the concept by which people understood the individual in the nineteenth century...duty, work...honor, integrity, and manhood. In his or her character, then, a person had a certain relationship, good or evil, to an encompassing and transcendent moral order. Aspiring to good character demanded self-discipline and self-sacrifice."
"In the twentieth century, however, the moral concept of character began to be replaced by the narcissistic concept of personality, and self-sacrifice began to be replaced by self-realization...Having a good personality demanded no conformity to moral order, but instead fulfilled the desires of the self and achieved power over others...Self-growth meant realizing one's potential, not living up to impersonal moral ideals." But human potential, Leahey points out, is as often bad as good.
"A new Hellenistic age was in the making. In the first Hellenistic age...people's first desire was personal happiness--ataxia...in the modern Hellenistic Age, people's first desire would again be personal happiness--adjustment--and they would seek out psychologists for recipes by which they might find fulfillment...
"In both Hellenistic Ages there remained a deep hunger for more transcendent truths, but in neither were they forthcoming."
Value Systems Compared
Can modern psychology deal fairly with clients whose life philosophies conflict with that profession's values?
Clients from a traditional religious background, for example, might envision personal growth through roughly the following principles:
- A valuing of self-restraint, with the potent awareness that man is inclined toward evil as well as good.
- The belief that the self (with its drives for power, sexual gratification, and violence) must be subordinate to transcendent moral law (as revealed in Torah, Koran or Bible). Self-actualization is seen not so much in terms of "being oneself," as in developing one's natural self toward a desired ideal.
- Feelings are recognized as expressions of one's inner life, but they are understood as often transitory and unacceptable to act out. Critical judgment--guided by external moral authority--is given ultimate precedence. Personal responsibility (particularly to spouse and children) is afforded a higher ultimate value than self-gratification and self-expression.
- Self-esteem is seen less as a "right," and more as a byproduct of good character and achievement.
- There is a strong belief in the reality of absolute truth.
In contrast, the values of modern psychology might be summarized roughly as the following:
- Self-actualization is generally held to be the goal of life. Leahey says, "The central values of the twentieth century [are]...being true to one's 'real' self, expressing one's 'deepest' feelings, 'sharing' one's personality with a larger group." Emphasis is on claiming self-esteem as an inherent right.
- Right and wrong, which are rarely acknowledged, are held to be subjective and relative ("What's bad for me, may not be bad for you"), and thus outside the scope of professional discourse. Clients are taught to discern the morality of their life choices based on whether they "feel comfortable" about them.
- Feelings reign above external moral authority. As Leahey (1987) says, "'Feeling good about yourself'" has now become "the litmus test of good behavior, a sort of bastardized moral sense."
- Moral relativism is the accepted philosophy, which holds that there is no transcendent, overriding truth--only "your truth" and "my truth"--and no other philosophy may be endorsed by psychology, or by the culture as a whole.
- Guilt is often held to be unnecessary and unhealthy. It is often judged best to erase the standards that engender the guilt, than to persist in feeling bad about oneself. "Feeling bad about oneself" is usually seen as a sign of psychological ill-health.
- Celibacy and sexual restraint are rarely understood to be healthy options, even if undertaken in pursuit of a longterm goal. Both are considered unrealistic in light of human nature.
- Dedication to transcendent ideals--such as the standard of one's religious faith--is viewed much more skeptically as a therapeutic goal than self-expression, exploration of the self through feelings, and spontaneity.
A cynic might be tempted to say that the values of modern psychology were summarized by Boy George in an interview on the Oprah Show (9-20-95):
"I think to be prejudiced against other people is really wrong" (said to loud clapping) "and whatever makes you happy is the right thing for you" (louder clapping).
Psychology's Conflict of Values with Clients Seeking Sexual Reorientation
The American Psychological Association takes positions on issues such as gays in the military, the decision to abort, and same-sex marriage. Dr. Ray Johnson, founder of Psychologists for a Free A.P.A., aptly describes this as a policy of advocating its own particular social-moral positions.
Predictably, A.P.A. also disapproves of sexual-reorientation therapy.
In taking such social-moral positions, psychology places itself in opposition to those who value committed male-female marriage as the norm. The clinical work of Dr. Richard Isay, a prominent spokesman for A.P.A.'s official gay-affirmative position, clearly demonstrates this values disparity.
Dr. Isay, once head of a family of four, says he struggled with unwanted homosexual feelings throughout his life. After many years of marriage, he saw a gay pornographic movie and felt such a strong sense of arousal that he decided to divorce his wife and live his life as an openly gay man. In the process, he changed his mind about homosexuality, which he had previously believed to be developmentally disordered. "I can't imagine living my life without passion," he said.
These same values carried over into his work as a psychoanalyst. As described in his book Becoming Gay, he helped many patients leave their wives when they complained of a "lack of passion" in middle age. Others he assisted in creating pragmatic compromises.
Marital Fidelity Not Valued
For example, describing a married patient, he speaks approvingly (regardless of what the client's wife might think) of the man's learning to be "more tolerant of his homosexual fantasies. He was able to masturbate with more comfort and greater frequency to homosexual images, and even permitted himself surreptitious glances at an attractive man on the street, or at gay pornography" (p. 98).
Describing an elderly, sick and obese patient who wanted to leave his longtime wife to find a lover in the gay community, Isay told him the most "practical" course would be to "improve his relationship with his wife and gratify his sexual needs with hustlers" (p. 147). Exactly how the patient would reconcile improving communication with a spouse of fifty years--while having sex with street prostitutes on the side--Isay does not say; but his advice implies a pragmatic disregard for commitment in marriage. Isay, incidentally, describes his own therapeutic approach as "neutral" and that of sexual-reorientation therapists as "biased."
Clients who seek sexual-reorientation therapy typically have different values. Such clients grant the pleasure and excitement of sexual passion, but decide not to let such feelings guide their life decisions, compromise their commitment to family, or alter their religious views. They recognize that passion is often driven by motivations that are unacceptable to act out, and that through self-insight, the meaning of this unwanted passion may be transformed, thus taking away much of its power. The search for constant romance and excitement so often described by gay men thus seems empty and meaningless in the larger context of their lives.
Bisexual Lifestyle Suggested as an Option
We see an example of values similar to Dr. Isay's in the work of Richard Green, M.D., as reported in Green's The Sissy Boy Syndrome. In a section entitled, "Reassurance about Joseph's Sexual Options," we have a young man, Joseph, who has expressed a repeated desire to be straight and to marry, but who has had sexual fantasies which more often involve men than women.
Speaking to the young man's father, Dr. Green describes the "sexual options" which his client Joseph should consider:
Dr. Green:
"There's a psychiatrist colleague of mine who has written a book called The Bisexual Option, in which he argues that being bisexual is a far more human-potential-fulfilling experience than either exclusive heterosexuality or exclusive homosexuality. Bisexuals have not cut off from their relationships one dimension of sexuality and caring and affection and love--half the human race. He argues that people who have this flexibility, who really can relate depending on the individual, regardless of gender, have a far healthier outlook and a far healthier existence.
"This is not written by some wild person on a mountaintop, but by a clinical psychologist. That is a potential that more and more people are exploring.
"From what you've said about his having an interest in Penthouse and things like this, an exclusively homosexual lifestyle just does not seem to be fitting..."
Dr. Green then suggests that Joseph's father say to him:
"'What I really care about is that you be happy. It's the quality of the relationship that's of much more concern. As a parent, I know that just being heterosexual doesn't guarantee happiness...I hope that you're able to find a partner or partners that make your life fulfilling.'"
"If you can believe that and say it with conviction that goes with the belief, then I think you've done a magnificent job as a parent..."
Soon after, Joseph himself comes in for a session. He voices doubts about Dr. Green's encouragement of his bisexuality, saying it: "scares me a lot sometimes. Because I keep saying to myself that I really want a wife and kids...I really do want a wife and children very, very much."
Dr. Green confronts Joseph's doubts:
"Are you worried about bisexuality primarily because you want to get married and have kids, or because you think there is something wrong about being bisexual--that there is something wrong with being gay?"
Joseph tells Dr. Green that bisexuality is "weird."
Dr. Green reassures him that bisexuality is, in fact, a valid option:
"The issue of integrating a bisexual lifestyle as opposed to maintaining an exclusively heterosexual one is something that people do...Personally and professionally, I know a lot of people who have married and have children and who are bisexual. It's a question of how you negotiate with your wife to be open about this and go into a marriage and family situation with everybody's eyes wide open... 'This is who I am. Can you accept that?'...There are some women who can and some who can't...Do you want to be open with this person or not?..."
Dr. Green then further suggests the possibility of having gay affairs, with or without the wife's knowledge:
"There are some men who go into a marriage knowing that they really can't be heterosexually monogamous, and it's a question of then deciding whether it's appropriate to tell their prospective wife that they are not going to be monogamous, and hopefully reach that understanding beforehand...
"Many of these people that I know don't find that the bisexual part interferes with the heterosexual part. They say that it's like two different channels on a television set...It's a question of switching channels, so that they don't interfere with each other..."
After hearing Dr. Green's point of view, Joseph has evidently had a change of heart. He says:
"I almost think it's neat being bisexual, if in fact I am.
"Yeah, exactly, like...why should I be restricted?"
Values Must Be Made Explicit
Many questions are addressed in psychotherapy, including social-moral issues centering on bisexuality and homosexuality, as well as the choice to have an open marriage, versus a lifetime of fidelity. These questions, including the larger definition of psychological health and normality, can never be determined on purely scientific grounds, as sociologist Steven Goldberg reminds us. Science is concerned only with empirical relationships. How these empirical relationships are interpreted and applied always requires subjective judgment.
Instead of claiming to be "neutral," and dismissing those with an explicit moral philosophy as "biased," the psychological profession must acknowledge that there are values inherent in any system which attempts to guide human lives.
Then, we must address the question which has created this crisis of confidence: "What really constitutes self-actualization?"
And if we cannot agree on the answer, we must ask: "Should the public continue to place its trust in psychotherapy?"
Bibliography
Green, Richard, M.D. (1987). The "Sissy Boy Syndrome" and the Development of Homosexuality. New Haven: Yale U. Press.
Isay, Richard (1996). Becoming Gay: The Journey to Self-Acceptance. N.Y.: Pantheon Books.
Johnson, Ray. "American Psychology: The Political Science,"
Collected Papers of the National Association of Research and Therapy of Homosexuality, 1995.
Leahey, Thomas (1987), quoted in The A.P.A. Monitor in "Moralism: Full Circle," by Tori DeAngelis, vol. 18, #12, December l987, p. 5.
Leahey, Thomas (1991). A History of Modern Psychology. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
Leahey, Thomas (1992). A History of Psychology: Main Currents of Psychological Thought. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
Copyright © NARTH. All Rights Reserved.
copyright © 1995-2008 Leadership U. All rights reserved.
Updated: 14 July 2002