It was proved in the article, that among the students of experimental and control groups, before the experimental training, the most important instrumental values were: high demands, cheerfulness, independence, accuracy, education, conscientiousness in the execution of assignments. Unfortunately, such important instrumental values for the future psychologist as sensitivity, tolerance for the opinions of others, the ability to make thoughtful decisions, self-control and others have a rather low level of formation (for example, sensitivity; tolerance of others’ opinions). According to the results of our research, individual experience is actualized during the formation of the subject, the so-called “going out to meet something”. This is explained by the fact that our self-realization, although important in itself, is optional, an additional product of our desire, that is, in other words, a human calling that inspires a person to perform actions. In this context we’d remark on subjective experience (“awareness”), which is a component of a real dialogue is quite important. We call another danger from the person’s focus on his/her personality “hidden spontaneity”. This spontaneity is hidden because we want to become spontaneous, we set this as our goal, but then we try to structure this spontaneity. Such a process takes place during encounter groups. However, we point out, the danger is that what worked for one person in one situation may not necessarily work in another situation, so transference should not be applied in every case. But, as a rule, at the moment when a person becomes experienced, then he/she wants to transfer this experience to other subjects. As a result of this, the emergence of authoritarianism on the part of the coach during the group meetings classes is possible. In the context of the analysis of the experience that we carry out, one can see the efforts to overcome the methodology of simplified determinism. Thus, Humanistic Psychology paradoxically comes close to weakening its own subjective idea. Directly for the results of our research, the key point in our theory was the construction of a universal scale of needs from lower to higher, which differs from the levels of the formation or functioning of needs in representatives of behavioral psychology or known levels of psychoanalysis, in their essence, only an instruction to look for the key to anatomy not from below, but from above. The heuristic nature of the classification and ranking of human needs in the operational-procedural plan is not in doubt, but, nevertheless, objections arise when even any broad normalization of human actualizations enters the limits of the methodological paradigm. It is difficult to say to what extent such regulation is unhumanistic, but it is clear that to a large extent it appears as undemocratic.
Read full abstract