APPLICATIONS OF GENERAL SYSTEMS
THEORY TO HUMANISTIC PSYCHOLOGY
In the foregoing discussion, we have attempted to
demonstrate the common philosophical perspec-
tives of GST and HP with the purpose of advocat-
ing the usefulness of GST in furthering the under-
standing of the human being from the perspective
of HP. The challenges which face HP at this
juncture are numerous, yet the areas of rnind(body
interaction and the dynamics of growth are of par-
ticular note. Both areas are timely considerations
and reflect the type of problem that we feel may par-
ticularly benefit from the application of GST to
problems in HP and humanistic psychotherapy.
Paradigms of mind/body interaction
Though not stressed in the early days of HP, an
emphasis upon the unity of mental and physical
processes of the human organism has become
fundamental to many contemporary therapeutic
approaches. The need to supplant the mind/body
dichotomy with a more holistic view which
recognizes inter-level interactions is also important
to the organismic paradigm of GST. Lotka [46], a
forerunner of modern systems theory, was perhaps
the first to make this point. Concerning the scientific
inadequacies of mind and matter dualism, von
Bertalanffy [11] observes: Psychopathology attests
to the interwoveness of both halves of experience,
body and mind, physiological function and consciousness.
Rather brutal physical and chemical attacks- drugs,
electroshock, neurosurgery-profoundly influence the
'mind'. Mental treatment like the verbal treatment ad-
ministered by the psychotherapist may profoundly influence
the body's physiological functioning including malfunctions
and psychoneurosis .... This physiological function in behavior
and neurophysiology on the one hand, and psychological
function in its conscious and unconscious parts on the other,
begin to resemble each other even more in their structural
aspects. There is no sharp borderline between bodily function,
unconsciousness, and the conscious mind. In the last resort,
they may be the very same thing (p. 99)
Von Bertalanffy [10] thus adopts the
phenomenologically-based view that direct ex-
perience suggests a continuum between the
subjective and objective, emphasizing that mind
must encompass conscious, unconscious and
culturally-influenced symbolic phenomena. The
general systems theoretical approach to the
interactions of mind and body has already proven
useful in psychosomatic medicine, physiology and
psychopathology [12, 13]. Perhaps the most fruitful
application of GST to the integration of mind and
body concepts will come from utilizing models that
combine biological processes with those of the
psyche in an inter-level approach to the human and
human problems.
GST can also clarify the extent to which the
humanistically oriented therapies combine func-
tions of mind and body, and perhaps suggest new
areas for exploration. For example, Miller [52] uses
general systems theory to describe the dynamics of
stress. He defines stress as any force that pushes the
functioning of an organism's important subsystems
beyond their ability to restore equilibrium through
ordinary, non-emergency adjustment. Stress may
involve either an under- or overload of system inputs
such as food, air, water, energy, or information.
Methods of coping with stress through mind-
body therapies are quite popular among humanistic
therapists, although the techniques often differ
considerably,especially in which levels are treated
and by which technique. Some feel stress is a function
of personality and, therefore, can be controlled by
modifying detrimental behavior [58]. Hyper-
tensives, for example, can learn to be less com-
pulsive [29], essentially an approach directed at the
mind level. Others treat stress with physiologi-
cally based strategies [42, 65], through teaching a
relaxation response [8], or by prescribing drugs. In
these strategies, the primary treatment focus is aimed
at the body level, but the relaxation response method
also has been noted to produce effects at the mind
level [9]. In addition, there are techniques which are
multi-level in that they aim at levels of both body and
mind. For example, body therapies such as the
Feldenkrais method [28], the Alexander technique
[1,67], bioenergetics [48] or rolfing [61], emphasize
the release of body tension and the realignment of
General systems theory in humanistic psychology
body structure to heighten self-awareness and
increase the ability to cope with accumulated stress.
Although primarily physiological in approach, these
techniques have been found to have definite
influences on the client's attitudes. Lowen [47], for
example, points out that frequent, strenuous exercise
helps a person regain contact with mind and body,
thereby establishing both increased self-awareness
and a greater closeness with other people. Though
often successful, the above techniques can often be
improved by taking a multi-level approach and
considering other important elements of the human
system, such as attitudes, beliefs, diet, exercise and
interpersonal feelings.
More comprehensive approaches to humanistic
mind-body strategies utilizing multi-level ap-
proaches to stress reduction are found in the writings
of Davidson and Schwartz [26J, Nuernberger [54],
and Hastings, Fadiman and Gordon [36].
Nuernberger, for example, uses a holistic framework
combining body disciplines, diet, elements of
meditation and lifestyle change. Biofeedback [19,
40] is also employed by humanistic psychologists to
monitor the interaction between their client's
feelings and concomitant physiological responses.
The biofeedback user is able to gradually increase
mental and physiological awareness and thus begin
to control personal patterns that have resulted in
increased tension. Compared to therapeutic pro-
grams that are primarily physiological in approach,
these techniques produce heightened mind-body
awareness through the integration of clinical
technology with client-therapist interactions.
Client-therapist interactions can address a host of
factors in the client's profile which contribute to
stress and, thus, make these approaches multi-
leveled.
The transcendental potentials of the psyche are
often not considered in mind-body therapies-
perhaps because we first connect our more conscious
and rational thoughts to bodily feelings. The use of
meditation and yoga to produce self-willed somatic
effects illustrates this point. However, the trans-
cendental qualities of meditation, yoga and other
routes to altered states of consciousness also have
somatic influences which can be useful. Psychedelic
substances, too, may have this potential [37]. The
domains of transcendence are in need of a great deal
of research in order to define and elucidate the
specific processes involved and to develop effective
techniques to exploit this knowledge in therapy.
From a general systems view, both mind and body
are collective terms for interactive processes
incorporating many subsystems which need to be
considered during the therapy process. Therapies
which primarily focus on limited aspects of a
problem, such as stress, may be somewhat successful,
but would benefit from a multi-leveled approach
which recognized and treated the multi-causal
nature of the problem. Substantially more research is
needed in order to equip HP with an array of multi-
level techniques suited to a variety of problem areas
and client types. GST can provide the theoretical
framework as well as useful methodologies for the
development of specific applications which involve
the client in a therapy-oriented system which focuses
on the myriad of influential variables in the client's
life and utilizes the interactive nature of the client-
therapist relationship.
One major and difficult area where research is
called for is that of producing comprehensive models
of the stress process and elucidating the relative
contributions of such variables as attitudes, beliefs,
body awareness, compulsiveness, diet, exercise,
interpersonal feelings, social status, etc. From these
models of the stress process, specific therapeutic
techniques could be developed and further research
conducted to determine their effectiveness and to
demonstrate the most effective methods to employ
client-therapist interactions to reduce stress.
Dynamics of growth in an open system
The growth paradigm appears to be one of the
most utilized concepts in HP. Its popularity is often
attributed to a reaction against the behaviorists'
stimulus-response models that emphasize equi-
librium as the fundamental goal of the human
organism. The theoretical and practical facets of
humanistic therapies suggest both a variety of
conceptualizations of growth and a wide spectrum of
situations for which growth is considered ap-
propriate [27]. Models of the growth process offered
by humanistic psychologists take several forms:
cycles in transition [59]; the linear passage through
stages of self-actualization or psychosocial develop-
ment [34, 51]; a progression of self-awareness
toward an ultimate state [23]; and a process of
adaptation that tends toward higher degrees of order
[22].
Buhler [21] observes that creativity, more than
any other human behavior, shows that the person is
an open system with certain freedoms of operation
and potentials for growth. Creativity expresses what
Buhler considers the central theoretical issue in HP:
that humans are active mediators of their own
existence. On the other hand, emphasizing the
growth of an individual to the extent of excluding
social relationships may obviate chances for
successful therapy [53]. The importance of the
growth paradigms is unquestioned in HP, however, a
clear approach toward the definition and evaluation
of this process has not been formulated. That is,
humanistically oriented therapists have yet to
translate the intuitive recognition of the growth
process into well-formulated theories for evaluating
therapeutic success, communicating with others, and
developing new therapeutic techniques.
GST can clarify some ofthese issues by illustrating
the diversity of growth processes exhibited by
biological and cultural systems. The general systems
properties of the growth process may thus serve as
analogues in HP. The paradigm of the open system
provides the backbone for all general systems
insights into the dynamics of growth. Growth can
assume a variety of patterns with rates of change that
result in steady or sporadic increases, or increases
that reach a stable plateau. Logistic growth,
exponential growth, asymptotic growth and steady
state (which may include oscillatory behavior) are
systems terms used to describe these phenomena [56,
57]. These processes considerably expand the
paradigms of homeostasis and equilibrium that have
been incorporated into many psychological theories
[12].
The application of evolution theory to the
dynamics of open systems also broadens the scope of
growth paradigms. The evolution of complexity
(which is often described as the progression through
levels of complexity) can thus be differentiated from
adaptation-a point that is often confused in many
fields [22J. Von Bertalanffy [11] clarifies this issue:
I must confess that I do not see a scintilla of evidence that
evolution in the sense of progression from less to more complex
organisms has anything to do with improved adaptation,
selective advantage, largest production of offspring, or in
whatever way the Darwinian concept is couched. Adaptation to
environment appears to be possible at any level of organization
(p.83).
Von Bertalanffy [l1] describes this seemingly
paradoxical relationship between the continuous
flow of ordered processes and the dynamics of
differentiation as anamorphosis. As Gray [31] points
out, the theory of anamorphosis has clarified the
processes of growth, change, development and
creativity. He also considers the origin of
anamorphosis to be one of the major problems for
future research. Von Bertalanffy [13] summarizes
these points and integrates them with theories in psychology:
psychophysiological development is not exhausted by
conditioning, accumulation of traces of past experience and
their neurophysiological counterparts. Rather, development-
ontogenetic, cultural, microgenetic--proceeds from un-
differentiated or syncretic states to ever more differentiated
ones. This is found in perception, concepts, language and
elsewhere (p. 12).
And for von Bertalanffy [13], 'Normal differentia-
tion implies progressive organization within an
integrated whole or system. In regressing this
integration is lost, resulting in splitting. of
personality, complexes, distributed ego function,
and the like' (p. 42).
A general systems perspective toward personal
growth also facilitates the comparison of this process
with similar phenomena at various levels of
complexity, including not only the organismic
growth described by von Bertalanffy, but also the
succession in ecosystems [55J, the evolution of
culture [70J, the evolution of species [38, 39J, and
even the origin of life itself [17]. Properties that are
common to these processes may be helpful to the
humanistic therapist in understanding and evaluat-
ing the growth of the client.
Equifinality is a case in point. Equifinality
recognizes that the same final state may emerge from
different initial conditions, or may be reached in
different ways [11]. Gray [33] summarizes the use of
the systems property of equifinality in psychiatry:
Four derivations of the concept of equifinality are of particular
importance to psychiatry. The first is that of recognizing
psychopathological states as equifinal and therefore resistant to
change. The second is in the recognition that the initial state is
not as important as was previously thought, as, for example, in
the early days of psychoanalysis. The third issues from the
understanding that what does determine equifinal levels are the
system parameters and that the search for psychotherapy must
stress ways in which such parameters can be changed. The
fourth is the recognition that shifts in equifinal levels are the
necessary concomitants of growth and development and are
experienced psychically as painful and as involving introspec-
tion (p. 178).
Another growth associated phenomenon that is
clarified by the general systems perspective is the
relationship between growth and disease. Von
Bertalanffy [12] characterizes mental illness as a
disturbance of system functions. The regression that
often accompanies the psychotic state is not a re-
turn to older and more infantile forms of behavior,
but a dedifferentiation and decentralization of
personality.
The processes and dynamics of growth, change,
creativity, anamorphosis, differentiation, dedifferen-
tiation and the relationships of these processes wIth
physical disease and mental disorders are all in need
of careful investigation through structured research.
In particular, models need to be developed for the
growth and change processes, outlining similarities
and differences, if any, between these processes.
Models are also needed to describe how people adapt
to changes and how this process differs from
progression through levels of complexity. The
relationship between the flow of ordered processes
and differentiation-anamorphosis-also needs to
General systems theory in humanistic psychology
be more fully explored in research. All of these
processes and their dynamics are closely interrelated
and may be very different processes or similar
processes differing only by name and the perspective
of the viewer. All of these processes and their
interrelationships are timely subjects for research,
and GST appears to offer the best theoretical
framework for understanding these complex, multi-
leveled processes. GST modeling methods seem
particularly suited to describing this knowledge and
giving insight into practical therapeutic approaches.
CONCLUSION
In this article we have outlined the interests that
are held in common by GST and HP. We have also
suggested specific areas in HP that can benefit from
incorporating the theory and methodology of GST.
This obviously hinges upon the willingness of
humanistic psychologists to consider ideas and
techniques whose origins are in the natural sciences.
Many early humanistic psychologists under-
standably resisted the idea that GST could
contribute to HP. This is not surprising, however,
considering the resistance to the introduction of
GST into psychiatry [32], even though Bateson [5J
convincingly argued the importance of communi-
cations theory, Gestalt, and the theory and
methodology of science to psychiatry.
It is certainly possible, though, that HP could have
its fundamental precepts undermined in ways
reminiscent of the hegemony established by
behaviorism. As Bugental [20] observes:
Although humanistic psychology must find its own methods
and must validate those methods as dependable knowledge
about the human condition, humanistic psychology would be
untrue to itself were it to become preoccupied with
methodology to the loss of concern with meaningful issues in
the human condition (p. 24).
Humanistic psychologists should be rightfully
critical of any paradigms or methodologies that seek
to become incorporated into their fields, and several
supportable criticisms have been raised against GST
[14]. But the failure to explore possible contri-
butions also has its shortcomings. Rogers [60]
makes this point quite clear:
It is very well to be opposed to the shaping of human behavior as
being the ultimate goal of psychological science. But it is simply
not enough, in my estimation, to settle comfortably back into
the principle that since we appreciate the mysterious and the
unique in man we are, therefore, somehow superior. William
James wrestled with this issue long ago and said of these two
extremes-both an atomistic empiricism and a subjective
mysticism- 'they are but spiritual chloroform'. I heartily agree
with his view (p. 2).
In suggesting the utility of general systems
principles in HP, we have pointed out some of the
problems that may arise. Some very complex
approaches overgeneralize analogies or create new
scientifically fortified 'cults' with paradigms and/or
language precluding interdisciplinary communi-
cation, and interdisciplinary communication is
becoming ever more necessary. The fact that
examples of these problems abound in the literature
of GST is certainly cause for caution. However, the
clarity that GST can contribute will more than offset
the accompanying disadvantages.
Though our focus has been on potential
contributions to HP from GST, we suggest that the
reverse is also true. The unique emphasis that HP
places on the intuitive development and evaluation
of therapy, the critical regard for reductionist
tendencies in science, and the faith in the potential of
humanity offers challenges to GST. Substantial
contributions to the evolution of new conceptual
techniques, philosophical approaches, and research
methodologies can result. That is, the synergy of HP
and GST may lead to major advances in both.
Von Bertalanffy [11] recognized the generative
potential of this type of relationship, which is too
often overlooked in the sciences and the humanities:
Analysis has to proceed at two levels: that of phenomenology,
that is of direct experience, encompassing perception of outside
things, feelings, thinking, willing, etc.; and of conceptual
constructs, the reconstruction of direct experience in systems of
symbols, culminating in science; it being well understood that
there is no absolute gap between percept and concept, but that
the two levels intergrade and interact (p. 94).
Let us suggest that HP and, possibly, GST can
benefit from an interactive relationship. At the
present, HP lacks a commonly-understood scientific
paradigm to provide a theoretical framework with
which to develop and evaluate models, methods,
research, theories and therapies. Also, HP has no
common ground or language for efficiently and
effectively communicating its findings. We believe
that GST can perform just such a service to HP, with
the understanding that models, generalizations,
symbolizations, etc. are useful devices provided that
they are not confused with reality itself and do not
become an end in themselves rather than a means to
an end.
Finally, future research is especially important to
HP. The meta-theoretical framework of GST can
provide the basis for uncovering previously
overlooked problems and viewing old problems
from a new perspective. At the same time, the
methodologies employed in GST can provide HP
with tools to investigate these problems. Research
based on GST principles is especially needed in such
timely problem areas as stress, psychosomatic
illnesses, growth, etc., and can help to clarify the
multi-causal nature of these problem areas and lead
to fresh therapeutic techniques which emphasize
multi-level therapeutic interventions.