Introduction: The Modern Paradox and the Call for Being Imagine living in a time where information bombards you from every direction – radio, television, satellites – yet, paradoxically, you feel a profound lack of inner certainty about who you are. This is the curious situation we find ourselves in today, according to Rollo May. As objective truth and technical power increase, our inner assurance seems to dwindle, sometimes leaving us feeling pushed toward a sense of potential annihilation. But don't despair! May suggests a powerful path forward: discovering and affirming the being in ourselves. He argues that instead of getting lost in theories about conditioning, behavioral mechanisms, or instinctual drives, we need to look deeper, to find the actual person, the _being_, to whom these things are happening. Talking about this "being" might feel a bit intimidating – maybe too revealing, too intimate, too profound. Yet, May believes that by covering up our sense of being, we lose touch with the very things we cherish most, like love, death, anxiety, and caring. These writings, he tells us, grew out of a passion to find this sense of being, a search that always involves exploring our values and purposes. ### The Existential Approach: A New Way of Understanding The existential approach to psychology and psychiatry, which was quite prominent in Europe for two decades, began to make its way to America around 1960. Some folks even worried it might get _too_ popular, popping up in national magazines. It wasn't about creating a whole new school of thought or a different set of techniques; rather, it aimed to understand the very structure of human existence itself. If successful, this understanding would provide a foundation for grasping the reality underlying all situations where human beings face crises. It's important to understand that this wasn't about throwing out all the valuable technical discoveries made by brilliant minds like Freud. Not at all! The goal was to take these discoveries and place them on a _new basis_, a fresh understanding of the fundamental nature of the human being. Why this new basis? Well, May, along with others like Jaspers and Whyte, felt a serious concern about the dehumanizing tendencies in modern science, the risk of turning humans into something resembling machines. They argued that without grappling with concepts like "being" and "nonbeing," we can't fully grasp even our most common psychological ideas, like repression. ### Beyond Mechanisms: The Human Being as Potentiality Traditional thinking often leans towards seeing humans in terms of security and survival, which fits neatly into cause-and-effect models. But what if Nietzsche and Kierkegaard were closer to the mark? They suggested that humans are organisms who prioritize certain values – prestige, power, tenderness – even above pleasure or survival itself. Isn't that a thought-provoking idea? From an existential perspective, we can only understand psychological concepts like repression by looking at the deeper meaning of human potentialities. "Being" itself can be defined as the individual's "pattern of potentialities". These possibilities are partly shared with others, but each person has a unique pattern. The crucial questions become: How does a person relate to their own potentialities? What makes them block off awareness of things they know?. Repression, then, isn't just a simple mechanism. It's a complex internal struggle of the individual's _being_ fighting against the possibility of _nonbeing_. This struggle can't be fully understood in terms of ego dynamics alone. It inherently involves the human being's margin of freedom regarding their potentialities – a space where their responsibility for themselves resides, something even a therapist can't remove. ### The Richness of Human Connection: Agape, Participation, and Encounter Let's think about love for a moment. The sources suggest that selfless love, "agape" (concern for the other's welfare), shouldn't be seen as just a leftover or sublimation of more self-serving desires like eros. No, agape is understood in its own right, a _transcending_ of eros that actually gives eros itself a fuller, more enduring meaning. The existential approach prompts us to ask fundamental questions about human connection: How is it even _possible_ for one being to relate to another? What is it about our nature that allows two people to truly communicate, grasp each other as beings, genuinely care for the other's well-being, and build trust?. Understanding this inherent capacity helps us see what phenomena like transference might be a distortion of. When you're with another person, say, like a patient in therapy, there's an assumption that this person, like all existing beings, has a need to reach out from their own center and participate with others. This participation isn't just physical; it involves anticipation and imagination. But here's the catch: participating always involves risk. If you reach out too far, you might lose your sense of identity. Yet, being too afraid to participate means staying behind a defensive "stockade," blocking others out, and missing the chance to be enriched by new relationships. Encountering another person's being is potentially creative; it should ideally expand your consciousness and enrich your self. The dynamic, existing, experiencing human being is immediately present in the room, and our science should be relevant to this distinctive characteristic. ### The Principles of Being: What Makes Us Human? The sources outline several essential characteristics that make up an existing person. Let's explore these fascinating principles, some shared with other life forms, and some uniquely human: 1. **Self-Affirmation and Courage:** Every existing person has this character. It's the need to maintain one's centeredness. For human beings, this is called "courage". As Paul Tillich suggests, being human isn't automatic; it depends on courage, and without it, being is lost. This makes courage a necessary part of what it means to be. This is why paying attention to a patient's expressions of willing, decisions, and choice is so important. The wish has power only when combined with the will. Nietzsche also emphasizes that individuality and dignity aren't given, but are tasks we must solve, requiring the courage to be. 2. **Participation:** All existing persons need and can go out from their center to participate in other beings. Again, this carries the risk of losing one's identity. Just like a gypsy moth dispersing itself until its own being is emptied, we too can lose ourselves by merging too much with others. Thinkers like Martin Buber and Harry Stack Sullivan rightly pointed out that you can't understand the human being as a self if you leave out their participation with other selves. 3. **Awareness:** This is the subjective side of being centered. It's present in various degrees throughout life, from the simplest organisms to humans. Think of an animal's vigilance, like a seal lifting its head to watch for danger. This basic awareness is the primitive counterpart of anxiety in humans. The word "awareness" itself comes from Old English words related to knowledge of external dangers – like "beware" and "wary". 4. **Self-Consciousness:** Now we come to a uniquely human characteristic. Self-consciousness is different from simple awareness. It's not just knowing there's a threat, but knowing _you_ are the one being threatened. It's the experience of yourself as the subject who _has_ a world. As Kurt Goldstein pointed out, this capacity allows us to transcend the immediate situation, live in terms of possibilities, use abstractions, language, and symbols. This is the foundation of psychological freedom. When self-consciousness emerges, it changes the whole pattern of the organism; you can only understand the simpler biological functions _in terms of_ this new, more complex function. It gives us "in-sight," the ability to see the world's problems in relation to ourselves and do something about them. 5. **Anxiety:** This isn't just another emotion; it's an ontological characteristic, meaning it's rooted in our very existence. Anxiety is the state of a human being struggling against what could destroy their being. It's the conflict with nonbeing. While it involves struggle against external threats, it's even more significant for therapy in its _inner_ dimension – the battle against denying or destroying oneself. Anxiety arises at the point where a potentiality for fulfilling existence emerges, but this possibility threatens present security, leading to a tendency to deny the potentiality. This idea connects to the "birth trauma" concept – the pain of being born, emerging through narrows. If there were no possibility of opening up, no emerging potentiality, anxiety as we know it wouldn't exist. 6. **Nonbeing/Nothingness:** This isn't just the opposite of being; it's an inseparable part of it. To truly grasp existence, you have to grasp that you _might not_ exist, that you're constantly on the edge of possible annihilation and will eventually die. Without this awareness of nonbeing – whether it's death, anxiety, or the loss of potential through conforming – existence feels shallow and unreal. Confronting nonbeing makes existence take on reality and consciousness. Death, in particular, makes the present moment feel absolutely valuable. A common way we avoid confronting nonbeing is through _conformism_, getting lost in the crowd, losing our unique potential and sense of self. But the capacity to face nonbeing also shows up in our ability to accept and constructively use challenging states like anxiety, hostility, and aggression. Neurotic issues arise when we can't face these normal forms of struggle. It's like Paul Tillich said, a being's self-affirmation is stronger the more nonbeing it can take into itself. 7. **Guilt:** This is another ontological characteristic. It arises when a person denies or fails to fulfill their potentialities. It's not just having "guilt feelings," but actually _being guilty_ against what is given to you in your core. If you "forget being" by not bringing yourself to your full potential, you are failing to be authentic and are guilty to that extent. There's also guilt against others because, as individuals, we necessarily see others through our own limited, biased eyes, doing some violence to their true picture and failing to fully meet their needs. This isn't necessarily a moral failing, but an inescapable result of our separate individuality. This form of guilt can foster humility and forgiveness. There's even a third form, "separation guilt" related to nature. Importantly, ontological guilt isn't from cultural rules; it's rooted in self-awareness – the capacity to see yourself as the one who can choose or fail to choose. If this guilt is ignored, it can become neurotic guilt, leading to symptoms. But accepted, it leads to humility, sensitivity, and creativity. These principles, when taken together, describe the fundamental structure of human existence. ### Being in the World: Undercutting the Subject-Object Split Second only to the search for being, the existential therapists focus on the person _in their world_. This focus directly challenges the deep-seated "subject-object dichotomy" that has, in Binswanger's words, "bedeviled Western thought and science" and acted like a "cancer of all psychology up to now". This split imagines a detached observer (subject) looking at a separate reality (object). The problem is, modern humans have often lost their sense of "world" and community. The subject-object split contributed to this, leading to ideas like Descartes' separation of mind and body, or Leibnitz's "monads" – isolated units with no doors or windows to each other, saved from utter loneliness only by a presumed "pre-established harmony". Instead, the existential view sees "World" as the structure of meaningful relationships where a person exists and which they participate in designing. It includes the past and deterministic influences, but only _as you relate to them_, molding and building them through your awareness. World also includes the possibilities that lie ahead. It's not just your culture; it includes your unique "own world" and future possibilities. The "openness" of the human world, its vast possibilities, is what distinguishes it from the closed worlds of animals. Your world isn't static; as long as you're self-conscious, you are actively forming and designing it. Human existence isn't tied to a blueprint like a tree; it's rooted in manifold potentiality. Think about the case study of Rudolf, the butcher boy who shot a prostitute. Understanding his actions involved exploring his "world of the mourner" – his repression of grief for his mother, living in a depressed state, searching for a way to express his mourning. Analyzing his world provided a depth of understanding that might be missed by other approaches. ### The Three Modes of World: Umwelt, Mitwelt, Eigenwelt To grasp this idea of "being in the world" more fully, the existential analysts break it down into three interconnected modes: 1. **Umwelt (The Environment-World):** This is the natural world around us, including our biological needs, drives, and instincts. It's the world governed by natural laws, like birth, death, sleep, and desire. All organisms exist in Umwelt, and the existential approach respects this biological level without reducing everything to it. Concepts like "adjustment" and "adaptation" fit well here, as we adapt to external realities like weather or bodily needs without changing the reality itself. 2. **Mitwelt (The With-World):** This is the world of our relationships with other human beings. It's distinct from simply being influenced by a group or social forces. Mitwelt is actively designed by the interrelationships _between_ people. This is why love, for example, can't be just biological; it involves personal decision and commitment. Encounter and presence, where you grasp the being of another, occur in the Mitwelt. 3. **Eigenwelt (The Own-World):** This is perhaps the most challenging but crucial mode – the world of the self in relation to itself. It encompasses consciousness, self-awareness, insight, and the experience of the "self knowing itself". These internal phenomena are incredibly close to us, yet often mysterious. Eigenwelt isn't fully explained by our biological needs (Umwelt) or our social interactions (Mitwelt). It's essential for the experience of tragedy, as you must be conscious of your own identity to feel the weight of destiny acting upon you. Without a sense of Eigenwelt, a society might lack a sense of tragedy and the capacity for deep art. Understanding a person requires seeing them through the lens of all three modes: the biological reality (Umwelt), their relationships with others (Mitwelt), and their unique self-awareness and relation to their own fate (Eigenwelt). ### The Dominance of Time and the Future Here’s another fascinating shift in perspective: the existential analysts propose that our most profound experiences – anxiety, depression, joy – happen more in the dimension of _time_ than space. They bravely put time front and center in understanding psychological life. They don't study it as isolated moments, but as a dynamic process. Consider a patient who can't relate to time, seeing each day as a separate island. A traditional view might say their delusions _cause_ this inability to grasp the future. But the existential view asks the opposite: could the _basic disorder_ be a distorted attitude toward the future, with the delusion being just one manifestation?. This flips our usual thinking and opens up new possibilities. Helping someone severely anxious or depressed focus on a future point _outside_ their suffering can make a huge difference. Why? Because severe anxiety and depression tend to engulf the present, trapping the person. Human existence is always _becoming_, always emerging in time. It's not static; it's literally a psychology of _being_, the verb. Psychologists like Mowrer and Liddell have shown that "time binding" – bringing the past into the present and acting with the long-term future in mind – is essential to human personality. Animals can anticipate, but only for short periods; humans can connect with past thousands of years ago and project far into the future. The pressure of these time dimensions, particularly the future, can lead to anxiety if not faced openly. The existentialists propose that the _future_ is the dominant mode of time for human beings. You understand a person by seeing where they are headed, what they are becoming. A self is always in the process of becoming what it is _to become_. This isn't about escaping into the distant future, but about the dynamic process of self-actualizing and moving into the _immediate_ future, guided by self-awareness. Kierkegaard beautifully captures this, suggesting that each generation must start anew in genuinely human tasks like learning to love; you can't inherit it. Therapy, then, doesn't love _for_ the patient, but helps them remove blocks to their _own_ responsible capacity to love. There's also the idea of a special moment, a "kairos," where eternity touches time, often felt as heightened awareness or an "aha" experience, sometimes called an "epiphany". Isn't it intriguing how these concepts weave together time, awareness, and meaning? ### Transcending the Immediate: The Foundation of Freedom One final, crucial characteristic of human existence (Dasein) is the capacity to _transcend_ the immediate situation. The very word "exist" (ex-sistere) means "to stand out, to emerge". This capacity means we are constantly emerging, going beyond our past and present towards the future. Kurt Goldstein's work with brain-injured patients vividly illustrates what happens when this capacity is lost. These patients were stuck in the immediate concrete situation, unable to abstract or think in terms of possibilities. Simple disorder could throw them into anxiety, and they'd cling rigidly to order. They couldn't venture beyond the edges of a piece of paper when writing. Goldstein realized the capacity to abstract, use symbols, and orient oneself beyond immediate limits is the hallmark of normal human functioning. Losing this means losing possibility, shrinking one's world space and time, and suffering a radical loss of freedom. Transcending shows up in many ways: bringing the distant past and future into the present, using symbols and language (stepping back from an object to name a class of objects), and especially in social relationships. To have genuine trust and responsibility, you need to be able to "see yourself as others see you," fulfilling expectations or failing to. This capacity is impaired in psychopathic disorders where individuals lack "conscience" – the ability to "know with" others. Nietzsche noted that "Man is the animal who can make promises". This isn't just about social pressure; it's about the self-awareness to see yourself as the one making the agreement. It's very different from simple conditioned behavior. Sartre called dishonesty a "behavior of transcendence" because it requires standing outside the truth. The many "re-" words (re-sponsible, re-collect, re-late) point to our ability to "come back" to ourselves as the ones performing the action. Erwin Straus called man the "questioning being" because we can question our own existence. Transcending presupposes Eigenwelt, the capacity to see oneself as both subject and object. It's the basis of human freedom, our vast range of possibilities. Binswanger used the metaphor of different creatures finding different "environments" in the same forest – an insect, a romantic girl, a woodsman, an artist. This illustrates how we select among possibilities by projecting our purposes, based on our capacity to transcend. Freedom in "designing world" is a mark of health. Boss connects transcendence to "Sorge" (care, concern for being). Our capacity for transcendence comes from our capacity for Sorge. It's not just another ability; it's given in our very nature. Imagination is key here, enabling reflection and intensifying the self. ### Implications for Therapy: Understanding, Presence, Commitment For those seeking specific techniques, existential analysis might initially feel a bit disappointing. There aren't detailed handbooks. The core belief is that _understanding_ comes first, and _technique_ follows. The therapist's primary job is to understand the patient as a being in their world. Techniques are secondary tools to aid this understanding. This means seeing the patient not as a collection of mechanisms, but as a human being actively choosing, committing, and moving towards something. The context is dynamic and real. What does this mean in practice? - **Flexible Methods:** The therapist's methods are chosen based on what will best reveal the patient's existence and their being in the world at that moment. - **Understanding Dynamisms Ontologically:** Repression, resistance, transference – these are seen not just as mechanisms but in the light of the patient's existence. Repression, for example, involves the patient's relationship to their own freedom to express potentialities. Resistance might be seen as the patient withdrawing into conformity, renouncing their unique potential. Drives are understood as _potentia_ for existence, not just energy transformations. This approach can simplify theory and make psychotherapy feel less like a violation of the patient's essence. - **Emphasis on Presence:** The relationship between therapist and patient is considered a real one. The therapist isn't just a detached observer but participates in the interaction. As Jaspers put it, even with all our knowledge, we miss opportunities if we lack "a full human presence". This presence isn't sentimental; it stems from seeing the patient as a human being, not just an object. Carl Rogers, though not formally an existentialist, embodies this attitude in his emphasis on liking, confidence, understanding, and his "organismic sensitivity" in the relationship. Presence requires disciplined training focused on understanding what it means to be human. It means the therapist is real in the interaction, helping the patient bring forth something from within themselves – like a midwife. - **Illuminating Existence:** The main goal isn't just curing symptoms, but helping the patient experience their existence as real, become aware of their potentialities, and act on them. Neurosis involves a "darkened" existence lacking sanction for action. The therapist asks, "Where is the patient?" in their struggle. Interpretations of mechanisms are made within this context of the patient's becoming aware of their existence, otherwise, they remain intellectual and unreal for the patient. - **The Importance of Commitment:** This is a necessary part of seeing truth. Here's a crucial idea: _decision precedes knowledge_. We often think insight leads to decisions, but it's also true that a patient needs to be ready to make a decisive orientation toward life before they can fully gain insight or knowledge. This isn't about sudden leaps without foundation, but about a committed _attitude_ towards existence. Your present commitment even influences what you can recall and how you shape your past. Commitment isn't just conscious; it operates on unconscious levels, shaping even dreams. It's not reckless activism, but the attitude of Dasein taking existence seriously. ### A Note on the Unconscious The concept of the "unconscious" can be tricky. Some existential analysts are wary of it, feeling it can split being into parts, leading to rationalizing behavior and avoiding responsibility for one's own existence. They push back against a "cellar" view of the unconscious as a deterministic reservoir. While acknowledging these valid criticisms, May argues that Freud's true, lasting contribution wasn't the "cellar" theory itself, but the radical _enlargement of the sphere of human personality_ to include the "depths" – the irrational, the repressed, the forgotten. The concept of the unconscious symbolized this expansion. May proposes that being is indivisible, that unconsciousness is part of any given being, and that while the "cellar" theory might be flawed, the meaning of Freud's discovery – the enlargement of being – is a major contribution that should be kept. ### Concluding Thoughts and Further Exploration Exploring "The Discovery of Being" offers a powerful lens through which to understand the human predicament and the therapeutic process. It challenges us to look beyond fragmented views and technical solutions, urging us to confront the fundamental questions of existence: What does it mean to be? How do we face nonbeing? How do we connect with others and our own deepest selves?. This briefing only scratches the surface of the rich ideas presented! If these concepts have sparked your curiosity, you might want to explore further: - Delve deeper into the works of the thinkers mentioned, like Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Heidegger, Binswanger, and Tillich. - Consider how these ontological principles might apply to specific psychological disorders. How might depression, for instance, be understood through the lens of nonbeing or a distorted relationship to time? - Think about the challenges and possibilities of applying the concept of "presence" in various human interactions, not just therapy. - Reflect on the idea that decision precedes knowledge. How might this play out in your own life or in how you understand others' struggles?. - Explore the connections between existentialism and Eastern philosophies like Zen Buddhism, which also grapple with the nature of being and the subject-object relationship. Be mindful, though, that complex concepts like "being" can sometimes become abstractions themselves, giving the illusion of understanding without real engagement. The true challenge, and the heart of the existential approach, is integrating these ideas into a lived understanding of the unique, existing person.