144 Journal of HUMANISTIC COUNSELING ◆ July
2017 ◆
Volume 56
© 2017 by the American Counseling Association. All rights
reserved.
Received 08/26/16
Revised 12/07/16
Accepted 12/09/16
DOI: 10.1002/johc.12049
Recovering the Original
Phenomenological Research Method:
An Exploration of Husserl, Yoga,
Buddhism, and New Frontiers
in Humanistic Counseling
Fred J. Hanna, Brett D. Wilkinson,
and Joel Givens
✦ ✦ ✦
Phenomenology has been widely misunderstood since it
transitioned from philosophy into
counseling. Phenomenology is the study of consciousness to achieve
knowledge and insight
using Edmund Husserl’s phenomenological reduction.
Transcendental aspects of this method
are better understood by comparisons to Asian mindfulness
practices. The phenomenological
reduction should become a distinct counseling research
methodology.
Keywords: phenomenology, research methods, mindfulness,
Buddhism, yoga
✦ ✦ ✦
The term phenomenology is relatively common in the
behavioral sciences
(Hays & Wood, 2011; Matheson & Rosen, 2012;
Stanghellini & Lysaker,
2007). Phenomenology appears in the disciplines of
counseling, psychology,
psychiatry, social work, and couple and family therapy, and
yet the
meaning and use of the term are virtually unrecognizable
when compared
with its original meaning in philosophy. Edmund Husserl’s
(1913/1931,
1964a) original intention as the founder of phenomenology
was to break
free of the perennial limits of subjectivity and so arrive
at the common,
universal ground of human experience. Whereas the
qualitative method of
phenomenological inquiry in counseling research seeks to
highlight general
patterns and broad variations across individual
interpretations of particular
subjective experiences, Husserl had a far more profound
purpose in mind:
the fundamental understanding of human consciousness itself.
Fred J. Hanna, Department of Counselor Education and
Supervision, Adler University; Brett D.
Wilkinson, Department of Professional Studies, Indiana
University–Purdue University Fort Wayne;
Joel Givens, Department of Counselor Education, Adams State
University. Correspondence concerning this
article should be addressed to Brett D. Wilkinson, Department of Professional
Studies, Indiana University–Purdue
University Fort Wayne, 2101 East Coliseum Boulevard, Neff Hall Room 250M, Fort Wayne, IN 46805 (e-mail:
wilkinsb@ipfw.edu).
Journal of HUMANISTIC COUNSELING ◆ July
2017 ◆
Volume 56 145
Husserlian phenomenology is an attempt to develop a
researcher’s ability
to attain a level of seeing that penetrates the curtain of
everyday appearances,
known as the natural attitude, so as to arrive at things as
they are
in themselves (Zahavi, 2005). Husserl (1913/1982) believed
that he had
developed a methodology—the phenomenological
reduction—designed to
bypass the obstacles that keep one from “pure seeing”
(Husserl, 1964b)
of phenomena (see also Heidegger, 1972). The application of
this method
allows phenomenologists to view virtually anything with a
refined state
of consciousness that results in more clear, unbiased
perception. The
“phenomenon” in this context could be a physical object,
concept, mental
image, being, entity, process, or relationship.
Phenomenology is thus
meant to illuminate the foundations of human experience by
providing
a research method for exploring how human consciousness
engages the
world (Zahavi, 2005). In
a striking parallel, yoga and Buddhism are characterized by their
methods and means for attaining intuitive knowledge through
the application
of consciousness, leading beyond language and beyond subject or object distinctions. Of course, yoga
in this context does not refer to the
currently popular physical practice of assuming various postures
(i.e., hatha yoga) but actually has to do with specific
mental practices designed to
increase and enhance consciousness and awareness. Contrary to popular thought, yoga is a primary
source of psychospiritual practices for
Hindu beliefs in general. It is also widely accepted that the Buddha practiced yoga and then incorporated it
into Buddhism after his enlightenment, along
with additional practices that he himself designed, such as mindfulness (Rahula, 1978).
Yogic and Buddhist methods have much in common with
phenomenology and have many parallels
with the phenomenological method (Hanna, 1993a,
1993b, 1995; Puligandla, 1970; Sinari, 1965). All are dedicated to the acquisition of knowledge, including
intuitive, transcendental knowledge. Husserl’s
chief interpreter, Eugen Fink (see Spiegelberg, 1982), once remarked to Cairns (1976) that Buddhist
meditative practice is much the same as the
phases of the phenomenological reduction. An example of this could be the Buddha’s teaching that there is no
such thing as a self. The Buddha attained
great certainty on this point (Pandita, 1991; Rahula, 1978), and it is quite possible that he did something
similar to Husserl’s reduction in arriving
at this conclusion. In this
article, we intend to show the value of phenomenology as a means of attaining knowledge of the self,
world, and consciousness. Its universality
and multicultural relevance are evidenced through its alignment with the goals and methods of yoga and Buddhism,
two respected Asian disciplines of knowledge
acquisition and psychospiritual insight. We present the practice of phenomenology as a path to personal
growth and transformation that might
also prove to be of particular significance to humanistic counseling 146
Journal of HUMANISTIC COUNSELING ◆ July 2017 ◆
Volume 56
professionals and researchers. Finally, we suggest that
Husserl’s original methodology,
the phenomenological reduction, be integrated as a valid form of qualitative research in counseling
and the behavioral sciences, which, to
our knowledge, has not been previously suggested.
THE RELEVANCE OF PHENOMENOLOGY FOR HUMANISTIC COUNSELORS
Humanistic counseling was heavily informed by philosophical
thought at its origin, drawing as
it did from the continental philosophies of phenomenology and existentialism (Hansen, 2012).
There are indeed important differences between
phenomenology and humanistic counseling, particularly related to their methods. Whereas the
phenomenological method seeks to examine the
structures of human consciousness (Zahavi, 2005), humanistic counseling methods are used to reinforce the
inherent value and rights of human beings
(Brady-Amoon, 2011; Ratts, 2009). However, such methodological distinctions should not needlessly
obscure their ideological similarities.
Husserl (1936/1970) was deeply concerned with preserving the
tenets of humanism and believed
that the phenomenological method should be
used so as not to lose sight of the humanistic aspects of science. In
some ways, the guiding impulse of
humanistic counselors to value clients and to work toward expanding client self-awareness and presence might
be said to reflect Husserl’s
notion of transcending the natural attitude. Yet a basic misunderstanding of phenomenology in counseling
circles persists. Although this
may be in some part attributable to the density or inaccessibility of many philosophical texts and concepts, it is
also quite reasonable to suggest
that the term phenomenology has been unduly equivocated with subjectivism in the behavioral sciences. Arguably, it has
been oversimplified to such an
extent that few counselors would see any real need to study the philosophy further. We suggest that this
problem arises directly from the
manner in which humanistic psychology misappropriated the term phenomenology by mistaking the study of structures of
conscious experience for the study
of particular individual subjective experiences. As suggested by Giorgi (2009), “simply trying to understand the
world of the other would not be
sufficient in and of itself to warrant the label ‘phenomenological.’ How that world is studied matters” (p.
173).
In shifting away from psychoanalytic and behaviorist frames
of reference, humanistic
psychology sought to revive the value and importance of subjective human experience (Hansen, 2012). Carl Rogers took
his phenomenological perspective
from the works of Snygg and Combs (1949) into
phenomenal field theory, which defines the self in terms of individual subjective experience. Rogers
(1961/2012) thus held that the phenomenological perspective corresponds with the “client’s frame of reference”
(p. 125), and his psychological
interpretation of phenomenology highlights
the inner, subjective experience of the individual. However, Snygg and Journal
of HUMANISTIC COUNSELING ◆ July 2017 ◆
Volume 56 147 Combs (1959)
later replaced the term phenomenological with perceptual, a decision that reflects the important
distinction between the mere study of
how individuals experience or understand the world and the rigors of Husserl’s phenomenological method
(Giorgi, 2009). So there is both a
serious methodological difference and a notable similarity of purpose between phenomenology and humanistic counseling.
The
same could be said about the relationship between mindfulness
practices
and humanistic counseling. There is ample room in the
evolving counseling
dialectic to bring Husserlian phenomenology into the fold,
just as
Asian mindfulness practices have been. There is also reason
to believe that
humanistic counseling can benefit from an apt reintroduction
to phenomenological
thought. With this in mind, we seek not only to describe how
phenomenology can inform counseling research, but also to
clearly show
how seemingly intractable philosophies such as
phenomenology, yoga,
and Buddhism are akin in their practices and in alignment
with humanistic
principles. We now turn to a review of the methods and
interconnected
practices of Husserlian phenomenology, yoga, and Buddhism.
THE VALUE OF PURE SEEING IN PHENOMENOLOGY,
YOGA, AND BUDDHISM
Husserl’s first writing on the subject of phenomenology
(Husserl, 1964a)
presented it as a method based on what he later called “the
principle of
principles” (Husserl, 1913/1931, p. 51), specifically, that
pure consciousness
could provide rigorous, reliable, intuitive understanding at
an ontological
level. Reliably attaining such a level of pure consciousness
required the
development of a methodology that would lead
phenomenological practitioners
beyond the natural attitude, which consists of subjective
preconceptions
and assumptions imposed on individuals by such dynamic
forces as education, culture, family, and beliefs, thereby coloring
and influencing
all that they experience. Husserl also referred to the
natural attitude as the
psychomundane attitude, claiming that individuals are
entrenched by it and
within it. Husserl’s phenomenological method is thus a set
of practices for
the refinement of consciousness into a pure seeing that can
take one beyond
the natural or psychomundane attitude.
It is common knowledge in philosophy that Husserl’s work
exerted
a profound influence on continental philosophy in the 20th
century,
and existentialism in particular (Collins, 1952). In Being
and Time (Heidegger,
1927/1962), one of the most influential texts in
20th-century
philosophy, Heidegger acknowledged phenomenology as his
method
of research into metaphysics and the nature of being
(Heidegger, 1972).
In his essay “My Way to Phenomenology,” Heidegger (1972)
also acknowledged
Husserl while referring to his own research approach as
“phenomenological seeing” (p. 78). In addition, Heidegger
claimed that
the phenomenological approach to knowledge could lead to the
“end of
148 Journal of HUMANISTIC COUNSELING ◆ July
2017 ◆
Volume 56
philosophy” (p. 71)
insofar as phenomenological seeing has
the potential
to take researchers beyond the limits of mere calculative or
deductive
reasoning by means of intuitive, nonrational (as opposed to
irrational),
contemplative thought processes.
In terms of Asian philosophy, Husserl (1989) was not only
aware of
Buddhism but also characterized it as a transcendental
practice similar to
his own phenomenology as a means of seeing. In this context,
Buddhist
mindfulness meditation practice bears much resemblance to
phenomenological
seeing (Felder, Aten, Neudeck, Shiomi-Chen, & Robbins,
2014; Hanna,
1993a). Indeed, mindfulness practice is much the same as the
practice of
the phenomenological reduction, including the necessary step
of moving
back or detaching from the phenomenon under study (Hanna,
1993a). The
active ingredient here is consciousness in the form of
confronting an issue
(see Hanna, 2002). With regard to counseling, it has been
long recognized
that numerous trademark therapeutic techniques such as
systematic desensitization,
thought stopping, and changing beliefs have been used by
Buddhist monks for 2,500 years (DeSilva, 1984, 1985;
Mikulas, 1978, 1981).
As Puligandla (1970) and Sinari (1965) pointed out, the
phenomenological
method also has much in common with the yoga meditation
practice
known as samyama. In the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali, the major
source on yoga
psychology (see Aranya, 1983; Feuerstein, 1989), samyama is
extensively
used to bring about existential and psychospiritual changes
through the
application of pure consciousness. It is essentially a
three-stage method of
meditation consisting of dharana, dhyana, and samadhi,
roughly translated as
concentration, contemplation, and realization. In the Yoga
Sutras, Patanjali
presented samyama as being used not only for the acquisition
of knowledge
but also as an application for achieving self-development
and liberation
of the mind and spirit. Part of the yogic approach to
freedom and liberation
was its dedication to helping its practitioners refine
consciousness
by outlining a highly phenomenological conception of
psychopathology
that can be alleviated through yogic practices that reduce
certain flaws of
character through meditation (Hanna, 2011a, 2011b).
CLARIFYING THE PURPOSE AND PRACTICE
OF THE PHENOMENOLOGICAL METHOD
As previously noted, when phenomenology transitioned into
behavioral
sciences research, it became synonymous with subjectivity.
Although
this was the precise condition that Husserl was seeking to
move beyond,
phenomenology thus became confined to the very meaning that
it was
seeking to escape. In the context of Husserl’s
phenomenological method,
research is done by a phenomenologist within the field of
his or her own
consciousness and experience. It was never meant to be done
in its current
form, by an interviewer consulting with a group of
individuals for the
purpose of examining their experience; seeking themes across
particular
Journal of HUMANISTIC COUNSELING ◆ July
2017 ◆
Volume 56 149
events, relationships, or types of experience; and trying to
find subjective
commonalities. The Husserlian conception of phenomenological
research
is radically different from qualitative phenomenological research
in its current
form (see Hanna & Shank, 1995; Moustakas, 1994;
Polkinghorne, 1989).
For Husserl, research was done by the researcher into
phenomena themselves.
In fact, Husserl’s (2000) motto, “back to the things
themselves” (p.
168), was a call for philosophers to conduct research into
the phenomena
of the world, mind, and social contexts. This was to be done
in the context
of consciousness and the principle of principles: that the
intuition
generated by the application of pure consciousness is a reliable
source of
knowledge and understanding. Husserl (1910/1965, 1936/1970)
went to
great lengths to show how this approach was well within the
context and
domain of science. For example, Husserl used his method to
study time
as a phenomenon unto itself, and how it manifests in human
experience.
As a report of his research, he published The Phenomenology
of Internal Time
Consciousness (Husserl, 1964b), in which he provided
extraordinary insights
into how people experience the phenomenon of time.
In an important treatise on phenomenology in the behavioral
sciences,
Jennings (1986) outlined how phenomenology in philosophy is
distinctly
different from the meaning assigned to it in the behavioral
sciences. Whereas
phenomenology in philosophy involves exploring the nature of
consciousness
and essential knowledge, the behavioral sciences view
phenomenology as
the study of subjectivity and therefore regard it as
empirically unreliable.
This reductionistic viewpoint is a consequence of a
pervasive naturalistic
interpretation, that is, that all phenomena are subject to
the laws of nature
and should be studied using experimental methods (Jennings,
1986). The
behavioral sciences thus depict consciousness as a
neurobiological phenomenon
that obeys the natural laws of the physical world and should
only be studied by empirical means.
Phenomenology, on the other hand, regards consciousness as
both a kind
of being that is distinct from the natural laws of the
physical world, and the
medium through which essences are made manifest. Husserl
(1929/1977)
specifically said that consciousness is “not a piece of the
world” (p. 26).
Phenomenology takes the perspective that if there is no
consciousness then
there is no knowledge of the existence of any world,
empirical or otherwise.
In a sense, the world begins with consciousness and it is
thus necessary to
study it, especially when conducting empirical research
(Husserl, 1936/1970).
Insofar as the behavioral sciences tend to mistake conceptual
interpretations
for acts of consciousness, the phenomenological method can
instead
be used to expose the fundamental nature of psychological
concepts before
empirical studies are conducted (Jennings, 1986).
If the radical reinterpretation of phenomenology as a form
of subjective
inquiry were an improvement, perhaps there would be less
reason
for concern. But in the process of overlooking the true
meaning and
intention of phenomenology, much was lost in the way of
knowledge
150 Journal of HUMANISTIC COUNSELING ◆ July
2017 ◆
Volume 56
and phenomenological access to knowledge that might
otherwise be
quite valuable to counseling and other behavioral sciences
(e.g., see
Hanna, 1991; Puhakka & Hanna, 1988). As we show by
exploring the
phenomenological method in detail, the subjectivist
interpretation of
Husserlian phenomenology is an oversimplification (Jennings,
1986;
McCall, 1983). Once the method itself has been explicated,
we will return
our attention to defining how phenomenology, yoga, and
Buddhism all
serve as refined practices of focused consciousness and
mindfulness.
EXPLORING THE PHENOMENOLOGICAL REDUCTION:
HUSSERL’S RESEARCH METHOD
Husserl (1913/1931) was adamant that “transcendental
phenomenology is
not a theory” (p. 13) but instead the practice of a research
method called the
phenomenological reduction. The phenomenological reduction
is so central
to Husserl’s philosophy that he asserted that if one does
not understand
the reduction, then one does not understand phenomenology
(Spiegelberg,
1982). As described by Husserl (1913/1931, 1913/1982), the
phenomenological
research method involves a series of three steps, usually
outlined as (a)
the epoché, (b) the eidetic reduction, and (c) the
transcendental reduction
(Kockelmans, 1967). In each case, sustained and focused
awareness directed
on the experience of consciousness is the primary means by
which research
is conducted. To understand Husserlian phenomenology, it is
necessary to
grasp how Husserl was exploring consciousness itself.
The term reduction is not used in the sense of reductionism
but rather in
the sense of stripping away extraneous or tangential
characteristics of the
object of the reduction—within the natural attitude—to
discover its true
nature or essence. With regard to the reduction as a
research method, Husserl
(1964a) stated, “Every intellectual process and indeed every
mental process
whatever, while being enacted, can be made the object of a
pure ‘seeing’ and
understanding” (p. 24, italics in original). In that same
work, Husserl noted
that a successful phenomenological reduction involves “as
little interpretation
as possible, but as pure an intuition as possible” (p. 50).
Heidegger
(1972) described the process differently, claiming that
phenomenology
allows the concealed truth of a phenomenon to reveal itself,
calling this
aletheia, or “the unconcealedness of what is present” (p.
79). Although
Heidegger believed the reality of things are hidden behind
appearances,
such appearances likely constitute the natural attitude.
In the epoché, a “bracketing” is done on the everyday
phenomena of the
world known as the natural or psychomundane attitude. This
step is crucial
and yet, in our experience, requires an extraordinary degree
of discipline
and training. Bracketing can be understood in the context of
suspending,
or stepping back from, without invalidating one’s cultural,
familial, and
educational preconceptions and assumptions about a
phenomenon. These
preconceptions and assumptions make up the natural attitude
of the
Journal of HUMANISTIC COUNSELING ◆ July
2017 ◆
Volume 56 151
everyday world, concealing or distorting the true nature of
both the object
of the reduction and the world in general. As described by
Heidegger
(1971), “Everything that might interpose itself between the
thing and us in
apprehending and talking about it must be set aside. Only
then do we yield
ourselves to the undisguised presence of the thing” (p. 25).
Phenomenological
researchers must dedicate time and energy to appropriately
perform the
epoché, as this is the vital first step toward attaining
pure seeing.
The eidetic reduction takes place as consciousness
penetrates to the essence
of an object, being, or phenomenon. This is often quite
difficult to describe,
as this essence is usually beyond the capacity for
descriptive language to
capture, grasp, and contain. For example, in doing the
reduction on the
phenomenon of love, it may be that language cannot fully
convey the
feeling of love that one holds for another, be it a lover,
child, or friend. Yet
it may be possible to arrive at its essence, even if beyond
words, by the
continuous application of focused awareness on the
phenomenon of love
itself. As William James (1890/1981) noted long ago,
experience is prior
to language. Of course, if someone is intensely focused on a
loved one but
is unacquainted with phenomenology, he or she may arrive at
the same
point of insight without any formal use of the reduction. In
this sense, the
reduction can be quite a natural process.
The eidetic reduction is also achievable with basic
phenomena such as
objects, but it is more difficult to do so. This is because
the process involves
empathy, and Husserl (1913/1931) occasionally used the term
empathy to
describe the process involved in the use of his method.
Husserl served as
teacher and dissertation chair for the philosopher Edith
Stein (1989), who
was intrigued by Husserl’s ideas on empathy in the
phenomenological context
and completed her dissertation on this phenomenon. An early
feminist,
Stein’s dissertation is believed to be one of the first
treatises ever written
on empathy. Along these same lines, Alfred Adler (1956) also
believed that
empathy can be experienced toward a wide range of phenomena,
including
both inanimate objects and animals (see also, Hanna, 1996a).
Finally, the transcendental reduction could be called the
full escape from
subjectivity into the radical realm of the intersubjective
beyond categories of
subjective or objective. If there is little that words can capture
in terms of the
eidetic reduction, language is even less useful in this
nearly ineffable realm.
This is not to say, however, that efforts toward accurate
description should
be abandoned entirely, of course. Husserl believed that
phenomenological
researchers should make every effort to accurately describe
their intuitive
encounters with the world and then compare notes with each
other (see
Bartlett, 1986, 1989). This requires staying outside the
natural attitude with
a minimum of interpretation, staying as close to description
as possible.
A major purpose of phenomenology in Husserl’s view was for
phenomenologists
to attain the transcendental reduction—beyond the limits of
mere subjectivity—and then share and compare intuitions
brought back
from the experience. Not surprisingly, the transcendental
has remained a
152 Journal of HUMANISTIC COUNSELING ◆ July
2017 ◆
Volume 56
mystery even to dedicated phenomenologists, as Husserl
believed it was
impossible to describe the transcendental reduction to those
who had not
performed it (Spiegelberg, 1982). Unfortunately, with the
probable exception
of Heidegger in his own way, phenomenologists mostly parted
ways with
Husserl at the transcendental turn (Spiegelberg, 1982). It
is somewhat ironic
that Husserl (1936/1970) often noted that the transcendental
reduction was
the ultimate source of all knowledge—subjective and
objective—bringing
the so-called objective world “back into the absolute sphere
of being” (p.
189) in which it ultimately exists. As such, the prospective
value of this
method for self-development and research should not be
dismissed.
THE NATURE OF SELF: CONNECTING THE
PHENOMENOLOGICAL REDUCTION TO MINDFULNESS
Husserl and the Buddha both had remarkable and unique views
of the
nature of the self. To grasp the depth of this connection,
it is helpful to
understand the nature of mindfulness and its similarities to
the phenomenological
reduction. It is reasonable to suppose that their respective
views
of the self were formed from the application of their
respective methods.
For the Buddha, it was the application of mindfulness,
presumably done
under the legendary Bodhi tree where he achieved
enlightenment. It was
there, according to the legend, that the Buddha realized the
extraordinary
insights that would become the fundamentals of Buddhism. For
Husserl,
it was the application of the phenomenological reduction,
which has been
established as remarkably similar to mindfulness (Hanna,
1993a, 1993b).
In another context, a powerful ingredient of therapeutic
change that has
much in common with mindfulness is called confronting the
problem (Hanna,
1996b, 2002; Hanna & Puhakka, 1991). In the use of all
such methods, a
concentrated, steadfast, deliberate focusing of attention on
a phenomenon
reveals insights into its true nature.
A fundamental doctrine in Buddhism is that there is no self.
In the original
Pali language (a variation of Sanskrit), this is called
anatta. An important
step in understanding Buddhism, especially the original
Buddhism of
Thailand, Burma, and Sri Lanka, is to see that the self is
an illusion with
no basis in fact (Rahula, 1978). The philosopher David Hume
(1738/1978)
came to much the same conclusion in his explorations. Of
course, the mind
is filled with many thoughts, feelings, habits, and
opinions, but the Buddha
proclaimed that there is no actual self to be found therein.
However,
he also claimed that the knowledge of anatta must come from
meditative
experience (mindfulness) rather than accepting the doctrine
through faith
or the study of texts alone. The Buddha clearly encouraged
mindfulness
as a source of self-knowledge.
With regard to the self in phenomenology, Husserl was
dedicated to
the exploration of consciousness and came to discover what
he called the
transcendental ego. However, he made it clear that this is
not the ego or self
Journal of HUMANISTIC COUNSELING ◆ July
2017 ◆
Volume 56 153
that has been taught in psychology but rather transcendental
consciousness.
Husserl (1929/1977) declared, like the Buddha did, that
“There is no
psychological ego” (p. 26). He also made it clear that the
psychological
ego or self has no ontological foundation. In other words,
it is not real.
Similar to a Buddhist perspective, Husserl (1913/1982)
reported that the
transcendental ego is “completely empty of
essence-components, has no
explicatable content, is undescribable in and for itself: it
is pure Ego and
nothing more” (p. 191). Husserl (1913/1931) also held that
the pure ego is
so transcendent that “no reduction can get any grip on it”
(p. 214). Husserl
and the Buddha appear to have both arrived at the same level
of experience,
but after emerging from this rarified realm, they described
their observations
using different terms grounded in their respective cultural
worldviews.
For Husserl, his examination of consciousness was so
thorough and relentless
that at the core of consciousness he discovered not an
individual,
but other people. He called this transcendental
intersubjectivity, an important
part of his philosophy (see also Hanna, 1996a). For Husserl
(1936/1970),
it is not just that people are all connected, but that
“souls themselves are
external to one another [only] in terms of their embodiment”
(p. 228).
Husserl (1936/1970) came to experience “a sole psychic
framework, a total
framework of all souls, which are united not externally but
internally . . .
through the intentional interpenetration which is the communalization
of
their lives” (p. 155). Transcendental intersubjectivity is
not a theory. It is a
realization due to the practice of the phenomenological
method.
The Buddha would have had little to say about
phenomenological intersubjectivity,
as he refrained from engaging in any sort of metaphysical
speculations (Murti, 2003). His concern was not cataloging
knowledge,
but liberation and the end of suffering (Pandita, 1991;
Silananda, 1990).
Metaphysical speculations are mostly associated with later
schools of Buddhism
that are considered part of the Mahayana tradition. The
Vijnanavada
school (also called Yogacara), for example, held that there
is nothing other
than consciousness (Shun’ei, 2009). Such metaphysical
speculations clearly
align with Husserlian phenomenology. However, the basic
methodological
processes at work within the phenomenological reduction
remain fundamentally
akin to those mindfulness practices cultivated by the
Buddha,
despite terminological variations.
PHENOMENOLOGY, YOGA, AND BUDDHISM AS
PATHS TO TRANSCENDENTAL INSIGHT
A reasonable question arises as to whether it is possible to
understand what
Husserl was trying to accomplish in regard to the
transcendental reduction.
We believe it is indeed, and that light can be shed on this
mystery by
exploring important connections between the transcendental
reduction in
Husserl’s phenomenology and the practices of yoga and
Buddhism. Each of
these disciplines has a long tradition in which their
transcendental aspects
154 Journal of HUMANISTIC COUNSELING ◆ July
2017 ◆
Volume 56
are largely acknowledged, accepted, and explicated.
Furthermore, each has
important counseling implications in terms of mindfulness
practices and
therapeutic change (Hanna, 1993b, 2002). While phenomenology
may not at
first appear to be in the business of self-development or
therapeutic change,
quotes from Husserl indicate his belief that both Buddhism
and phenomenology
can bring about significant personal growth and
transformation.
In his short treatise on Buddhism, Husserl (1989) spoke of
Buddhism
thus: “This manner of seeing the world means a great
adventure” (p. 367).
In his preface to the first English edition of Ideas
(Husserl, 1913/1931), he
spoke of phenomenology in much the same tone, saying that
the practice
of phenomenology leads to “the trackless wilds of a new
continent” (p.
15) and “infinite open country” (p. 21). He later wrote that
the practice
of the reduction enhances one’s inner life and reveals “a
possible selfexperience
that can be perfected and perhaps enriched, without limit”
(Husserl 1929/1977, p. 29). Additionally, Husserl maintained
that practice
of the transcendental phenomenological method brings about
“a complete
personal transformation” quite comparable to a “religious conversion”
(1936/1970, p. 137). “Every new piece of transcendental
knowledge,” he
said, “is transformed by essential necessity, into an
enrichment of the human
soul” (Husserl, 1936/1970, p. 264).
Considering the gravitas of these statements, one should not
be surprised
by Husserl’s assertion that perhaps philosophy was
originally intended
to explore these realms but never did. This is an important
consideration
insofar as Husserl (1936/1970) noted that the practice of
phenomenology
and any resulting shift to the transcendental standpoint
lead to “the greatest
existential conversion that is expected of mankind” (p.
137). Elsewhere
he called this event a “Copernican reversal” (Husserl,
1913/1931, p. 22).
These are strong words, especially in comparing the impact
of transcendental
phenomenology to that of no less a figure than Copernicus.
It was
clear that Husserl meant this in the context of both a
transformation in the
discipline of philosophy and its tremendous impact on the
people who
practice transcendental phenomenology.
If, as it appears, the practices of yoga and Buddhist
methods for achieving
knowledge and transformation are indeed similar to that of
the practice
of transcendental phenomenology, then it is not surprising
at all to find
them having similar effects. It is quite possible that
transcendental phenomenology
might lead to mystical realizations. The mystical element of
phenomenology has been a scholarly topic for many years,
although mostly
in regard to the philosophy of Heidegger (1927/1962).
Caputo’s (1986)
The Mystical Element of Heidegger’s Thought is a
comprehensive treatise on
Heidegger’s connection with Meister Eckhart, Taoism,
Buddhism, and
Hinduism. However, contempt for mysticism in philosophical
circles of
the early 20th century surely would have prevented Husserl
from claiming
such a parallel. Many phenomenologists have resisted the
comparison of
transcendental phenomenology to anything mystical
(Spiegelberg, 1982).
Journal of HUMANISTIC COUNSELING ◆ July
2017 ◆
Volume 56 155
Yet the mystical connection is not something to ignore or
dismiss. Cairns
(1976) once heard Husserl claim that “whole pages” of the
writings of the
renowned German mystic Meister Eckhart “could be taken over
by him
unchanged” (p. 91). Unfortunately, Cairns did not provide
any further details
on this intriguing statement. Husserl (1964a) himself once
stated that
to understand the intuition of pure consciousness and how it
is beyond
thought, one should “hark back to the speech of the mystics
when they
describe the intellectual seeing which is supposed not to be
a discursive
knowledge” (p. 50). The transcendental reduction bears a
quite striking
resemblance to Asian methods that are also designed to move
beyond
discursive thought.
CLINICAL APPLICATION OF THE PHENOMENOLOGICAL
REDUCTION AND MINDFULNESS TO ANXIETY
We now turn to a very different type of example of the use
of the phenomenological
reduction: making use of focused awareness or mindfulness
meditation. In so doing, we will address the commonly
reported emotional
problem of anxiety (see American Psychiatric Association,
2013). In Western
culture, anxiety is usually regarded as distasteful,
irritating, and disturbing.
It is a common reason for people to seek therapy. People
often try to deal
with it by “drugging it,” either legally or illegally.
Alternatively, people
may attempt to “cope” with it by getting involved in
shopping, sporting
events, television, the Internet, or other diversions. The
first author has
taught many people to deal with anxiety by directly
meditating on it, staying
with it, and “riding out” threatening feelings and thoughts
in order to
fully experience and observe them. This method involves
sticking with the
technique in spite of typical feelings of falling apart,
intense discomfort,
the urge to scream, and so forth.
Remarkably, when this technique is done over a period of
hours (not
necessarily in one sitting), the anxiety begins to
transform. Eventually, it
starts to lose its intensity, and if the process is
continued it becomes boring.
If the process is continued from there, the anxiety is
transformed into
feelings of peace, acceptance, and even serenity, with the
anxiety no longer
present. The likely realization that accompanies this
phenomenon is that the
anxiety is “empty” or that it is “just a feeling” that is
subject to change like
so many other feelings. This application does not guarantee
that one will
never again have anxiety, but we have found that after
having completed
this technique one is unlikely to ever be intimidated by the
feeling of anxiety
again. We venture to say that in this technique we see the
convergence of
meditation with the phenomenological method.
The technique was actually described by Heidegger
(1929/1975), who stated
that the process leads to transcendence. Several of us have
tried this direct
concentration and mindfulness approach on anxiety and found
ourselves
in agreement with Heidegger. We believe the technique to be
altogether
156 Journal of HUMANISTIC COUNSELING ◆ July
2017 ◆
Volume 56
extraordinary in its results. And again, this technique has
been taught to a
variety of people, nearly all of whom experienced the same
results. However,
it is difficult to explain to people how or why this would
work unless
they have done it for themselves—just as in the case of the
transcendental
reduction. As an experiential process of sustained
concentration on one’s
own consciousness, conducting the phenomenological reduction
is not
only a challenging task but a difficult experience to
explicate. However, we
maintain that through a combination of direct practice and
collaborative
exploration, it is quite possible to use it in counseling.
RESEARCH APPLICATION OF THE
PHENOMENOLOGICAL REDUCTION ON EMPATHY
The methodological framework for applied research would
require participation
from a number of coresearchers who are sufficiently trained
in
the phenomenological method. Such training is highly
experiential rather
than conceptual because the method itself requires ongoing
practice. It
also requires that the coresearchers have the intuitive
ability to clearly
articulate their own experiences using descriptive terms, as
well as the
intellectual capacity to apply abductive reasoning, or
logical inference
(Hanna & Shank, 1995). The ability to identify and “set
aside” or compartmentalize
preconceptions and assumptions, to remain wholly focused on
the experiential elements of the phenomenon under
investigation, and to
avoid the pursuit of categorical truths are all necessary
attributes of the
trained phenomenological researcher. In terms of the process
of assessing
coresearcher results, the lead researcher conducts
individual interviews
in which distilled elements of the phenomenological
investigation are
examined with intensive detail.
The phenomenological investigation would require choosing a
particular
phenomenon to study and then having each coresearcher report
his or her
experience of the epoché, eidetic reduction, and
transcendental reduction
so as to compare notes, as intended by Husserl (see
Bartlett, 1986). Take
empathy, for example. In researching the phenomenon of
empathy, the first
step would be to identify one or more specific mental modes
of experiencing.
Because empathy occurs in a variety of conditions or
situations, the
researcher must define a single or even a set of situational
conditions. For
instance, the researcher may choose to focus on empathic
perceptions of a
client (i.e., empathic perception of the other), one’s own
perceived empathic
experience of a client within oneself (i.e., empathic
perception within the
self), or even one’s sense of how empathy influences the
broader counseling
relationship (i.e., empathic perception of the self–other
dyad).
Next, any number of methodological options exist for the
researchers to
investigate the phenomenon. One controlled experimental
method might
involve having all of the coresearchers observe portions of
a counseling
session video in which a counselor clearly displays empathy
for a client.
Journal of HUMANISTIC COUNSELING ◆ July
2017 ◆
Volume 56 157
Another controlled method might involve priming empathy with
a particular
clinical vignette or case study, and having the coresearchers
evaluate one
or more sections to determine variations in empathic
experience. Either of
these approaches could be completed independently by the
coresearchers
before the results are evaluated, or during a group session
at which time
all of the results are compiled simultaneously. However, the
chosen approach
could also involve less controlled methods, such as using in
vivo
experiences in which coresearchers examine their own
empathic experiences
with clients within counseling sessions, or otherwise
independently
observe audio or video in vitro after those counseling
sessions. Creativity
may be the only limit in devising a workable approach to any
given phenomenological
investigation.
In the epoché, the particular situation or instance of
empathic experience
includes tangential characteristics that must be bracketed.
In pursuing empathic
perceptions of a client, for example, one must suspend
extraneous
content of the immediate experience. This includes
withholding all preconceptions
(e.g., the client is depressed), assumptions (e.g., the
client feels
unheard), and judgments (e.g., the client must learn to not
blame others). In
the eidetic reduction, the phenomenon of empathy
subsequently emerges
as an isolated experience, free of conceptual and
theoretical abstractions.
It might be described as an immediate cognitive insight into
the actual
perceptual experience of the other, an extrapolation of
imaginary scenes
drawn upon from the experience of the other, or a felt sense
experience of
emotional understanding of the other. More likely, it could
be something
far richer in substance or more profound in psychological
insight. Movement
may also occur, back and forth, between epoché and eidetic
reduction
as unessential characteristics emerge or are otherwise
revealed in the
phenomenological process.
With regard to the transcendental reduction, there is no
telling what
might arise. At this juncture, only broad speculations will
suffice. Husserl’s
view on transcendental intersubjectivity might be affirmed
insofar as the
outcome reveals that empathy is indeed a primordial
characteristic of the
ontological interconnectedness of human beings. However,
other possibilities
could arise instead, such as empathy is a transitory
experience of
ontological connectedness that can be manifest at will, or
that it is merely
a form of inductive reasoning used to support communication
despite the
basic ontological disconnectedness of human beings. In any
case, the eidetic
and transcendental reductions combine to provide a uniquely
descriptive
account of phenomena under investigation. If a series of
studies were to
confirm (see Stein, 1989) that empathy comprises the
immediate intersubjective
“givenness” of others rather than being an inferential
process derived
from subjective experience, then the implications for
continued research
efforts and the training of humanistic counselors could be
profound.
Regarding the outcomes of the studies themselves, completion
of the
phenomenological reduction brings one back to the naïve
world of the
158 Journal of HUMANISTIC COUNSELING ◆ July
2017 ◆
Volume 56
psychomundane with a renewed sense of understanding and
insight that
penetrate the natural attitude. Results will vary according
to the level of
training of the phenomenological investigators, the
particular identified
mental object of experiencing, and the chosen method of
investigation.
As an abductive process, the phenomenological method is a
qualitative
and exploratory approach that seeks to arrive at a
posteriori hypotheses
rather than to confirm a priori suppositions. There is no
way to determine
the outcome until the phenomenological method has been used
and the
results have been compared. A pure description of
phenomenological
seeing, without reference to abstractions or theoretical
constructs, is the
ultimate objective. Counseling techniques might be derived
from the process,
as might be new training techniques that reflect insights
drawn from
the experience of exceptionally empathic coresearchers into
the nebulous
phenomenon of empathy. In the end, we have come to believe
that Husserl’s
method allows access to domains of human experience in a
manner
that is not to be found in any other current method of
research.
LIMITATIONS
There are several limitations that arise when considering
how the phenomenological
method might be introduced as a research method in
humanistic
counseling and the behavioral sciences. The first is with
regard to the
challenges inherent in using the phenomenological reduction
itself. Going
well beyond current qualitative approaches that emphasize
individual
or personal interpretations of subjective experiences using
thematic and
textual analyses (Creswell, 2012), Husserl’s
phenomenological reduction
requires extraordinary focus, continuous refinement through
practice,
and a willingness to explore the underlying tenets of
phenomenology.
The method is experiential rather than theoretical, meaning
that the phenomenological
reduction is a methodological process vastly different from
discussing phenomenology in conceptual terms. It involves
the inwardly
directed examination of preconceptual phenomena, a rigorous
task not to
be taken lightly.
Second, results of the transcendental reduction are highly
difficult to
describe, as the experience moves the researcher beyond
language to a
level of experience that transcends subject–object
distinctions. The degree
of ambiguity between psychological aspects of the eidetic
reduction and
intersubjective aspects of the transcendental reduction
means that their
distinctive features can only be delineated through
immediate experience.
Phenomenological research, like the study of mathematics,
may require skills
and understanding that are not possessed by just anyone who
decides to
become a researcher. To become a legitimate, bona fide
humanistic counselor,
having a master’s degree in counseling is a necessary, but
not sufficient,
condition. The same premise applies to conducting the
phenomenological
reduction. Having said that, however, there is evidence that
descriptive
Journal of HUMANISTIC COUNSELING ◆ July
2017 ◆
Volume 56 159
language of such subtle and ethereal experience need not be
a daunting
problem if research is conducted rigorously enough (Yaden et
al., 2016).
A third limitation relates to training methods. For
researchers to do the
kind of investigation demanded by phenomenology, rigorous
training in
executing the phenomenological method would need to be
provided. A
formal procedure for such training would likely require the
documentation
of various methods and skills necessary to do this kind of
research.
One of our broader aspirations in writing this article is to
draw attention
to, and so to spur interest in, the merits of the
phenomenological method.
The development of a rigorous phenomenological training
approach will
likely require the combined efforts of many researchers and
practitioners,
each providing their unique perspective on the various
challenges and
opportunities afforded by such a training process. While
such a task may
appear daunting to some, we find the prospect exciting and
hope other
humanistic counselors will as well.
CONCLUSION
In this article, we have attempted to show how the original
meaning as well
as method of phenomenology deserves a renaissance. We have
also tried to
show how phenomenology’s transition into the behavioral
sciences resulted
in a loss of considerable magnitude, due to its being
confused with and
relegated to subjectivism (Jennings, 1986). However, more
was misplaced
than just the original meaning of phenomenology. The
phenomenological
reduction, along with its attendant insights into the nature
of consciousness,
was lost as well. Although phenomenological studies have
become a valid
and accepted methodology in the array of research methods
found under the
general heading of qualitative research (see, e.g.,
Creswell, 2012; Moustakas,
1994; Polkinghorne, 1989), this form or expression of phenomenology
is but a
shadow of the original. We believe the phenomenological
reduction deserves
a niche in the current array of qualitative methodologies
insofar as it can
uniquely contribute to both the knowledge base of humanistic
counseling
and the professional development of humanistic counselors
and researchers.
The unique capacity for phenomenological methods to enhance
personal
development should also be noted. Husserl designed the
phenomenological
method to provide experiential knowledge and insights that
are
not only informative but also transformative. In this
respect, Husserlian
phenomenology aligns with the goal of heightened conscious
awareness as
found in Asian philosophies such as yoga and Buddhism, as
well as in the
humanistic work of Abraham Maslow (1968, 1971). Seldom in
the history
of counseling and behavioral sciences has a research method
aspired to
bring about personal transformations that are enriching or
self-enhancing
and can result in existential conversions of great
magnitude. Nonetheless,
in our experience, these claims seem to be quite accurate.
The restoration of
Husserl’s phenomenological method has the potential to take
counseling to
160 Journal of HUMANISTIC COUNSELING ◆ July
2017 ◆
Volume 56
new heights as a conduit for acquiring knowledge that
enhances not only
one’s quality of understanding but one’s quality of being as
well.
REFERENCES
Adler, A. (1956). The individual psychology of Alfred Adler
(H. L. Ansbacher & R. R. Ansbacher,
Eds.). New York, NY: Harper & Row.
American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and
statistical manual of mental disorders
(5th ed.). Arlington, VA: Author.
Aranya H. (1983). Yoga philosophy of Patanjali. Albany:
State University of New York Press.
Bartlett, S. J. (1986). Philosophy as ideology.
Metaphilosophy, 17, 1–13.
Bartlett, S. J. (1989). Psychological underpinnings of
philosophy. Metaphilosophy, 20, 295–305.
Brady-Amoon, P. (2011). Humanism, feminism, and
multiculturalism: Essential elements of
social justice in counseling, education, and advocacy. The
Journal of Humanistic Counseling,
50, 135–148. doi:10.1002/j.2161-1939.2011.tb00113.x
Cairns, D. (1976). Conversations with Husserl and Fink. The
Hague, Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff.
Caputo, J. (1986). The mystical element in Heidegger’s
thought. New York, NY: Fordham University
Press.
Collins, J. (1952). The existentialists: A critical study.
Chicago, IL: Henry Regnery.
Creswell, J. W. (2012). Qualitative inquiry and research
design: Choosing among five approaches
(3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
De Silva, P. (1984). Buddhism and behaviour modification.
Behaviour Research and Therapy,
22, 661–678.
De Silva, P. (1985). Early Buddhist and modern behavioral
strategies for the control of unwanted
intrusive cognitions. The Psychological Record, 35, 437–443.
Felder, A. J., Aten, H. M., Neudeck, J. A., Shiomi-Chen, J.,
& Robbins, B. D. (2014). Mindfulness
at the heart of existential-phenomenology and humanistic
psychology: A century of
contemplation and elaboration. The Humanistic Psychologist,
42, 6–23.
Feuerstein, G. (1989). The yoga-sutra of Patanjali: A new
translation and commentary. Rochester,
VT: Inner Traditions.
Giorgi, A. (2009). The descriptive phenomenological method
in psychology: A modified Husserlian
approach. Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University Press
Hanna, F. J. (1991). Processing mental objects directly: A
therapeutic application of phenomenology.
The Humanistic Psychologist, 19, 194–206.
Hanna, F. J. (1993a). Rigorous intuition: Consciousness,
being, and the phenomenological
method. Journal of Transpersonal Psychology, 25, 181–198.
Hanna, F. J. (1993b). The transpersonal consequences of
Husserl’s phenomenological method.
The Humanistic Psychologist, 21, 41–57.
Hanna, F. J. (1995). Husserl on the teachings of the Buddha.
The Humanistic Psychologist, 23,
365–372.
Hanna, F. J. (1996a). Community feeling, empathy, and
intersubjectivity: A phenomenological
framework. Individual Psychology, 52, 22–30.
Hanna, F. J. (1996b). Precursors of change: Pivotal points
of involvement and resistance in
psychotherapy. Journal of Psychotherapy Integration, 6,
227–264.
Hanna, F. J. (2002). Therapy with difficult clients: Using
the precursors model to awaken change.
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Hanna, F. J. (2011a). Freedom: Toward an integration of the
counseling profession. Counselor
Education and Supervision, 50, 362–385.
doi:10.1002/j.1556-6978.2011.tb01921.x
Hanna, F. J. (2011b, October). A psycho-spiritual
alternative to the DSM and psychopathology: The
yoga view of mind and the causes of mental and emotional
suffering. Paper presented at the
meeting of the Association for Counselor Education and
Supervision, Nashville, TN.
Hanna, F. J., & Puhakka, K. (1991). When psychotherapy
works: Pinpointing an element of
change. Psychotherapy, 28, 598–607.
Journal of HUMANISTIC COUNSELING ◆ July
2017 ◆
Volume 56 161
Hanna, F. J., & Shank, G. (1995). The specter of
metaphysics in counseling research and
practice: The qualitative challenge. Journal of Counseling
& Development, 74, 53–59.
doi:10.1002/j.1556-6676.1995.tb01822.x
Hansen, J. T. (2012). Extending the humanistic vision:
Toward a humanities foundation for the
counseling profession. The Journal of Humanistic Counseling,
51, 133–144. doi:10.1002/j.2161-
1939.2012.00011.x
Hays, D. G., & Wood, C. (2011). Infusing qualitative
traditions in counseling research designs.
Journal of Counseling & Development, 89, 288–295.
doi:10.1002/j.1556-6678.2011.tb00091.x
Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and time. New York, NY: Harper
& Row. (Original work published
1927)
Heidegger, M. (1971). The origin of the work of art. In
Poetry, language, thought (pp. 15–86).
New York, NY: Harper Books.
Heidegger, M. (1972). On time and being. New York, NY:
Harper & Row.
Heidegger, M. (1975). What is metaphysics? In W. Kaufman
(Ed.), Existentialism from Dostoevsky
to Sartre (pp. 242–264). New York, NY: New American Library.
(Original work
published 1929)
Hume, D. (1978). A treatise of human nature. Oxford,
England: Clarendon. (Original work
published 1738)
Husserl, E. (1931). Ideas: General introduction to pure
phenomenology. New York, NY: Collier
Books. (Original work published 1913)
Husserl, E. (1964a). The idea of phenomenology. The Hague,
Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff.
Husserl, E. (1964b). The phenomenology of internal time
consciousness. Indianapolis: University
of Indiana Press.
Husserl, E. (1965). Philosophy as rigorous science. In Q.
Lauer (Ed.), Phenomenology and the crisis
of philosophy (pp. 71–147) New York, NY: Harper & Row.
(Original work published 1910)
Husserl, E. (1970). The crisis of European sciences and
transcendental phenomenology. Evanston,
IL: Northwestern University Press. (Original work published
1936)
Husserl, E. (1977). Cartesian meditations. The Hague,
Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff. (Original
work published 1929)
Husserl, E. (1982). Ideas pertaining to a pure phenomenology
and to a phenomenological philosophy:
First book. The Hague, Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff.
(Original work published 1913)
Husserl, E. (1989). Uber die reden Gotamo Buddhos [On the
discourses of Gautama Buddha]. In T.
Nenon & H. R. Sepp (Eds.), Edmund Husserl: Aufsätze und
vorträge: 1922–1937 [Edmund Husserl:
Essays and lectures: 1922–1937] (pp. 125–126). Dordrecht,
Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
Husserl, E. (2000). Logical investigations. London, England:
Routledge.
James, W. (1981). The principles of psychology. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press.
(Original work published 1890)
Jennings, J. L. (1986). Husserl revisited: The forgotten
distinction between psychology and
phenomenology. American Psychologist, 41, 1231–1240.
Kockelmans, J. J. (1967). Phenomenology: The philosophy of
Edmund Husserl and its interpretation,
New York, NY: Doubleday.
Maslow, A. H. (1968). Toward a psychology of being. New
York, NY: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Maslow, A. H. (1971). The farther reaches of human nature.
New York, NY: Penguin Books.
Matheson, J. L., & Rosen, K. H. (2012). Marriage and
family therapy faculty members’ balance
of work and personal life. Journal of Marital and Family
Therapy, 38, 394–416.
McCall, R. J. (1983). Phenomenological psychology. Madison:
University of Wisconsin Press.
Mikulas, W. L. (1978). Four noble truths of Buddhism related
to behavior therapy. The Psychological
Record, 28, 59–67.
Mikulas, W. L. (1981). Buddhism and behavior modification.
The Psychological Record, 31, 331–342.
Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Murti, T. R. V. (2003). The central philosophy of Buddhism:
A study of Madhyamika system. New
Delhi, India: Munshiram Manoharlal.
Pandita, S. U. (1991). In this very life: The liberation
teachings of the Buddha. Boston, MA:
Wisdom.
162 Journal of HUMANISTIC COUNSELING ◆ July
2017 ◆
Volume 56
Polkinghorne, D. E. (1989). Phenomenological research
methods. In R. S. Valle & S. Halling
(Eds.), Existential-phenomenological perspectives in
psychology (pp. 41–60). New York, NY:
Plenum Press.
Puhakka, K., & Hanna, F. J. (1988). Opening the pod: A
therapeutic application of Husserl’s
phenomenology. Psychotherapy, 25, 582–592.
Puligandla, R. (1970). Phenomenological reduction and yogic
meditation. Philosophy East and
West, 20, 19–33.
Rahula, W. (1978). What the Buddha taught. London, England:
Gordon Fraser.
Ratts, M. J. (2009). Social justice counseling: Toward the
development of a fifth force
among counseling paradigms. The Journal of Humanistic
Counseling, 48, 160–172.
doi:10.1002/j.2161-1939.2009.tb00076.x
Rogers, C. (2012). On becoming a person: A therapist’s view
of psychotherapy. New York, NY:
Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. (Original work published 1961)
Shun’ei, T. (2009). Living yogacara: An introduction to
consciousness-only Buddhism. Boston,
MA: Wisdom.
Silananda, U. (1990). The four foundations of mindfulness.
Boston, MA: Wisdom.
Sinari, R. (1965). The method of phenomenological reduction and
yoga. Philosophy East and
West, 15, 217–228.
Snygg, D., & Combs, A. W. (1949). Individual behavior: A
new frame of reference for psychology.
New York, NY: Harper.
Snygg, D., & Combs, A. W. (1959). Individual behavior: A
new frame of reference for psychology
(Rev. ed.). New York, NY: Harper.
Spiegelberg, H. (1982). The phenomenological movement. The
Hague, Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff.
Stanghellini, G., & Lysaker, P. H. (2007). The
psychotherapy of schizophrenia through the
lens of phenomenology: Intersubjectivity and the search for
the recovery of first- and
second-person awareness. American Journal of Psychotherapy,
61, 163–179.
Stein, E. (1989). On the problem of empathy: The collected
works of Edith Stein (Vol. 3). Washington,
DC: ICS Publications.
Yaden, D. B., Eichstaedt, J. C., Schwartz, H. A., Kern, M.
L., Le Nguyen, K. D., Wintering,
N. A., . . . Andrew B. (2016). The language of ineffability:
Linguistic analysis of mystical
experiences. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 8,
244–252.
Zahavi, D. (2005). Subjectivity and selfhood: Investigating
the first-person perspective. Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press.
✦ ✦ ✦
Няма коментари:
Публикуване на коментар
Здравейте, приятели! В случай, че желаете да ми зададете въпрос и очаквате отговор, моля пишете ми тук в коментарите!