This conceptual work is concerned with the development of a holistic theory of personality. The following were selected for their strong orientation in this direction: Gordon Allport, Andras Angyal, Kurt Goldstein, Prescott Lecky, Abraham Maslow, Bardner Murphy, and Carl Rogers. The four themes which emerged from an analysis of their writings are concerned with organization, motivation, process and potentiality. With three minor exceptions, the seven holistic theorists were virtually identical in their basic principles and thematic concerns. The four themes form a supportive structure for the development of a holistic theory of healthy personality and are offered as evidence that the selected theorists represent a shared orientation toward the development of the human personality. An analysis and subsequent synthesis of the seven individual theories is presented. Implications for the theory and practice of psychotherapy and education are cffered. (Author/CJ)

Five selections from an interview with Abraham Maslow are presented here. These five excerpts, each introduced with commentary by the author, include such topics as Maslow's early experiences in psychology, his problems with timidity and isolation, the inspiration for his concept of self-actualization, and his gradual withdrawal from many of life's pleasures to devote more time to his work. Also discussed are the difficult theoretical problems he faced following his discovery that many individuals do not move automatically into the sphere of self-actualization after all other needs have been gratified. The final selection presents Maslow's views on the development of third-force psychology and its future. Finally, a coda is presented, giving attention to the vastly different psychological and social realities that have evolved since 1968, when the interview was held. The implications of these changing realities are discussed as they relate to humanistic psychology and its future.

Humanistic biologists, psychologists, and organismic theorists have made a persuasive case for the presence of an innate growth force within the personality for achieving self-actualization (S-A). Among the S-A theorists, however, little attention has been given to the way in which this organic force is mobilized to achieve direction and expression. A notable exception to this omission is found in the motivation theory of Abraham Maslow. He theorized that progressive gratification through his need hierarchy would lead individuals automatically to explore their higher needs for S-A. Later Maslow came to realize that this was not true; many did not move toward S-A even after all other needs in the hierarchy had been gratified. This discovery necessitates a rethinking of his theory. A crucial element in this theory is that S-A, the highest need in the hierarchy, is the weakest biologically. This characteristic, in addition to the many examples of experience, is essential in achieving our highest possibilities. Such concepts are liberating for they help free us from ego-centered developments and thereby add a significant dimension to our conceptual model for personal growth.

In this brief article I would like to relate my experience in therapy with Judy and her young mother, who were clients in the Counseling Service of the Merrill-Palmer Institute. My work with them was under the supervision of Dr. Clark Moustakas of the Institute. At the beginning of therapy Judy was only twenty-six months old. It is true that the uniqueness of a two-year-old girl as a candidate for therapy was of no small appeal to the writer's penchant for the unusual and experimental. However, the motivation for this present report springs not so much from the sheer uniqueness of the experience with such a young child1 as from the need to articulate and communicate certain experiences, reactions, and formulations that accrued from my relationship with my very young client and her mother. There are, however, other pertinent and perhaps more basic considerations. Comparatively speaking, our therapeutic experience with the very young child is nil and a dearth of reports of consequence reach the professional journals. As suggested in footnote 2, what experimental work and experience there is to date has been inexorably linked to psychoanalytic theory. There are serious limitations in such a marriage where proof of basic theoretical assumptions and concepts is often primary and where all observations of behavior and experiences with the child are interpreted to conform to and confirm psychoanalytical theory.2 It is also true that most therapeutic efforts with children focus on illness and its cure rather than on prevention and the maintenance and enhancement of health ( 1 ). For some time now there has been very little freshness and originality offered in the therapeutic efforts with the very young child.