Carrying Forward: Explicating Gendlin’s Experiential Phenomenological Philosophy and Its Influence on Humanistic Psychotherapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In his philosophical writings, Eugene Gendlin has developed a way of thinking about human experience that inextricably connects the body to language and thought. His work has stemmed out of a frustration with the limited scope of rationalism and deconstructionism, both of which currently dominate discourse in the human sciences. Gendlin has drawn on the work of a rich and diverse array of thinkers, from Aristotle to Heidegger, to develop a novel approach to understanding the subjective processes that propel the meanings that we create and live by during our existence. This article explores the philosophical influences on Gendlin’s thought, as well as the significance of his experiential phenomenological philosophy for our understanding of the human body, the process of thinking, and language. It concludes with a discussion of the implications of Gendlin’s philosophy for psychotherapeutic practice.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.077 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".