ABSTRACT
Students of the person-centred approach frequently comment on how there is something nourishing and inspiring about reading the work of Carl Rogers. I/we would argue, in common with Bondi and Fewell (2016) and Canavan and Prior (2016) that this is no accident. Much of Rogers writing can be understood as “experience near” (Canavan & Prior, 2016) and “phronetic”, drawing on the work of Aristotle, described by Dunne (2009) as practical, rather than technical rationality. In recent years, the approach has arguably been drawn towards proving itself in a way that speaks to a technical rationality. Our suggestion is that we need to return to the rough ground and value our work appropriately.
