ABSTRACT
The dominant “natural science” approach in American psychology is contrasted with the “human science” approach that hails back to Dilthey (1884/1977). The emphasis both within our discipline and our culture on seeking causal explanations of human behavior is presented as problematic to the extent that it marginalizes and even precludes any focus on human choice and responsibility. We first review the historical context for this received view in psychology, and then proceed to develop the need for a new “theory of science” that is capable of embracing human freedom and transcendence. Giorgi’s (1970) pioneering work in developing the “human science” approach to psychology is used as a platform from which to present the existential phenomenological alternative to psychological research, as recently summarized by Churchill (2022). The essential role of philosophy in this research paradigm is discussed, with reference to Aristotle, Brentano, Dilthey, and Husserl. The ontological foundations for the “existential” approach to the human person is presented through reference to Heidegger and Sartre. Illustrations are presented throughout, drawn from recent senior theses developed at the University of Dallas under the combined supervision of the two co-authors.
