ABSTRACT
Humanistic Psychology is often mis-portrayed as dying or dead, a claim that is especially egregious when made by positive psychologists who minimize their debt to, as well as co-opt a narrow version of, Humanistic Psychology. Dilthey's collection of essays, written prior to his death in 1911, distinguished between natural and human sciences, with the former focused on material explanations and the latter focused on understanding humans and their unique lives within socio-historical contexts. Mruk provided a good way to delineate the complex rift characterizing the cultural divide separating Humanistic from Positive Psychology. Specifically, he delineated between what he called 'positivistic positive psychology' and 'humanistic positive psychology'. He outlined their commonalities and differences, while denying that they constitute separate fields. With the increasing cultural ascendency of Positive Psychology, claiming superiority over Humanistic Psychology by supposedly restoring hard science approaches to positive phenomena constitutes both a threat and an opportunity for Humanistic Psychology.
