Austin Fontaine 
Megan Novelli Third-force psychology reresents to me an interesting mix of useful change and hypocrisy. It’s usefulness comes in it’s challenge to the other schools of psychology in focusing in on the patient more (for example, psychiatry is trending towords more medication management and spends less and less time with patients). Third-force psychology brings a more humane focus to psychology, which is good. Yet, where it excels, it also fails. Because, I then feel that it goes to far in how much it focuses on humans, and alienates the other fields of psychology. Without using emprical data or any terms of labeling third-force psychology leaves itself in a rut. And because it rejects a lot of the testing other fields of psychology use, they pass up many chances for collaboration or cooperation.
And again, third-force psychology runs into a problem. It rejects labeling, yet it tells us that there is something wrong in the way we think that must be rejected or changed. Third-force criticizes other branches of psychology for “diagnosing” problems, yet it does the very same thing. I know that realistically, a lot of third force psychologists probably don’t hold this extreme view, yet it seems too big a flaw to overlook.
I also think third-force psychology fails in it’s inability to explain more than a small section of psychological problems. It definitely has is uses however. I really like Maslowe’s hiearchy of needs, which I believe has a lot of uses outside of psychology (mission work, business, rebuilding in disaster zones ect). And I enjoy the more holistic approach that third force psychology offers to mental health couselors.
I believe third force psychology has a lot to offer, but at the same time I find that a lot of what it does offer is too subjective and unscientific. Third-force psychology really is a product of the “post-modern” age. It embodies a lot of the humanistic philosophies (which I disagree with to an extent). Perhaps it’s a matter of opinion. But I believe that like Gestalt Psychology, third-force will eventually fade to the background as post-modernism begins to pass.
Josh Morrison
5:34 pm, 11.18.10
While I probably like this type of psychology more than you, I do take serious issue with such hesitation to label things. This may well be a faulty assumption but to me the rejection of labels has always come across as the height of smugness. It almost seems as though such a system feels that comparing and grouping people duhamanizes them which is absolutely ridiculous to me when considering exactly how social people are. We yearn to be in groups so why do some take such offense at being thought of as anything other than an individual, unique and one of a kind case? What really makes people so incedible is that we are all such cases yet we still have so much in common. That’s the group dynamic and and an important perspective that seems to be missing from this branch of psychology.
Jason Herrington
6:26 pm, 11.21.10
I too think that this school of psychology is limited in its attempt to separate from the other schools. I think that all schools contribute something helpful in improving the human condition. I also think that this school will fade out as other schools further develop. I think that there are some good thoughts and goals but as a whole, do not think that it is enough.