The psychological humanities is a burgeoning field seeking to reshape psychological theory and practice.

As a discipline, it takes seriously the contributions of psychological science.

Yet it holds that science becomes a better version of itself when it dialogues with art and literature.

“I wish we would recognize the place of psychology at the intersection of all disciplines that deal with the human mind and the behavior of living things.” —James H. Korn, “Psychology as a Humanity”

“I wish we would recognize the place of psychology at the intersection of all disciplines that deal with the human mind and the behavior of living things.” —James H. Korn, “Psychology as a Humanity”

We are often asked to define the term “psychological humanities.” As scholars working in a Center that helps set the discourse for the field, it is understandable why. Yet as is the case with any of the disciplines that have emerged from the rich tradition of the liberal arts, the psychological humanities resists simplistic articulation. And as a field that seeks to enhance both our theoretical understanding of the human person and our practical approaches to caring for one another, it is an ever-evolving discipline – one that must be continuously imagined anew.

When we offer something like this in answer to the question What do you mean by “psychological humanities”?, however, we are typically met with sly smiles and quips about academics being good at talking around problems but not addressing them. It is important to us, therefore, to share some reflections on what constitutes the psychological humanities and what possibilities we believe can be opened up by this burgeoning field.

To do so, we will begin with an anecdote, one that gets to the heart of why we view the humanities as an essential companion to psychological science and mental health care more broadly. A few years back, we undertook a grant-funded project that sought to promote interdisciplinary dialogue between philosophers, psychologists, and theologians. The idea was simple: These three disciplines share a fundamental concern – understanding what it means to be human – and yet the methodologies they employ and the languages they use are radically different. What would it look like for scholars from each field to come together and learn from one another?

One thing we recognized early on was that it is far easier for scholars and practitioners from diverse intellectual backgrounds to engage with one another when they are discussing something outside of their area of expertise, something they can appreciate and enjoy whether they have a deep theoretical knowledge of it or not.

In anticipation of our first convening, for instance, we asked participants to read Tolstoy’s slim masterpiece The Death of Ivan Ilyich – a work of singular genius that deserves to be read by anyone who wants to understand suffering and know how to better care for those in need. The conversation that arose around that text was simply astonishing. There, in a room full of highly accomplished academics, we had colleagues share stories of their first encounters with death, of the helplessness they’ve felt having to sit by and watch loved ones suffer, of their own fear of mortality and the various ways it shapes their lives. It was a stirring, powerful discussion occasioned by our shared appreciation of a beautiful work of art.

That art and literature and the great religions and ideas, which have inspired awe and wonder throughout all of human history, can help us to better understand ourselves and one another ought not to surprise us. Indeed, at some level we already know this, which is why we refer to films and song lyrics and lines of poetry when we want to express that which we find most inarticulable. And yet for various reasons – some historical, some political, some merely accidental – we deprive ourselves of access to these rich resources of insight and meaning when it comes time to think deeply and scientifically about the human condition.

It is just this problem that the psychological humanities seeks to address. As a discipline that takes seriously the contributions of psychological science, and yet holds vigorously that science becomes a better version of itself when it is put into dialogue with philosophy, theology, history, and literature, the psychological humanities works to broaden the discourse and practice of psychology such that it can entertain questions of meaning and value.

Why do we suffer? How ought we to treat one another? What is the meaning of human life? These are the kinds of questions the psychological humanities was created to entertain.

Incidentally, they are also the questions each of us wrestles with, the ones that most characterize our lives. Isn’t it odd that a discipline designed to help us understand ourselves and alleviate our suffering asks us to bracket such vital questions? Isn’t it odd that therapists, whose job it is to meet patients where they are at and accompany them in their trials, enter the profession ill-equipped to speak to these most human concerns?

If the psychological humanities seeks to reinvent psychology, its method for doing so involves the restoration of the humanities, which have been so lamentably diminished in recent decades. This can only be accomplished if the value of things once understood to be inherently valuable – art, literature, religion, moral discourse, the search for truth – is assessed not in terms of utility but the degree to which it contributes to a good and prosperous life.

Coincidentally, those seeking psychotherapeutic care are often motivated by a desire to live better lives. They enter therapy with ailments the alleviation of which they believe will improve their existence. What if, instead of merely teaching coping techniques and providing medication, clinicians were also able to introduce patients to the kinds of experiences and ideas that have provided human beings with consolation, understanding, and meaning for centuries? What if no topic or question was off limits because psychology understood itself to be a convening discipline where every aspect of human experience meets?

This may seem like an audacious goal, and for many in the field as it is currently constituted, even an inadvisable one. But it is the work of the psychological humanities all the same, and only time will tell how far this growing movement will take it.

Korn, J.H. (1985). Psychology as a Humanity, Teaching in Psychology, 12(4), 188-193.

© Psychology Today