Excerpts from the new science of axiological psychology.

A Personal Note

"VALUE" is at once the most important, the most poorly understood, and the least studied concept in the field of psychology. About this, I am in agreement with the late Milton Rokeach (Rokeach, 1973). Looking back over the history of clinical psychology, we see that few psychologists have undertaken a scientific or clinical study of values and morals in spite of their enormous clinical and societal relevance. By default, values are left to religion, humanism, and philosophy. Yet, values and morals are too important to be left in those hands alone, a view I have not always held as a clinical and research psychologist.

My career in psychology, including my initial training in psychoanalysis and psychoanalytic personality theory, began as a graduate student at the University of Texas in Austin. In those days, the city of Austin boasted 90,000 people instead of millions, and the streets were open without traffic jams! At U.T. Austin, I studied under Gardner Lindzey who presided over the psychology department and Kenneth Spence who had "psychoanalyzed" B. F. Skinner at Harvard. I was most impressed by Spence's presentation of learning theory, Karl Dallenbach's presentation of the history of psychology, Bruce Deatherage's neurophysiology, R.J. Williams's biochemical individuality, and A.J. Welch's biomedical engineering. I was privileged at the University of Texas in Austin to carry out an interdisciplinary doctoral dissertation involving many academic departments, and I benefited from generous scholarships and research assistantships. This great university encouraged and supported my growth as a young scholar. I want U.T. Austin to know that my rich educational opportunities at Texas were not squandered.

My doctoral work at Austin was followed by an academic appointment at Long Island University and a private clinical practice on Manhattan's Upper East Side. Between 1969 and 1973, my approach to clinical psychology was supported and enriched as a clinical post doctoral fellow at the Ellis Institute in Manhattan.

The clinical orientation of cognitive psychology focuses on highly internalized beliefs rather than on the Id, Ego, or Superego structures of psychoanalysis. My work with belief structures ultimately took me to the study of value structures after I discovered Robert S. Hartman (Hartman, 1967b) while a fellow at the Ellis Institute. I have since struggled to understand the relation between values and beliefs and have come to the conclusion that all beliefs involve values, but not all values involve beliefs.

In time I retired from teaching and accepted a position as Senior Staff Psychologist at a major medical center, The Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center Outpatient Clinic in Brooklyn. This move permitted me to devote my career largely to clinical practice.

During this time I was fortunate to meet a group of progressive physicians seeking to establish an International Academy of Preventive or Alternative Medicine. They approached me, knowing my interests and background as a former Research Assistant to R.J. Williams of the Clayton Foundation Biochemical Institute at the University of Texas at Austin. Williams was a friend of Linus Pauling, Julian Huxley, and other notables who visited our Institute on the Texas campus from time to time. Williams is known for his publications in the fields of nutrition, alcoholism, cancer, and biochemical individuality (Williams, 1959). He is known also for having discovered more vitamins and their variants than any other scientist in the world.

These physicians asked me to invite R.J. Williams and Linus Pauling (Pauling, 2001) to an organizational meeting in St. Louis, Missouri in the early 1970s. I did, and they agreed to come. They later became active sponsors of our international alternative medicine society, composed largely of doctors dedicated to proactive biodynamic medicine as well as to pharmacodynamic crisis medicine. During my years as Board member, President, and founding Editor-in-chief of IAPM publications, I became aware of problems with patient compliance in preventive and wellness care practices. I was intrigued by various lifestyle, herbal, nutritional, and other interventions. I was also impressed by the frequent lack of will on the part of patients to use this information to make rational health choices. The problem of patient motivation troubled me for many years before I discovered the importance of the moral dimensions of medicine and psychology.

The power of values coming alive within us is seen in spirituality and mysticism. I affirm at the outset that my method is science, but my goal is religion, with a good dose of "Know thyself" in between. Nothing is like facing down the dramatic limitations of science in searching for truth and discovering that you have gone as far as science can take you. Then a profound sense of humility before or in the presence of creation is experienced. As a scientist I have never felt the need to choose between science and religion! I know what is necessary and sufficient for the practice of my profession while pushing the envelope of research understanding, and in the end my faith in creation and God comforts me. I am confident that I live in a lawful and infinite cosmos containing an infinite number of universes, each with its own laws, yet sharing universal laws.

Because of the essential infinity of nature, our finite existence cannot prepare us for what is out there. I made peace with an infinite universe as a scientist, clinician, and person. I make an effort to balance the need to know with the needs not to know and to feel at one with the universe.

My present clinical orientation is that of cognitive psychology theory and practice, informed by axiological psychology. In my clinical work, I address acute presenting problems as well as self-actualization issues for people in challenging careers of one sort or another. Often my patients are in pain and arc highly motivated to find relief; but they are confused, having diminished rational autonomy and must sort out many problems in living. Head problems combine with reality problems to make the role of the psychologist highly valued. Only a complex society like ours throws such intricate problems in living at us. In many societies of the world, religious faith and family love suffice; but this is not always the case in complex life styles such as our own. Individuals can lose balance, lose their way, and require a coach or teacher to help them sort things out with minimal down time or loss of sleep. In my work, emotions need to be clarified and reflected, for they are the "telegraph" or "pipeline" into the troublesome value and belief structures that come alive within us through habitual use.

The Ellisonian Model of irrationality in the field of cognitive psychology identifies negative (irrational) beliefs commonly encountered in clinical practice. Each possesses a value-signature or structure that can be identified and measured, using the Hartman Value Profile. For this reason, in my work I combine the Ellisonian concept of irrationality with Hartmanian laws of normal or reasonable valuation and evaluative habits. The elegance of Hartman's formal model and valuemetrics shifts the focus of my work to values, but beliefs remain a pipeline or telegraph into value structures. For these reasons, I define my work as valuecentric cognitive psychology or as axiological psychology to distinguish it from other systems of cognitive psychology.

A mind bears some similarities to an onion; it is organized around layers of psychodynamics driven by constellations of evaluative habits. The work of psychotherapy concerns "owning" important layers with their habitual axiological (value) patterns, ranging from pro-self and pro-social to anti-self and anti-social axiological patterns, attitudes, and behaviors. Since the sensitivity, balance, and hierarchical ordering of these patterns can be measured using valuemetrics, they assume great importance in the system of psychotherapy made available by axiological psychology.

Unlike the onion, the human mind is capable of compartmentalization, dissociation, splitting, and switching. Thus, clinicians may encounter multiple personalities and other dissociative phenomena common to post traumatic stress disorders. In my clinical work, I focus on what might be loosely called "value-vision." It is clinically meaningful and can be measured using the Hartman Value Profile.

The most important conclusions in life are those concerning ourselves; this is no exaggeration for two reasons. First, thinking stops at a conclusion. Second, conclusions build identity and self-esteem, or the lack of them. How we think has enormous implications for getting good things in life for ourselves and for other people. Thinking about thinking with the tools of axiological psychology can provide great relief for many conflicted individuals.

In my focus on thinking about thinking, the following have played important roles: 1) life as a boy growing up on a New England Dairy Farm where I had much time to think and became interested in philosophy, 2) the study of cognitive psychology at the Ellis Institute in Manhattan, 3) my youthful study of Alfred Korzybski's writings in general semantics (Korzybski, 1948), 4) the study of philosopher Hartman's approach to values research, 5) the influence of Milton Erickson's writings and his practice of hypnotherapy; 6) collaboration with Nathaniel Branden in the conduct of Manhattan Intensives, 7) the writings of Viktor Frankl in the field of existential psychology, 8) the study of humanist thought and phenomenology, 9) the comparative study of world religions, 10) the influence of psychology's learning and personality theory, 11) an advanced degree in biology with courses in biochemistry, 12) organization work in the field of preventive medicine with Williams and Pauling to establish the world's first international alternative medicine society for doctors, The International Academy of Preventive-Alternative Medicine (IAPM), 13) carefully listening to what my patients had to teach me for some thirty years, and 14) my passionate search for truth outside the box in my field of psychology. My interest in how the mind works is for me the "master game," one that paid well and funded my values research over the years.

Budding clinicians commonly marry psychological theories only to divorce them while finding an approach best suited to their own personalities. Often influential is some strong and successful personality in the field like Sigmund Freud, Carl Rogers, or Albert Ellis. Some clinicians follow the beaten path in an unquestioning manner; others sample what is out there and then go beyond the black box of their profession. Some systems of psychotherapy admit to more eclecticism than others. Some are more doctrinaire than others. Professional maturity means cultivating a personal style that succeeds with a wide range of personalities, though never with all. We have to appeal to our patients in the medium they understand best. In some cases we choose not to do so and lose them. Word of mouth referrals are the best kind because we get to work with like-minded souls. At times a judicious referral to another professional is the best intervention; no clinician can be all things to all people.

Successful clinicians must take a good personal history, get their patients to express their thoughts and feelings, provide empathy, understanding, and emotional support, and achieve self-knowledge before attempting to help others. These objectives are important in any clinical relationship or internship. My own clinical work with patients was active and directive, in the tradition of a good teacher or coach. Clinical goals are to help patients to clarify what the good things in life are and to help them get these good things. Psychotherapy promotes pro-self, pro-social behaviors while helping patients get on friendly terms with their crazies. The thrust of psychotherapy is to foster "rational autonomy," in the words of Rem B. Edwards (Edwards, 1981).

My work in cognitive psychology sensitized me to the importance of values, morals, and beliefs in ways that training in other fields of psychotherapy, including psychoanalysis, does not. For many years I searched for a conceptual framework from which to examine the roles of values and emotions, motivations, and behaviors. I sought a better understanding of how to motivate patients to work on themselves once they understood how to make rational health choices. I especially sought ways to motivate patients in my private practice as well as in crisis medicine management. Why do patients not take better care of themselves? Why do they not complete psychological homework given to them? Do they have a deficient will to live?

I finally concluded that no one is an island unto himself or herself, and that group therapy, including group support, are powerful motivators. The ultimate group context is the collective of society itself. More societal sponsorship of self-reliance and the moral duty to make rational health choices could make a tremendous difference. As it takes a village to raise a child, so it takes an enlightened society and nation to promote health and to control health, including health care costs. Our frontier past championed rugged and careless individualism, but the time has come to weigh in with rugged and carefully considered collectivism, without losing sight of the basic rights of individuals.

I am always amazed at how intelligent human beings can be so stupid and so obviously indifferent to the importance of high cultural values and to the risks of low cultural evils. Much of the popular culture that poisons our young people is produced through the mass media by big businesses, interested only in their bottom line.

The drumbeat of commercial insanity distorts minds and exports decadence to the world. I take little comfort in knowing that our half-smart American culture is a tragically flawed civilization that does not know any better. I take more comfort in knowing that the axiological psychology presented here offers inspiration and hope for the future to all who take notice.

Speaking for the health care professions, I hope the world will come to realize that we doctors need societal backup, including policies of "tough love" based on moral education and grounded in basic value science. Our society must communicate with one voice on subjects like good citizenship, moral obligations to make rational health choices, and the importance of self-reliance. We must extend the frontiers of self-reliance as we expand the frontiers of genetics in order to remedy or compensate for the mistakes of nature that predispose individuals both to moral problems and to chronic degenerative diseases.

Axiological Considerations

The reconstruction of psychology, and ultimately of society, around values and morals must build upon Robert S. Hartman's philosophical research on values. This reconstruction has great practical implications for all the social sciences and for all humankind. If people cannot catch up with this work, then this work must catch up with people, or all is lost. Axiology in general and formal axiology in particular need to be studied and understood. As a psychologist, for "axiology" I substitute the terminology of "values research" and "empirical value science."

The phrase "formal axiology" was used by Hartman to designate his formal model of value phenomena and our deeply internalized evaluative habits. Deep axiological structures define personality, character, skills, defenses, emotions, motivations, behaviors, and the whole subject matter of psychology. The study of value phenomena is as critical to the practice of clinical psychology as it is to sociology, political science, and economics. Values result in beliefs, and no beliefs exist without value dimensions. Values result in character traits, and no such traits exist without value dimensions. Value structures are present in the evolution of all human traits and beliefs, and the knowledge of these value structures is basic cognitive value science. Hartman's formal model of value phenomena and its derivative value profiling methodology provide the foundations of basic cognitive science and give rise to valuecentric cognitive science and its application, axiological psychology.

Unknown in all previous centuries, axiological psychology will emerge and prevail in the twenty-first century. My research supporting Hartman's work needs replication by independent investigators in order to achieve a critical mass of credibility and leap into popular culture and politics. The conservative aspect of science demands evidence, proof, facts, and ruthless empirical support all along the way. My work is a successful pilot study, demonstrating feasibility and practicality. I challenge others to replicate these empirical findings that support axiological psychology

I ask critics who are steeped in traditional ways of thinking about emotions, motivations, and behaviors to reflect seriously on these empirical findings. Do they indeed support a precise cognitive science of emotions and motivations? "Axiological psychology" may carry a surplus of meanings associated with earlier failed attempts to build a system of "moral psychology." The term may also carry surplus negative meanings associated with popular beliefs that equate morality itself with religious or humanist morality. The concept of a morality based on science, an empirical/normative science of values and morals, remains alien to popular culture as well as to most educated people. This must change!

Popular equating of morality as such with religious morality confuses many and limits what can and must be done. Pioneering a new approach to morality likely will take several generations of grass roots consolidation to launch a bottom up revolution. I doubt that axiological psychology, empirical/normative value science, will benefit much from a top down revolution. This makes transforming today's elemental 3-R education into 4-R education all the more important. This is where axiological consciousness can play a vital role.

Psychology originally broke from its mother discipline of philosophy over the importance of empiricism. Ironically, my profession now converges with philosophical thought in constructing axiological psychology. My story emphasizes the failure of psychology to investigate the scientific nature of values and morals and their clinical relevance, and Hartman's discovery of a means of doing so. My work integrating this discovery with psychology gives rise to axiological psychology. Reading and understanding Hartman's work inspired me to pick up where he left off and to go where psychologists like Allport, Kohlberg, and Rokeach failed to go.

Subsequent chapters present hard data supporting Hartman's findings and his belief that the structure of value can be known and measured. I undertake the task with humility and excitement, knowing that I am defending an ingenious formal model of value and moral phenomena not conceived by me, but proven valid by me by employing the best clinical tests and measures available to me in my profession of psychology.

LEON POMEROY*

* Recently retired from private practice and from the Outpatient Clinic of the Department of Veterans Affairs at Brooklyn, Dr. Pomeroy devotes full time to the advancement of Hartman's legacy in science and to the advancement of tomorrow's psychology today, based on Hartman's discoveries, and known as the New Moral Psychology.