Feist−Feist: Theories of
Personality, Seventh
EditionIII. Humanistic/Existential
Theories- May: Existential
Psychology
(^360) © The McGraw−Hill
Companies, 2009
354 Part III Humanistic/Existential Theories
that his actions were in some way connected to his early experiences with his un-
predictable mother and his “crazy” sister. He was trapped in his unconscious belief
that unpredictable and “crazy” women must be cared for, and this intentionality
made it impossible for him to discover new ways of relating to Nicole.
Care, Love, and Will
Philip had a history of taking care of others, especially women. He had given Nicole
a “job” with his company that permitted her to work at home and earn enough money
to live on. In addition, after she ended her affair with Craig and gave up her “crazy”
plan to move across the country, Philip gave her several thousand dollars. He previ-
ously had felt a duty to take care of his two wives and, before that, his mother and
sister.
In spite of Philip’s pattern of taking care of women, he never really learned to
care forthem. To care for someone means to recognize that person as a fellow human
being, to identify with that person’s pain or joy, guilt or pity. Care is an active
process, the opposite of apathy. “Care is a state in which something does matter”
(May, 1969b, p. 289).
Care is not the same as love, but it is the source of love. To love means to care,
to recognize the essential humanity of the other person, to have an active regard for
that person’s development. May (1953) defined loveas a “delight in the presence of
the other person and an affirming of [that person’s] value and development as much
as one’s own” (p. 206). Without care there can be no love—only empty sentimental-
ity or transient sexual arousal. Care is also the source of will.
May (1969b) called will“the capacity to organize one’s self so that movement
in a certain direction or toward a certain goal may take place” (p. 218). He distin-
guished between will and wish, saying that
“will” requires self-consciousness; “wish” does not. “Will” implies some
possibility of either/or choice; “wish” does not. “Wish” gives the warmth, the
content, the imagination, the child’s play, the freshness, and the richness to “will.”
“Will” gives the self-direction, the maturity to “wish.” “Will” protects “wish,”
permits it to continue without running risks which are too great. (p. 218)
Union of Love and Will
Modern society, May (1969b) claimed, is suffering from an unhealthy division of
love and will. Love has become associated with sensual love or sex, whereas will has
come to mean a dogged determination or will power. Neither concept captures the
true meaning of these two terms. When love is seen as sex, it becomes temporary and
lacking in commitment; there is no will, but only wish. When will is seen as will
power, it becomes self-serving and lacking in passion; there is no care, but only ma-
nipulation.
There are biological reasons why love and will are separated. When children
first come into the world, they are at one with the universe (Umwelt), their mother
(Mitwelt), and themselves (Eigenwelt). “Our needs are met without self-conscious
effort on our part, as, biologically, in the early condition of nursing at the mother’s
breast. This is the first freedom, the first ‘yes’ ” (May, 1969b, p. 284).