ABSTRACT In this article, I discuss the continuing relevance of the theoretical perspectives of Rogers and Gendlin for persons with psychosis experience (PE) and practitioners of person-centered therapy (PCT). Persons with PE have indicated in recent surveys and qualitative studies that they experienced a ‘turning point’ in their lives when they encountered persons who took a genuine interest in them, communicated acceptance of PE, discussed ‘voice hearing’ in normal language as part of normal experience and conveyed a genuine message of hope. The values and principles of PCT will be compared with those found in cognitive-behavior therapy for psychosis (CBTp) that, like PCT, claims to uphold the recovery-oriented values of persons with PE. Recent claims from proponents of CBTp that it is not primarily a technical therapy that undervalues the importance of human relationships will be discussed. I will argue in favor of a process-oriented therapeutic relationship as opposed to the primacy of cognition advocated in a ‘manualized’ CBTp. In doing so, I will discuss the distinctive contributions of Rogers, Gendlin and the subsequent work of Prouty, that continue to challenge the dominant biomedical models of service delivery that favor CBTp over other therapies.

中文翻译：

---

理解精神病的经历：罗杰斯和简德林的遗产

摘要 在本文中，我讨论了 Rogers 和 Gendlin 的理论观点对精神病患者 (PE) 和以人为中心的治疗 (PCT) 实践者的持续相关性。体育人士在最近的调查和定性研究中表示，当他们遇到真正对他们感兴趣的人、表达对体育的接受、用正常语言讨论“声音听力”作为他们生活的一部分时，他们经历了人生的“转折点”。正常的体验并传达了真正的希望信息。PCT 的价值观和原则将与精神病认知行为疗法 (CBTp) 中发现的价值观和原则进行比较，后者与 PCT 一样声称支持 PE 患者以康复为导向的价值观。CBTp 的支持者最近声称，它主要不是一种低估人际关系重要性的技术疗法。我将主张以过程为导向的治疗关系，而不是“手动化”CBTp 中提倡的认知至上。在此过程中，我将讨论 Rogers、Gendlin 和 Prouty 后续工作的独特贡献，这些贡献继续挑战支持 CBTp 而非其他疗法的主要生物医学服务提供模型。