psychology which include The Dynamics of Human Adjust-
ment and The Dynamics of Parent-Child Relationships.

As is explained in the text, the terms "ego" and "self" have
been used because it is believed that there are two concepts
which need separate terms in order to avoid confusion. Ego
refers to the self as object--the self which perceives, thinks
and acts--and which would be described by an outside ob-
server. Used in this sense ego is, to all intents and purposes,
identical with the ego as used in psychoanalytical literature.
The ego is the objective self as it might be observed by a
behaviorist. The self, on the other hand, is the subjective self
as it is perceived, conceived, valued and responded to by the
individual himself. The self is wholly subjective and cor-
responds to the "phenomenal self" described in the current
phenomenological approach to the study of human nature.
I am sure that Freud has never before been classed as a be-
haviorist; quite the opposite, he has been repeatedly chal-
lenged and criticized because he draws conclusions from
evidence that is not reproducible. But Freud with his interest
in understanding his patient as a functioning organism using
whatever evidence he has access to about his patient and in-
terpreting what his patient says to him seems quite the be-
haviorist as contrasted with those who profess the phenomeno-
logical point of view. Although Dr. Snygg assures me that he
does not limit his evidence in studying an individual to the
individual's introspective reports and indeed states in his
book (with Combs), "Introspection is not a valid way of
reconstructing the field, which can only be reconstructed from
behavior," ¹ when it comes right down to it, the only kind of
evidence that these writers accept is that which comes from
the individual being studied. "What the individual is seeking
to preserve is not his physical self but the self of which he is

-vi-