This article reviews humanistic critiques of traditional diagnoses, manualized treatments, and randomized controlled trial research. Humanistic psychology must more aggressively elaborate its alternatives to these mainstream approaches if it is to realize its potential as a human science capable of transforming the field. Humanistic alternatives to these approaches are explored in general and discussed specifically within the context of experiential personal constructivism, 1 theoretical approach to humanistic psychology. However, this research agenda could be applied across many humanistic approaches to clinical psychology and, in so doing, make for an intellectually (and empirically) rigorous defense of theories that respect human experience.All appearances to the contrary, psychology, particularly clinical psychology, is in the midst of a great crisis. 1 On the one hand, researchers spend more time, money, and effort learning ever more about even less. In so doing, they celebrate theories that reductionistically assume that theories are unnecessary as they discover more facts. The field accepts theories that assume that the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM)-current version contains (or at least the DSM-infinity will contain) the truth about psychopathology, ignoring viewpoints that would suggest that psychopathology cannot be understood outside of theories of person. The profession standardizes around models of care that are based on artificial, reductionistic, often irrelevant, empirically validated treatments, disen-