lol, this exercise has been fun... I agree with what you have written. Rogers has to be, as you've rightly stated, kept in the context of the period and ideas he was writing in.
I can see how he is abosulely correct in his theories; however, as much of his reasoning is inherently circular, I am left with the issue of "great theory, so what?". I mean if it is a self fulfilling theory that you can neither prove or disprove, what have you gained? Well the answer is he challenged us to think outside the accepted box of his time. So that is important.
I prefer harder science based methods of discovery such as behaviouralism, which all true sciences people would argue isn't really hard science b/c you can't control human reaction... c'est la vie, the point is it is the best evidence based group of psychological studies there is to date... although I took all of this over a decade ago and I am suprised I remember any of it... who'd a thought!
Congrats on the MA application... I've been playing with that myself... doing an online MA via the uni of Athabasca (Canadian Uni) with a broader perspective. I did an honours history in undergrad and I would like to have more of a generalized MA program... history, after all, is just writing stories, using footnotes, for credit. I actually proved to one of my profs that I could use the exact same sources and write papers that would be diametrically opposed and yet totally supportable based on these same sources. He was very surprised and thought it was comical.
Cheers, Levi
PS this has been fun, let me know if you want feedback on anything else