chapter
stringlengths 1.97k
1.53M
| path
stringlengths 47
241
|
|---|---|
Adler’s approach to psychotherapy has been the topic of numerous books and chapters (e.g., Dinkmeyer, Dinkmeyer, Jr., & Sperry, 1979; Mosak, 1995; Nikelly, 1971a; Watts & Carlson, 1999), including specific books on family therapy and lifestyle counseling for people with disabilities (Rule, 1984; Sherman & Dinkmeyer, 1987). It is generally accepted that Adlerian psychotherapists have no specific technique, but rather are eclectic in their approach. There are, however, a few key elements to Individual Psychology. First is the goal of understanding the style of life. Once the therapist understands the style of life, they can understand most everything the patient does. The therapist then helps the patient to strengthen their social interest. This involves a practical application of social interest: reorienting and readjusting the patient’s style of life. Underlying the success of therapy in Individual Psychology is a supportive therapeutic relationship. Adler believed in facing his clients, on an equal basis. The therapist helps to educate the patient on the nature of therapy and the goals that might be pursued, which involves helping the client to recognize the mistaken style of life and goals they have been pursuing in the past. In this way, the therapist helps the client in their own creative process of personality change (Dinkmeyer, Dinkmeyer, Jr., & Sperry, 1979; Mosak, 1995). This approach shares many similarities with both the client-centered approach popularized by Carl Rogers and the behavioral-cognitive approaches developed by Albert Ellis and Aaron Beck.
Understanding the Style of Life
Psychotherapy is about helping people to change their lives for the better. Thus, it involves looking forward, despite whether or not we need to know what has happened in the past (and different theories consider the importance of the past in radically different ways). According to Adler, “in order to understand a person’s future we must understand his style of life” (pg. 99; Adler, 1929a). The style of life, and the associated scheme of apperception, brings all experience into line with the person’s fictional final goal. So, if we can understand how a person is living their life, if we understand their style of life, we can help them to understand it as well, and then perhaps make changes for the better. So, how might we go about understanding the style of life?
As Freud and Breuer had before him, one area of interest for Adler was the analysis of dreams. However, Adler did not distinguish between the conscious and unconscious, or between waking and sleep. He considered dreams to be a reflection of the style of life, and the individual’s striving for superiority. Thus, dreams do not hold any special meaning (Adler, 1912b/1963, 1928, 1929a, 1932b/1964). As such, their interpretation can be relatively straight-forward:
Take, for instance, our knowledge that mankind as a whole is really cowardly. From this general fact we can presuppose that the largest number of dreams will be dreams of fear, danger, or anxiety. And so if we know a person and see that his goal is to escape the solution of life’s problems, we can guess that he often dreams that he falls down. Such a dream is like a warning to him: “Do not go on - you will be defeated.” (pg. 155; Adler, 1929a)
Of greater interest to Adler was the analysis of early memories. He believed that the earliest childhood recollections provided valuable information, and he did not let a single patient go without having been asked about them:
The information regarding memory is significant. Memory is an activity. It is based on the life style, which here steps in by selecting from old impressions a single one. This leads us to the question, why this single one? In it the entire life style resonates. (pg. 197; Adler, 1932b/1964)
It is not even important if the memory is, in fact, true. A “memory” may be created by a child based on their conscious experience in order to reflect an attitude, or an emotional tone, if that is necessary to pursue their unique, personal goal (Adler, 1928). Accordingly, if we can obtain a person’s earliest memories, we make reasonable predictions regarding the future course of their life. However, early memories are not reasons for behavior, but they are hints. It is also true that some forgotten memories (or unconscious memories) may have played a role in the creation of the style of life, but they are obviously more difficult to obtain, so they defy analysis. But, Adler did not consider them to be any different in content and tone from the conscious memories; the unconscious psyche enacts the same style of life toward the same final goal (as with dreams; Adler, 1929a, 1931a, 1964). There may, however, be some interesting differences in early memories based on culture. For example, Wang (2006b) examined the earliest memories of European American and Taiwanese college students in response to five cue words: self, mother, family, friend, and surroundings. In both groups, memories for ‘mother’ came from an earlier time than memories for ‘self,’ and memories for ‘mother,’ ‘family,’ and ‘friend’ were more socially oriented. The European Americans typically had memories from earlier ages, and their memories tended to report more specific events and to focus on their personal roles and autonomy in those memories. Thus, early memories not only reflect one’s style of life, but do so within a cultural context.
In two major case studies published by Adler, The Case of Miss R. (1929b) and The Case of Mrs. A (1931b), the subtitle of each book refers to the style of life. In the latter book, he concludes by saying: “I have simply wanted to show you the COHERENCE OF A LIFE-STYLE” (pg. 46; Adler, 1931b). Moving well beyond neurosis, both Adler and his son Kurt applied the study of the style of life to patients suffering from psychotic disorders, including schizophrenia and manic phase of bipolar disorder (Adler, 1929/1964; Kurt Adler, 1959). Kurt Adler does an excellent job of summarizing Individual Psychology, and he quotes his father’s description of neurosis and psychosis as attempts by a person to avoid clashing with reality and exposing their weakness and inferiority. However, these are “failed” styles of life, because they lead to an avoidance of social interest, which is necessary for solving life’s challenges in cooperation with others. In the case of a disorder such as schizophrenia, the child begins life with extreme feelings of inferiority, which lead to an exaggerated fictional goal. Subsequently, it is more difficult to achieve any success in life, which creates a vicious cycle of failure and greater distrust of others. Finally, as the individual fails to develop social-emotional capacities, common sense, or logic, they retreat into the private world that accommodates their exaggerated fictional personal goal. The subsequent treatment of psychotic patients is difficult, particularly if the therapist expects too much. Kurt Adler extends his father’s caution that the therapist must be aware of their own style of life, set aside any personal expectations, and never expect anything of the patient (Kurt Adler, 1959). As we will see below, Harry Stack Sullivan also paid special attention to psychodynamic processes in schizophrenia.
Discussion Question: What are your earliest memories, especially of your mother, father, and sense of self? Can you see a clear relationship between the content of those memories and your style of life? How does your life plan fit with those memories?
Strengthening Social Interest and Reorienting the Style of Life
Adler believed that everyone has some degree of social interest, but in neurotic and psychotic patients there is relatively less. He described Freudian transference as an expression of the patient’s social interest, directed toward the therapist. Resistance is simply the patient lacking the courage (i.e., feeling too inferior) to return to social usefulness and cooperation with others. The therapist must, therefore, help the patient to strengthen their social interest and reorient their style of life. Since the style of life is creatively formed, it becomes important to understand how and when the failed style of life began. Just as the individual took time and was selective in the formation of their failed style of life, the therapist must take time to understand it and educate the patient about it (Adler, 1913b/1963, 1929/1964, 1930c, 1932b/1964, 1958).
Individual Psychology stresses enormously that the psychological development of a person can reach a normal condition only when he can achieve the necessary degree of ability to cooperate. (pg. 199; Adler, 1932b/1964)
It is almost impossible to exaggerate the value of an increase in social feeling…The feeling of worth and value is heightened, giving courage and an optimistic view…The individual feels at home in life and feels his existence to be worthwhile just so far as he is useful to others… (pg. 79; Adler, 1929/1964)
There are numerous ways in which a therapist can help a client to increase their social interest. It begins with the therapist openly communicating with and accepting the patient, which is, of course, a social interaction. This is especially effective if the therapist displays social feeling themselves, while also helping the patient to recognize the patient’s value as a human being (as well as the value of other people). The therapist can point out that if other people, including the therapist, had the same values, goals, and cognitive orientation as the patient then others would also have the same problems as the patient. The therapist can then nudge the patient toward their own niche, where they can feel comfortable with others without fearing being the loser in personal interactions. And finally, the therapist can encourage the patient to get involved in concerns outside themselves (Nikelly, 1971b). Each of these ways of encouraging social interest can be a part of the reorientation and readjustment process, the “working-through” phase of therapy, in which the patient gains insight into their style of life, confronts their goals, and realizes that they are capable of making choices and decisions (Nikelly & Bostrom, 1971). The patient must be encouraged to understand and believe that they have the power to implement their insights and change their life.
The client must not be allowed to think of himself as the victim of past circumstances but must come to recognize that the problem is his alone and that he alone will solve it. In contrast, emphasis on past history may lead to rationalization and intellectualization without appropriate action. The client learns more and more about his problem and does less and less about it. (pg. 103; Nikelly & Bostrom, 1971)
Group Psychotherapy and Family Therapy
Our discussion of Adlerian psychotherapy would not be complete without mentioning group psychotherapy, and in the same breath, family therapy. Group psychotherapy probably has multiple origins, having been tried by a variety of independent therapists. In 1921, Adler began interviewing and counseling parents in front of a group of professionals. This fit well within his perspective on the three life tasks and social interest, since he felt that parents, family, and other important people, such as school teachers, needed to be involved in the development of children. Adler soon discovered that these settings led to personal growth in everyone present, establishing a form of group therapy that may be the oldest still in use. Strictly speaking, Individual Psychology does not prescribe any specific techniques for group psychotherapy, but rather, there is Individual Psychology for patients in a private setting as well as for patients receiving therapy in a group setting (Corsini, 1971).
Involving the parents in a child’s therapy is, quite obviously, the beginning of family therapy. However, when Adler established his child guidance centers, they were open for parents, teachers, social workers, and other interested people to be able to observe the process of psychotherapy. Adler felt it was important for everyone involved in the development of children to be educated in the important process of Individual Psychology, and the same was true of Rudolf Dreikurs, a student of Adler who opened family education centers in the United States (the first in Chicago in 1937; see Dreikurs, 1950; Sherman & Dinkmeyer, 1987). This education may be particularly important for the parents, whose attitude can have a profound influence on whether psychotherapy for a child is successful or not. As for teachers, understanding Individual Psychology can help them to put a child’s academic performance into a context that helps to explain it as a style of life aimed toward a particular goal, even if that goal is dysfunctional and interferes with schoolwork (Friedmann, 1930; Spiel & Birnbaum, 1930). Overall, the goal of family therapy is to improve communication and cooperation amongst all members of the family, and to help parents avoid the most difficult problems (Alexandra Adler, 1930a; Adler, 1930d).
In our conversations with the parents we relentlessly try to make them realize that children must not be beaten. Beating can only lead to a discouragement of the child, and we know well enough that this can make the child worse and not better…We always dissuade parents from engaging in warfare with the child, since the child inevitably remains in the end the stronger party. (pp. 110-111; Alexandra Adler, 1930a)
Discussion Question: Have you ever experienced group psychotherapy, family therapy, or anything similar (or know anyone who has)? What advantages did you experience, or what do you think you might experience if you were to work on your relationships with family members or other people? | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/04%3A_Alfred_Adler_and_Harry_Stack_Sullivan/4.04%3A_Alderian_Psychotherapy.txt |
Several aspects of Harry Stack Sullivan’s life history are quite strange, and so, according to some biographers, was Harry Stack Sullivan himself. He was born on February 21st, 1892, though his medical records say he was born in 1886, in the rural community of Norwich, New York. His father’s name was Timothy Sullivan and his mother’s name seems to have been Ella Stack, but it remains unclear whether her name was actually Ella. That is the name that appears on Sullivan’s birth certificate and on her death certificate, but in the family records her name was listed as Ellen, and on Sullivan’s baptismal certificate it was listed as Ellina. Timothy Sullivan was a hired-hand on the Stack farm (or another farm nearby), whose father had died when Timothy Sullivan was young, leaving the family quite poor. There was a great deal of discrimination against Irish Catholics at the time, and Timothy and Ella struggled. They lived in a poor part of town, where there was an improperly drained canal that was believed to be a breeding ground for “black diphtheria.” The Sullivans had two children before Harry, both born in February, who died in terrible convulsions before reaching the fall of their first year. When Harry was born in February, his mother was terrified that he would die as well (Alexander, 1990; Evans, 1996; Perry, 1982).
When Sullivan was 2 ½ he was sent to Smyrna, New York to live with his maternal grandmother. Where his mother was for the next few years is unknown. It was rumored that she had a nervous breakdown, and may have been kept hidden away in the attic of the barn until she recovered. Although she eventually returned to public view, she was never really Sullivan’s caretaker again. Neither was his father. When Sullivan’s maternal grandfather died, there was no one to run the farm, which provided the support for him and his grandmother. Being poor himself, Timothy Sullivan was granted control of the farm. However, the Stack family had always considered Timothy Sullivan to be beneath them (the Stack family had a prestigious ancestry), so the legal documents were quite demeaning to Timothy Sullivan, and the farm’s name remained the Stack farm. Timothy Sullivan worked hard, but withdrew into himself and had little contact with others (Alexander, 1990; Evans, 1996; Perry, 1982).
Sullivan did very well in school, but had few friends due to the common prejudice and discrimination. At one point, the Ku Klux Klan burned a cross in front of the Stack farm. His only friend was a boy who was 5 years older, Clarence Bellinger. The two were very close throughout school, and both went on to become psychiatrists. However, after high school, they never contacted one another again. Bellinger always spoke poorly of Sullivan, and Sullivan simply never spoke of Bellinger. The reasons why are unknown, but it may have something to do with the fact that neither one of them ever married, and Sullivan was widely regarded as a homosexual. When Sullivan was 35, he took in a foster son, who may also have been a psychotic patient. Late in life, Sullivan seems to have referred to the young man as a “lover” (Alexander, 1990). If this was their relationship when his companion was only 15, and if his companion was a former patient, it was both unethical and criminal. It is tempting to suggest that Sullivan’s sexual development and alleged later actions may have been influenced by an inappropriate relationship with Bellinger while Sullivan was still quite young. However, the truth is not known, and there are other gaps in the history of Sullivan’s life (Alexander, 1990; Evans, 1996; Perry, 1982).
Two family members helped Sullivan with his education during his school years. His mother’s sister Margaret, a schoolteacher, brought him many books and introduced him to a wide range of intellectual ideas. His father’s brother, Will, was a respected lawyer and then a judge who was influential in applying psychological issues to the law. He helped to foster Sullivan’s interest in human problems. This aunt and uncle both later helped Sullivan with college finances, and they helped him to win a prestigious New York State Regents’ Scholarship to Cornell University. However, Sullivan was not prepared for college. After a fair start, his grades dropped drastically. He became involved with a group of boys who were illegally obtaining and selling chemicals. Only Sullivan was caught, and he was convicted of mail fraud. His whereabouts for the next 2 years are unknown. He may have been in jail, but there is evidence to suggest that he was hospitalized at Bellevue Hospital following a psychotic break. Later in life he was friends with the renowned A. A. Brill (the psychiatrist who first translated many of Freud’s books into English), and Brill was working at Bellevue at the time. Sullivan was also friends later in life with another employee who worked at Bellevue at that time, and no simple explanation can be given for his friendship with two men who worked at Bellevue Hospital during the time Sullivan’s whereabouts are unknown (Alexander, 1990; Evans, 1996; Perry, 1982).
In 1911, Sullivan reappeared and entered the Chicago College of Medicine and Surgery. He finished his coursework in 1915, but did not receive a degree, possibly due to owing the school money. He worked briefly as an industrial surgeon in a steel mill, and in 1916 joined the Illinois National Guard. After only 5 months he was released on medical grounds, supposedly due to a broken jaw. He then disappeared for a while, later claiming that he received 75 hours of psychoanalysis during the disappearance. But where that occurred, or with whom, is again unknown. In 1917, he was finally awarded his medical degree, and he joined the U. S. Army. His application contained many inaccuracies and falsifications, including lying about his age. Nonetheless, he was commissioned as a lieutenant, promoted to captain at the end of World War I, and spent 2 years moving between Chicago and Washington, DC. In 1920, he left the Army, and again a year of his life seems to be missing. In November, 1921, he joined St. Elizabeth’s Hospital in Washington, DC, and began his career in psychiatry (Alexander, 1990; Evans, 1996; Perry, 1982).
St. Elizabeth’s Hospital was one of best psychiatric hospitals of the time (and remains so today), under the leadership of the renowned William Alanson White, a pioneer in applying dynamic psychotherapy to psychotic patients. After a year, however, there was no permanent position for Sullivan. So, he applied for a position at the Sheppard and Enoch Pratt Hospital in Baltimore (as prestigious as St. Elizabeth’s both then and now). White’s letter of recommendation for Sullivan was lukewarm and vague. He described Sullivan as “better equipped than the average State Hospital assistant,” but he also acknowledged that he didn’t really know Sullivan because of Sullivan’s personal distance from other people (Alexander, 1990). Nonetheless, Sullivan was hired for his first clinical psychiatric position at Sheppard Pratt (as it is more commonly known - Note: The author’s wife had the privilege of working at Sheppard Pratt early in her career), and he began an exciting and innovative period of eight years, during which he did the most important clinical work of his career, including innovative techniques for the treatment of schizophrenia in young patients (Alexander, 1990; Evans, 1996; Perry, 1982). Today, the Sheppard Pratt Health System includes the Harry Stack Sullivan Day Hospital, a partial hospitalization program assisting adults with severe mental illness, including psychotic disorders.
During his time at Sheppard Pratt, Sullivan became close friends with a young psychiatrist named Clara Thompson. They shared an interest in questioning Freud’s concepts of the feminine psyche and other challenges to orthodox psychoanalysis. As Sullivan became particularly interested in the work of Sandor Ferenczi (who accompanied Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung on Freud’s only trip to America, but later split with Freud), he encourage Thompson to go to Budapest and be psychoanalyzed by Ferenczi. She did so, and upon her return she was Sullivan’s training analyst, and Sullivan was later admitted to the American Psychoanalytic Society. The two remained close throughout their lives, and supposedly agreed to marry one another, but both quickly broke off the engagement the very next morning (Alexander, 1990; Evans, 1996; Perry, 1982).
In 1930, Sullivan moved to New York City to establish a private practice and conduct research. However, he failed to make much money, incurred some family debts following his father’s death, and he filed for bankruptcy in 1932. The next few years were interesting, but unstable. He was the driving force behind the establishment of the William Alanson White Foundation in 1933, and he actively collaborated with two colleagues at Yale University (where they likely had an influence on Erik Erikson’s work). However, one of those colleagues died in 1939, and Sullivan immersed himself in a project studying Black adolescents in Tennessee and Mississippi. He then settled in Bethesda, Maryland, where he spent the rest of his career (Alexander, 1990; Evans, 1996; Perry, 1982).
The year 1939 marked the beginning of a highly productive period for Sullivan. Dexter Bullard, the director of a psychiatric hospital named Chestnut Lodge, provided Sullivan with steady consulting opportunities. This provided Sullivan financial security, and through Chestnut Lodge he met many influential psychiatrists in the Washington, DC area. William Alanson White had died in 1937, and Sullivan delivered a series of public lectures, which became the First William Alanson White Memorial Lectures, and which were released as Sullivan’s only book published while he was still alive: Conceptions of Modern Psychiatry (Sullivan, 1940). The White Foundation established the journal Psychiatry, and the Washington School of Psychiatry. Sullivan also encouraged the White Foundation to establish a second training program in New York City, and the core faculty included Clara Thompson and Erich Fromm. The second program is known today as the William Alanson White Institute. When, in 1941, Karen Horney was disqualified as a training analyst by the New York Psychoanalytic Society, Clara Thompson walked out of the meeting, and helped to establish a rival Association for the Advancement of Psychoanalysis, with Horney as its dean. A series of political battles between opposing psychoanalytic societies followed, in many ways pitting followers of Freud against those whose interests and relationships were closer to Sullivan (Alexander, 1990; Evans, 1996; Perry, 1982).
In 1945, Sullivan became quite ill, and was urged to retire for his health. Instead, Sullivan accepted a new challenge. He was invited by Brock Chisholm, who was soon to become the first director of the World Health Organization, to serve as a consultant for the post-World War II International Congress on Mental Health. Sullivan focused on applying psychiatric principles to problems of world peace, including educating children on values for peace. He helped to establish the World Federation for Mental Health, and participated in the UNESCO Seminar on Childhood Education Toward World-Mindedness. In January 1949, following a particularly frustrating meeting of the World Federation for Mental Health, Sullivan died in a hotel room in Paris, France. He was cremated, as he had requested, and his ashes were buried at Arlington National Cemetery, honoring his service to the U. S. Army Medical Corps during World War I. A committee was established by the White Foundation to publish his papers. Between 1953 and 1972, the committee published seven books of Sullivan’s work, ensuring that his theories remained available to the fields of psychiatry and psychology (Alexander, 1990; Evans, 1996; Perry, 1982).
Placing Sullivan in Context: America’s Psychodynamic Theorist
Harry Stack Sullivan was an enigmatic character. His parents were poor and, apparently, both suffered from mental illness; his siblings died during their infancies. The region where he was raised was extremely prejudiced against Irish Catholics, and the KKK burned a cross in front of their home. As a student, Sullivan was very successful, but legal problems (due to his own bad choices) and presumed hospitalizations for his own mental illness delayed his success in college and medical school. And yet, he went on to become the most influential psychodynamic theorist born in America, worked at two highly prestigious psychiatric hospitals, co-founded an influential foundation, and has a hospital named after him. Like Adler, however, his contributions seldom receive proper recognition, and he remains somewhat obscure.
Sullivan’s most interesting and enduring contributions relate to his relationship with William Alanson White. Although Sullivan only worked with White briefly, and White’s letter of recommendation for Sullivan’s next position admits that White considered Sullivan to be distant and hard to get to know, Sullivan vigorously pursued White’s interest in the treatment of schizophrenia. Sullivan helped to found the William Alanson White Foundation, which established two psychiatric training institutes and the journal Psychiatry, and Sullivan delivered the First William Alanson White Memorial Lectures. Today, the Sheppard Pratt Health System includes the Harry Stack Sullivan Day Hospital (for the treatment of psychotic disorders). | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/04%3A_Alfred_Adler_and_Harry_Stack_Sullivan/4.05%3A_A_Brief_Biography_of_Harry_Stack_Sullivan.txt |
Sullivan shares two particular distinctions with Adler: his influence is extraordinarily wide ranging, and he is not very well known. It has been suggested that he was the most original and creative American-born psychiatrist (Chapman & Chapman, 1980). In Corsini & Wedding’s Current Psychotherapies (1995), Sullivan is mentioned in ten of the fourteen chapters, including those written by Albert Ellis, Carl Rogers, Aaron Beck, and Rollo May, as well as the chapters written about Sigmund Freud, Alfred Adler, and Carl Jung. Due largely to his emphasis on interpersonal relationships, he is acknowledged by Jean Baker Miller and other founding members of the Stone Center (see Chapter 9; Jordan, et al., 1991; Miller, 1976). So how can he be relatively unknown? According to Evans (1996), there are a number of reasons for Sullivan’s lack of popularity, but two seem to stand out. First, Sullivan did not publish much during his lifetime, and what he did publish was somewhat poorly written and difficult to understand. Second, Sullivan was apparently a very difficult and strange man, whose writings often included derogatory statements about psychiatry and psychiatrists (even though this was his own field). Whatever the reasons are for his lack of renown, Sullivan has had a significant influence on psychiatry and psychology nonetheless.
Whereas Adler considered relationships to be an obvious consequence of social interest, the primary factor in Individual Psychology is the striving for superiority. Social interest and interpersonal relationships, of course, make healthy superiority possible. For Sullivan, however, it was the interpersonal relationships themselves that were paramount:
One achieves mental health to the extent that one becomes aware of one’s interpersonal relations…It is part of the framework that supports all explanations of what is going on, what might be going on, and what will presently be going on…It is the necessary formula to which everything must be assimilable, if it is therapy. (pg. 207; Sullivan, 1940)
Euphoria, Tension, and Security
Sullivan believed that we exist somewhere between the states of absolute euphoria and absolute tension. Absolute euphoria is a state of utter well-being, which, unfortunately, is not really possible. The closest we can come to experiencing absolute euphoria is in the deep sleep of a newborn infant. Tension is the alternative state to euphoria, and tension is very much a part of our lives. It arises from two sources: needs and anxiety. There are two basic types of needs: those that arise from actual biological needs (food, water, air, etc.), and those that are cultural or learned. In real life, however, these types of needs cannot be separated. An infant cannot satisfy its biological needs, it must be cared for. Thus, Sullivan talked routinely about a mothering need, which is a need for an intimate, interpersonal relationship. When the mother does indeed care for the infant, the infant experiences this as tenderness, and the infant develops an ongoing need for tenderness. Thus, through the need for a mother and the need for tenderness, the infant finds itself in a world in which it needs interpersonal relationships for continued survival and psychological development (Chapman & Chapman, 1980; Lundin, 1979; Mullahy & Melinek, 1983; Sullivan, 1940, 1953).
Anxiety is the result of real or imagined threats, and can be experienced by the infant or caused by an anxious mother. In either case, it can be particularly intense in an infant because they cannot specifically do anything about it. Furthermore, unlike biological needs that can be met quite specifically (e.g., a hungry child can be fed), how can anxiety be satisfied? The answer, according to Sullivan, is through the pursuit of interpersonal security. In other words, a sense of security, the alternative to anxiety, can be obtained only through relationships that provide the child with tenderness and empathy. Sullivan used the term empathy to describe “the peculiar emotional linkage that subtends the relationship of the infant with other significant people - the mother or the nurse” (pg. 17; Sullivan, 1940). Long before infants show any sense of understanding emotional expressions, they seem to be able to share in emotional feelings, through what Sullivan considered an innate capacity for empathy. Even an infant is not, however, merely a recipient of the relationships in which it is involved, it is an active and engaged person. Likewise, children do not simply wait and hope for security, they actively engage in thoughts and behaviors that Sullivan called security operations. Security operations serve to maintain our sense of self-esteem, or self-respect, and they often begin with an emphatic sense of “I.” Unfortunately, this leads to an odd paradox: the concept that we can have self-esteem without being in relationship with others:
It is one’s prestige, one’s status, the importance which people feel one is entitled to, the respect that one can expect from people…that dominate awareness. These things are so focal in interpersonal relations of our day and age that the almost unassailable conviction develops…that each of us, as defined by the animal organism that we were at birth, are unique, isolated individuals in the human world… (pg. 219; Sullivan, 1964)
Dynamisms and the Self-System
Underlying Sullivan’s emphasis on interpersonal relationships is the fundamental concept of dynamism. Similar to the physical universe, our psychological environment involves ongoing transfers of energy (in the psychological sense) between ourselves and the people we interact with, and this is a dynamic back-and-forth system (i.e., a relationship). A dynamism is a relatively enduring pattern of energy transformation that allows us to characterize a living organism. Each organism, or each person, has many dynamisms, but the ones of particular interest to psychiatrists, according to Sullivan, are those related to how we interact with others (Sullivan, 1953).
One of the most important dynamisms is the self-system. The self-system is somewhat unique, in that it integrates and provides meaning for all of the individual’s interactions and experiences; Sullivan referred to it as a secondary dynamism (secondary here refers to a higher level of processing, not secondary in importance; Sullivan, 1953). The self-system also integrates the security operations, and serves to protect the individual from tension. Chapman & Chapman (1980) offer a useful description of various ways in which the self-system utilizes security operations in the actions of a 3-year-old child:
1. When faced with an emotionally threatening situation, the child may lapse into stubborn silence.
2. When there is tension between the child and the demands of older children, the child will obstinately resist the efforts of the older children to get the child to conform to their desires.
3. When stressful interpersonal situations arise, the child will withdraw into solitary play.
4. In new, anxiety-provoking environments the child will physically cling to a familiar adult.
5. When anxiety arises between the child and others, the child may engage in meticulous play with inanimate objects (toys, coloring books, etc.).
6. When the child’s emotional needs are not met by others, they may regress into more immature behavior and speech.
By observing these behaviors, we can understand who this child is at this point in their life. For a 3-year-old, such behaviors are quite normal. However, such security operations would be considered less appropriate for an adult. And yet, sometimes these behaviors become part of the self-system of an adolescent, or an adult, and Sullivan referred to such instances as dynamisms of difficulty (Sullivan, 1956, 1972). When dynamisms of difficulty go into action, they fail to achieve a desired goal, or at best achieve only an unsatisfactory goal. Since they are relatively enduring, as are all dynamisms, they tend to characterize states of psychological illness, and would indicate the need for psychotherapy. As a curious side-note, while discussing the dynamism of the self-system, Sullivan appears to be the first person to have used the now well-known term significant other (Sullivan, 1953).
Another important type of dynamism is the personification. A newborn infant cannot really understand who their mother is, or who they themselves are, so the infant develops an image of the mother, the father, themselves, etc. These images, which can sometimes conflict with one another, are called personifications. For instance, when the mother feeds and comforts the infant, she is the “good” mother. But when she fails to display appropriate tenderness, or her own anxiety is expressed to and experienced by the infant, she is the “bad” mother. Later, as the child develops greater intellectual capacity and experience, these personifications are fused into a single mother. Similarly, the infant begins life with personifications of itself as sometimes “bad” and sometimes “good,” and later in life fuses these personifications as the adolescent begins to establish a clear identity (Chapman & Chapman, 1980; Mullahy & Melinek, 1983; Sullivan, 1953, 1964). As with all of the concepts we have discussed here, the process of personification continues into adulthood. A mother will develop her own personifications of the infant, which, as mentioned above, may be experienced by the infant. For example, if a baby is colicky (cries constantly and cannot be soothed), it can be very frustrating for a mother, especially a new mother. Her anxiety may lead to a personification of her baby as inconsolable and of herself as a “bad” mother. Her discomfort, then, in caring for her baby can be experienced by the baby, leading to the baby’s personification of her as a “bad” mother. The key here, according to Sullivan’s theory, is that neither the mother nor the baby is in any way bad or good, inconsolable or tender, except in relation to one another!
Sullivan described the personified self as those aspects of personality about which one is consciously aware. This provides important information for a psychotherapist, and pursuing information about the personified self is an important part of the psychiatric interview (Sullivan, 1954). During the interview, Sullivan recommended that the psychotherapist examine four aspects of personified self: what does the patient esteem and/or disparage about themselves; to what experiences is the patient’s self-esteem particularly and unreasonably vulnerable; what are the characteristic security operations employed when the patient is made anxious; and how great are the patient’s reserves of security? In addition to these important points, Sullivan also considered it essential for a psychotherapist to gain an impression of the whole interview situation, particularly with regard to the patient’s sense of proportion in terms of where they fit into life. By understanding the personified self, the patient’s knowledge of themselves, and how they view themselves within the context of their life, the psychotherapist can gain an understanding of what is realistically possible for the patient during the course of therapy (Sullivan, 1954).
Discussion Question: Sullivan described the personified self as knowing what you like or dislike about yourself, what experiences are particularly damaging to your self-esteem, your characteristic security operations, and how deep your reserves of security are. Consider each of these points, and provide yourself with a self-evaluation. Overall, do you see yourself as a relatively healthy, secure person, or someone whose life is plagues by tension and anxiety?
Developmental Epochs
Sullivan considered an understanding of the course of human development to be essential to understanding individuals. He described seven developmental epochs: infancy, childhood, the juvenile era, preadolescence, early adolescence, late adolescence, and adulthood (Sullivan, 1953, 1954, 1964). These developmental stages represent a gradual unfolding of the individual’s capacity for effective interpersonal relationships or, in other words, the individual’s ability to fit into the social structure of their environment (Chrzanowski, 1977; Lundin, 1979). As we all know, children maintain very different relationships than adults do, and we would not expect children to have adult-like relationships. Thus, when attempting to evaluate a person’s state of mental health, which Sullivan equated with their ability to form healthy relationships, we clearly need to understand something about what constitutes the developmentally appropriate possibilities.
Infancy begins at birth, and lasts until the acquisition of speech. It is the time of the most empathic connection between the infant and its caregivers, which can be characterized by tenderness and security, or by anxiety and tension. Childhood lasts through the remainder of the preschool years, and involves extending one’s interpersonal relationships outside of the immediate family to peers (friends and playmates). In addition, language is incorporated into one’s experiences of approval and disapproval. The juvenile era begins as one enters grade school. Once again, interpersonal relations are expanded to include a wider variety of people and situations, including competition with one’s peers and subordination to authority figures (such as teachers and the school’s principal).
Adolescence involves some very dramatic changes, particularly in the direction of the intensely intimate relationships of adulthood. During preadolescence, there is a marked increase in the closeness of friendships (e.g., “best friends forever!”), which is characterized by an intimate dynamism. Early adolescence is marked by an interest in the other sex, and an erotic dynamism is formed. Late adolescence, which Sullivan placed between the middle high school years the early college years, were a time of developing full and mature interrelationships, as well as understanding of the need for responsible citizenship within one’s society. When these dynamisms, including the self-system, become stabilized, and society has transformed the individual into a completely social being, the person has attained adulthood (Chrzanowski, 1977; Lundin, 1979; Sullivan, 1953, 1954, 1964).
Sullivan provided ages for the transition of these developmental epochs, but he also acknowledged that they are based on experience. Thus, it is possible for the stages to occur at different times in unique individuals. The course, however, remains the same, unless the course fails to progress. If an individual is not provided with the opportunities to advance their interpersonal development, there can be an arrest of development (Sullivan, 1953, 1964). An arrest of development does not mean that the personality becomes static, but rather, the freedom and velocity of constructive changes becomes markedly reduced. Later, the arrested development becomes apparent through eccentricities in one’s interpersonal relations. The individual does not simply continue to act like a normal child, there is an increased likelihood that this “warp” in personality development will also lead to malevolent dynamisms and the consequent social problems (such as delinquency and crime).
Discussion Question: Do you know anyone who demonstrates arrested development (someone who seems immature, especially in relationships)? Are you able to maintain a friendship with that person, or is the situation too stressful?
Final Notes on Harry Stack Sullivan
From his early days working with William Alanson White, Sullivan was particularly interested in the treatment of schizophrenia. One of the books published by the White Foundation was entitled Schizophrenia as a Human Process (Sullivan, 1962), in which his longtime friend Clara Thompson described him as having a “genuine liking and respect” for his patients. Later the White Foundation published a series of seminars Sullivan offered to the psychiatric residents at Sheppard Pratt, as well as members of the Chestnut Lodge and the Washington School of Psychiatry, on the treatment of a young, male schizophrenic. The text includes commentary by others some 25 years after the seminar (see Kvarnes & Parloff, 1976).
Like Alfred and Kurt Adler, Sullivan recognized the difficulty of treating psychotic patients. The prognosis, in Sullivan’s opinion, depends to a large extent upon the patient’s history of successful interpersonal relationships:
…let us consider the empirical fact that the schizophrenia which appears in the form of a sudden dramatic onset is usually considered to have a more favorable prognosis than the schizophrenia with more gradual onset. But in those cases of sudden onset in which satisfactory experience with significant persons in the past is totally lacking, the patient may be practically beyond redemption; he may manifest empirically trustworthy capacity for recovery to the extent of making excellent institutional recovery; but the psychiatrist is daft who expects that he can put the patient out into the world without prompt relapse. (pg. 197; Sullivan, 1956)
Returning to Sullivan’s basic concept of personality, he offered the following definition:
Personality is the relatively enduring configuration of life-processes characterizing all of the person’s total activity pertaining to such other persons, real or fantastic, as become from time to relevant factors in his total situations. (pg. 47; Sullivan, 1972)
While this definition is rather sweeping in its coverage, it remains focused on interpersonal relationships. According to Thompson, Sullivan was very serious about his own relationships:
The quality of his friendship showed the same genuineness and tolerance so characteristic of his relation to patients. He was slow in making friends. He tested them for a long time…Once a person had passed the test he could count on Harry for absolute loyalty. No matter what your mistakes - and he might point them out to you privately - before the world he was on your side…He had a characteristic phrase when parting form a friend - “God keep you.” (pg. xxxiv; Clara Thompson in Sullivan, 1962) | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/04%3A_Alfred_Adler_and_Harry_Stack_Sullivan/4.06%3A_Sullivan%27s_Interpersonal_Psychology.txt |
Achieving Athletic Excellence Despite Physical Challenges
Adler’s studies on inferiority began with physical problems, what he called organ inferiority (Adler, 1917). Most students of Adler look past that medical beginning, and focus instead on the psychological inferiorities that children experience during their development. However, there are many people with organ inferiority, or what we more commonly refer to as disabilities, handicaps, or “challenges.” There may be some debate as to which term is preferred, but since the phrase “politically correct” is itself a contradiction in terms, I will use the terms disability and handicap as presented in Warren Rule’s book Lifestyle Counseling for Adjustment to Disability (Rule, 1984). In his summary of previous research, Rule adopts the definition of a disability as a “relatively severe chronic impairment of function” that occurs as the result of a congenital defect, disease, or an accident. Accordingly, disability refers to actual physical, mental, or emotional impairments that become a handicap only if they cause lowered self-assessment, reduced activity, or limited opportunities. When disabilities become a handicap, they can affect the individual’s entire style of life. Thus, Rule brought together a group of therapists trained in Individual Psychology, and published the aforementioned book on using lifestyle counseling for people with disabilities that have led to handicaps.
However, not everyone with a disability develops a handicap. Instead, some individuals become truly inspirational by the way in which they live their lives in spite of their disability, or rather, as if they simply were not disabled. Erik Weihenmayer (2001; see also Stoltz & Weihenmayer, 2006) was born with retinoscheses, a degenerative eye disease, which slowly destroyed his retinas, leaving him blind by the age of 13. In high school, Erik spent a month one summer at the Carroll Center for the Blind in Massachusetts. The summer camp included a weekend of rock climbing in N. Conway, New Hampshire (where the author has done a lot of rock-climbing). Weihenmayer’s rock climbing experience altered his life. He continued climbing rock, and then moved on to ice-climbing and mountaineering. He didn’t just followed more experienced climbers up the cliffs, he also learned to lead-climb: placing one’s own protection along the climb and then clipping in the rope, what climbers call “the sharp end” of the rope. I had the pleasure of climbing with Erik in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula a few years ago, while his seeing-eye dog slept in a sort of ice cave formed by the overhanging ice. It is truly extraordinary to watch him climb. He moves so smoothly, as he feels the ice above with his ice axe, and then sets the ice axe so deliberately when he finds the right spot, that you would not know he was climbing blind if you only watched for a little while. Eventually, Erik decided to pursue the Seven Summits, climbing the highest peak on each continent: Mt. McKinley (N. America), Aconcagua (S. America), Mt. Everest (Asia), Mt. Elbrus (Europe), Vinson Massif (Antarctica), Mt. Kosciusko (Australia), Kilimanjaro (Africa). He accomplished his goal in 2002.
Erik Weihenmayer is by no means the only well-known, disabled climber. In an amazing video, Beyond the Barriers (Perlman & Wellman, 1998), Erik goes climbing with Mark Wellman and Hugh Herr. Wellman was paralyzed from the waist down in a climbing accident (Wellman & Flinn, 1992), and Herr lost both of his lower legs to frostbite after being caught in a vicious winter storm on Mt. Washington, NH (Osius, 1991; Note: The author has suffered a small patch of frostbite during a winter storm on Mt. Washington). In Beyond the Barriers, Herr leads the hike toward the climb, while Erik carries Wellman. Once on the climb, Herr leads the climb, Erik follows, and they set ropes for Wellman to do pull-ups up the cliff. It simply has to be seen to be believed. One of the surprising aspects is how they joke with each other about what they are doing. As Erik is carrying Wellman, Wellman says: “I don’t know man. A blind man giving a para a piggyback ride? It’s a pretty scary thing!” When Herr starts climbing on a day when it was snowing, he says his hands are getting numb from the cold. So, Erik asks him how his feet feel! Humor was always an important part of Adlerian psychotherapy (Scott, 1984), so perhaps it should not be surprising that a sense of humor is an aspect of their personalities. One of the funniest stories that Erik tells is about the time he accidentally drank out of his climbing partners piss bottle (a bottle used to urinate inside the tent during storms). Erik became quite upset that the bottle wasn’t marked somehow, but his partner defended himself by saying he had clearly written on the bottle which one it was. It slowly dawned on Erik’s partner that the writing was of no help to Erik. As another example of Erik’s humor, consider the challenge he tried to avoid after having climbed the highest peaks in Africa and North and South America:
Emma Louise Weihenmayer was born on June 21, year 2000, at 3:57 A.M. There is so much to learn about parenthood. Sometimes being a father is about as intense as climbing Denali, Kilimanjaro, and Aconcagua, all in a day. Because I’m blind, I tried to convince Ellie that I couldn’t change diapers, but for some reason, she didn’t buy it. (pg. 303; Weihenmayer, 2001)
In addition to his climbing, Erik Weihenmayer is a college graduate with a teaching certificate, and he spent some time as a middle school teacher. He also tried the sport of wrestling, and was a wrestling coach. Trevon Jenifer was also a wrestler.
Trevon Jenifer was born without legs. Perhaps even more challenging, however, was the fact that he was the fourth child of a poor, single mother living in a ghetto outside of Washington, DC. Obviously, Trey (the name he goes by) began life facing difficult obstacles, but little by little, things got better. His mother, Connie, made a conscious decision to take care of him the best she could. She soon met Eric Brown, who became Trey’s step-father, providing a stable home for their family. He met a wonderful special education teacher named Bob Gray, who got Trey interested in sports, and who helped to make participating in sports a realistic possibility. He eventually joined a wheelchair track and basketball team named Air Capital, and he was very successful on the track, setting national records in the 100-, 200-, and 400-meter races. It was prior to his junior year in high school, however, that his step-father, who had been a wrestler, recommended that Trey try out for the wrestling team, the regular wrestling team.
What Trey wanted more than anything was to fit in, to have a normal social life at school. Being in a wheelchair, that was not likely to happen. However, he felt that sports might help him accomplish that goal, so he did try out for the wrestling team. He worked hard, learned as much as he could, and he made the varsity team as the 103-pound competitor (actually, there was no one else that light on the team, but he didn’t know that). His coach, Terry Green, did all he could to help Trey find a wrestling style that would take advantage of his relative arm strength (he made weight without legs, so his upper body was relatively large) while overcoming the disadvantage of not being able to balance or leverage his body weight by spreading out his legs. Now it was up to Trey. He was nervous in his first match, didn’t assert himself, and was easily pinned. In his second match he became the aggressor and earned his first victory. The rest of his junior year continued to be a series of wins and losses, and he ended the season 17-18. Of course, it had only been his first season of wrestling.
In anticipation of his senior year in high school, Trey continued to train hard. Outside of the ring he also received recognition, and became a part of the social network of the school. He received a Medal of Courage from the National Wrestling Hall of Fame, he attended his school’s prom, and he was chosen as co-captain of the wrestling team. Once again, humor played a role, as he compared his strength to a teammate from the previous year. Trey had made significant strides in how much he could bench-press, so his former teammate asked him how much he could squat (a lift done entirely with the legs)! Both wrestlers enjoyed a good laugh at that one.
Trey was doing quite well in league wrestling, and he also began to do well in tournaments. Eventually, he won a tournament, ended his season at 26-6, and from there went on the state championship. He won his first match, but then had to face an undefeated wrestler. He lost, but in that loss there was a sense of accomplishment due to how far he had come:
I lost 5-2…I was hurt less by the fact that I lost, and more by the closeness of it. This one hurt even more because of how close I was to beating the best wrestler in the state. Sharbaugh went on to win the state championship. In fact, he won his last two matches very convincingly, 6-0, and, 12-5. He told reporters afterward that my match was his toughest of the tournament. (pp. 171-172; Trevon Jenifer in Jenifer & Goldenbach, 2006).
The next morning he had to return to the championships to wrestle for a chance at third place in the state. He began with a vengeance, scoring victories of 9-1 and 9-2. His next match, and a shot at third place, was not so easy, but he won 3-1, earning his 30th victory of the season. He then won his final match, and earned third place in the state championship. However, an even more important challenge now loomed ahead of him: college.
Coming from a poor, Black family, there was no tradition of children going to college. However, a group of concerned philanthropists became interested in supporting his dreams. His old coach at Air Capital had talked to Jim Glatch, who coached wheelchair basketball at Edinboro College in Pennsylvania, a school with a large population (10 percent) of students with disabilities. Trevon Jenifer currently attends Edinboro College and plays on the wheelchair basketball team. He does not know if he will ever wrestle again, but it is interesting to note that Edinboro College has a famous wrestler as their athletic director: two-time Olympic gold medalist Bruce Baumgartner!
Recently, Trey was kind enough to respond to an email I sent him, and he provided me with an update on how things have gone during his first year of college. He misses wrestling very much, but he has really enjoyed his return to wheelchair basketball. It probably didn’t hurt that the team is very good, and they came in second-place in the NCAA championship for wheelchair basketball. Trey maintained good grades, his family strongly supports him in pursuing his education, and he has made many new friends. But a few challenges remain. It has been a little difficult for him to get used to the weather in northwestern Pennsylvania, and he has been too busy to attend as many book signings as his publisher would like (but he says they have been very understanding). As for becoming the inspiration his mother thought he was born to be:
I think that I have inspired some people, and I think that is great, but I don’t think that it has reached all the people that I would like it too. My family says that I have done a good job, but I [think that I could do a lot better], and I will try until I feel that I have reached that. (Trevon Jenifer; personal communication, 2007)
The range of sports in which disabled individuals compete is extraordinary today. Beyond the Barriers also includes disabled individuals sailing, scuba diving, surfing, and hang gliding. A few years ago, I began practicing Tae Kwon Do, and I soon discovered that I had degenerative joint disease in both hips. I considered quitting Tae Kwon Do, but I was strongly encouraged to continue by my instructors, as well as by my orthopedic surgeon and physical therapist. I have since learned that Dirk Robertson, a former social worker turned actor and writer, has worked hard promoting martial arts training for people with disabilities (Robertson, 1991; see also McNab, 2003). Each person simply needs to be encouraged to do their best. Adler suggested that the best way to strive for superiority was through social interest. Whether it’s a climbing partner, a wrestling team, a wheelchair basketball team, a martial arts school, whatever, when people work together to help each individual achieve their potential, it can prove to be a highly rewarding experience.
Whilst it is important to be sensitive to their particular situation, their disability should not be the central focus all the time. Their ability to learn, listen and adapt should be built on and encouraged. Do not be over-protective or an instant expert on people with disabilities. The experts are the people themselves, so listen to what they have to say. (pp. 101-102; Robertson, 1991)
4.S: Chapter Summary
Review of Key Points
• Adler helped Freud gain recognition for Freud’s personality theory. This lends credence to Adler’s claim that he was never a student or follower of Freud, but rather a colleague interested in similar psychiatric/psychological questions.
• Striving for superiority takes the form of compensating for our weaknesses, which, unfortunately, can sometimes lead to overcompensation.
• Adler believed that all thought and behavior was tied to some goal. Our overriding goal is the life plan, and we pursue it by living a characteristic style of life.
• According to Adler, social interest is the best way to achieve superiority, and it can most easily be seen in cooperation.
• Adler described three life tasks: work, communal life, and love.
• Each person exists within their own perception of the world, known as the scheme of apperception. This scheme guides all experience to fit into our style of life and our goals.
• Adler was very interested in the effects of birth order and the family constellation. Being an only child is likely to result in pampering, whereas an oldest child must deal with being dethroned.
• The key to Adlerian psychotherapy is understanding the patient’s style of life.
• Once the style of life is understood, Adlerian psychotherapists work to strengthen social interest and reorient the style of life.
• Sullivan began his formal psychiatric career at two prestigious hospitals: St. Elizabeth’s and Sheppard Pratt.
• Sullivan referred to the energy transformation that underlies our personal interactions as dynamisms. Perhaps the most important dynamism is the self-system.
• Before we can truly understand relationships, we develop images in our mind known as personifications. The personified self includes everything we can consciously describe about ourselves.
• Sullivan described seven developmental epochs, which provide a framework for our unfolding abilities to engage in healthy interpersonal relationships. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/04%3A_Alfred_Adler_and_Harry_Stack_Sullivan/4.07%3A_Personality_Theory_in_Real_Life.txt |
Who were the neo-Freudians, and what exactly does this term mean? Many early psychoanalysts remained basically true to Freud and his theories. These individuals are collectively known as either neo-Freudians or as ego psychologists, for their emphasis on the ego. Shifting from Freud’s emphasis on the id to an emphasis on the ego is a major change, but it does not require rejecting the basic elements of Freud’s theory. The shift also encourages the study of children. After all, it is during childhood that most of this dramatic psychological development occurs. The neo-Freudians stand in contrast to Alfred Adler and Carl Jung, who intentionally distanced themselves from Freud, and Karen Horney, who initially brought a female perspective to psychodynamic theory (a perspective in which she directly challenged some of Freud’s ideas on women) but later shifted to a cultural perspective on the psychology of women. For an interesting introduction to a number of important neo-Freudians, see Freud and Beyond (Mitchell & Black, 1995), and for an introduction to some of their papers see The First Freudians (Ruitenbeek, 1973).
In this chapter, we will only be able to take a brief look at a handful of these theorists. Among the many neo-Freudians, there are some notable individuals we will not be covering. Karl Abraham was an active psychoanalyst in Berlin when the rest of Germany was largely mocking Freud’s theory. Sándor Ferenczi accompanied Freud and Jung on their landmark trip to America. A. A. Brill was influential in the development of psychoanalysis in America, and an early translator of Freud’s works into English. As important as these theorists were in their own right, they have not had quite the influence of those whom we will cover in this chapter.
First, we will examine Anna Freud’s contributions on the defense mechanisms. Although her father had described many of the defense mechanisms, he left it to his daughter to literally write the book on them (A. Freud, 1936/1966). Anna Freud also moved beyond her father’s work in at least one significant way: she contributed to the study of applying psychoanalysis to children. Two other early contributors to the application of psychoanalysis to children were Melanie Klein and D. W. Winnicott. Although Klein and Anna Freud shared an interest in studying children, they often did not agree. This conflict led to a split in the English school of psychoanalysis (Mitchell & Black, 1995). Winnicott had been trained in part by colleagues of Klein, and he was supervised by Klein personally for a time, but eventually his independence led him to develop his own theories. Having been a pediatrician before he became a psychoanalyst, he was able to draw on a wealth of experience observing children interacting with their mothers (Mitchell & Black, 1995). Finally, we will take a very brief look at the work of Heinz Kohut and Margaret Mahler, and their perspectives on how an individual finally becomes just that.
Placing the Neo-Freudians in Context - 1: Connecting Personality Theories
In one sense, it is not possible to put the neo-Freudians in context, because to do so would be to suggest that these theorists have concluded their work. As we will see, the process of modifying Sigmund Freud’s theories toward some final, comprehensive theory accepted by all psychoanalysts continues today. So we must keep in mind that we are really just putting those theorists mentioned in this chapter in context, and this task is one that will continue into the future.
If you had been able to predict in 1910 what future perspectives on Freud’s theory would become, you might have easily done it. Some theorists stayed true to Freud’s basic principles, others took radically different approaches, and the rest fell somewhere in between. Not surprisingly, the strongest supporter of Freud’s theory was his own daughter Anna. Although she shifted the focus of psychoanalysis from the id to the ego, and emphasized analyzing children, these were reasonable extensions of Freud’s own work. And more importantly, she made these changes only within the constraints that her father’s theory allowed.
In contrast, Melanie Klein made radical changes to psychoanalytic theory, and directly challenged the views of Anna Freud. This challenge led to a public battle, one in which Anna Freud seems to have been respectful toward Klein, but Klein did not return the courtesy. Subsequently a third group arose, a group of moderates who appreciated the direction Klein had taken, but who had their own differences of opinion with her. Following a series of open discussions during World War II, it was agreed by all to acknowledge the differences among those who followed Anna Freud, Klein, or their own independent paths.
Eventually, subsequent theorists began to recognize the value in each different approach to psychoanalysis. Today, theorists like Otto Kernberg have come a long way toward blending the different neo-Freudian approaches together. But there remained an important area of psychology that needed further study in its own right: the psychology of women. The object relations theorists had laid an interesting foundation for what became a relational-cultural approach to the study of women, and ultimately all people. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/05%3A_Neo-Freudian_Perspectives_on_Personality/5.01%3A_Chapter_Introduction.txt |
Anna Freud (1895-1982) was the youngest of Sigmund and Martha Freud’s six children, and the only one to pursue a career in psychoanalysis. However, this did not come about immediately, and Anna Freud never attended medical school as her father had. Therefore, she was one of the first lay psychoanalysts, which is an important consideration for all mental health practitioners today (since Freud and most other early psychoanalysts were actually psychiatrists who had attended medical school). In 1971, a survey conducted among psychiatrists and psychoanalysts identified Anna Freud as the most outstanding colleague among both groups (see Peters, 1985).
Anna Freud lived with her parents until Sigmund Freud’s death in 1939. She was a lively child, with a reputation for being mischievous. Although she always enjoyed a good relationship with her father, it was her older sister Sophie who was her father’s favorite daughter (Peters, 1985). She was quite intelligent, but never attended college. She did, however, attend private schools, eventually entering the Cottage Lyceum in Vienna during fifth grade. She soon entered the Cottage Lyceum’s high school, graduating in 1912. Since she had not chosen a career, she traveled to England to improve her English, one of several languages she had learned. Upon returning to Vienna, she became a teacher at the Cottage Lyceum’s elementary school. She was very popular among her students, one of whom described her as “such a marvelous and simple figure that I loved her deeply at that time” (cited in Peters, 1985). Her popularity likely resulted from her own love of teaching and for her students (Coles, 1992). Anna Freud considered this experience as a teacher to have been very valuable for her later career as a child psychoanalyst:
The people who follow this line of thought hold that those who analyze children should possess not only the correct analytical training and mental attitude but something further: something which is called for by the idiosyncrasies of childhood, namely, the training and the mental attitude of the pedagogue… (pg. 130; A. Freud, 1973).
Even before she graduated, Anna Freud had begun reading her father’s works. But it was not until 1918 that she entered into psychoanalysis. Such a situation, a father psychoanalyzing his own daughter, would be considered inappropriate today, but at that time the entire field was still quite new and many aspects of it were still experimental. In any case, Anna Freud subsequently became one of her father’s most unwavering supporters and an important psychoanalyst in her own right. In 1920 she attended the International Psychoanalytical Congress with her father, and 2 years later she was a member of the Vienna Psychoanalytical Society and began presenting her own papers. In 1923 she began her own practice treating children.
As Anna Freud was developing her theories regarding the psychoanalysis of children, Melanie Klein was developing her theories in England. There were significant disagreements between them, including a symposium in 1927 organized specifically to provide an opportunity for Klein to publicly attack Anna Freud’s theories (Peters, 1985). After Anna Freud arrived to stay in England with her family in 1938, the conflict between them threatened to split the British Psychoanalytic Society. However, during World War II, a series of discussion forums resulted in the establishment of parallel training courses for the two groups.
After the war began, Anna Freud helped to set up the Hampstead War Nursery to provide foster care for over 80 children, a number that rose to a total of 190 children over several years (Peters, 1985). In addition to simply providing care for the children, she hoped to provide the children with continuity in their relationships with staff and family. With long-time friend Dorothy Burlingham she studied the effects of stress on young children in wartime. This work continued after the war when she had an opportunity to help provide care for six orphans who had survived the Theresienstadt concentration camp (Coles, 1992; Peters, 1985).
Throughout the rest of her life, she remained devoted to her work at the Hampstead War Nursery. She helped to establish the Hampstead Child Therapy Course (in 1947) and a children’s clinic. Eventually the nursery became known more simply as the Hampstead Clinic, and Anna Freud became one of the major figures in psychoanalysis. She often traveled to lecture in the United States, and in the 1970s she was a co-author, with two professors from Yale University, of two books about governmental involvement in the lives of children who have been emotionally deprived and socially disadvantaged (see below). She received many honors, including honorary doctorates from Clark University (where her father had lectured during his trip to America), Harvard University, and Vienna University. The honorary medical degree she received from Vienna University was awarded in 1972, only 1 year after she returned to visit her native city for the first time since the Freud’s had escaped the Nazis in 1938.
Shortly after her death, the Hampstead Clinic was renamed the Anna Freud Centre, in her honor, and in 1986 her former home became the Freud Museum. Although she has been considered by some to have done little more than continue her father’s work, she was a pioneer in both ego psychology and the psychoanalysis of children. Accordingly, she deserves to be considered one of the most influential neo-Freudians. Much of the information in this biography can be found on The Anna Freud Centre website, as well as much more information on the center itself (http://www.annafreudcentre.org).
Ego Psychology and the Defense Mechanisms
In 1936, Anna Freud published perhaps her most influential book: The Ego and the Mechanisms of Defense (A. Freud, 1936/1966). She began by stating a redefinition of the field of psychoanalysis. There was a general bias, in her opinion, among many psychoanalysts to focus on the deep instinctual impulses of the id at the expense of considering the ego. However, since the id is always unconscious, its processes can never be observed directly. It may also be difficult to observe the processes of the ego as well, but at least the ego exists partially within the conscious mind. Since it is the ego that observes both the impulses of the id and the restraints of the superego, and since the ego is available to the psychoanalyst, she concluded “this means that the proper field for our observation is always the ego.” (A. Freud, 1936/1966)
Although the ego is observable, that doesn’t mean that a person’s thoughts and behaviors always make sense. As the id demands the satisfaction of its impulses, the ego attempts to restrain the id, in accordance with the external demands of society and the internal representation of those demands in the superego. When these factors come in conflict, and the ego cannot easily resolve the conflict, anxiety develops. In order to help alleviate that anxiety, and to continue restraining the impulses of the id, the ego resorts to defense mechanisms. In so doing, the ego transforms the conflict somewhat and attempts to keep both the conflict and the basis for the conflict unconscious. When an individual is suffering psychologically and has sought help from a therapist, according to Anna Freud, the psychoanalyst arrives on the scene as someone who disturbs this fragile peace. This is because “it is the task of the analyst to bring into consciousness that which is unconscious…” (A. Freud, 1936/1966).
In order to understand how the ego uses defense mechanisms, it is necessary to understand the defense mechanisms themselves and how they function. Some defense mechanisms are seen as protecting us from within, from the instinctual impulses of the id (e.g., repression); other defense mechanisms protect us from external threats (e.g., denial). When treating a patient, the goal of the psychoanalyst is to determine how much a given defense mechanism contributes to the symptoms and to the ego resistance of the patient (in other words, resistance to therapy). To help understand these issues, Anna Freud identified and discussed ten defense mechanisms as being commonly recognized in the field of psychoanalysis: regression, repression, reaction-formation, isolation, undoing, projection, introjection, turning against the self, reversal, and sublimation. See Table 6.1 for a description of some of the defense mechanisms most commonly discussed today.
The defense mechanisms are not all available to an individual at the same time. As originally proposed by her father, Anna Freud believed that the defense mechanisms develop with the structures of personality (the id, ego, and superego). For example, projection and introjection depend on the differentiation of the ego from the outside world, so they would not be available to the ego as defense mechanisms until the ego had sufficiently developed (and, perhaps, differentiated into the superego as well; A. Freud, 1936/1966). This became an important point of contention, however, with the English school of analysis that included Melanie Klein. Whereas Anna Freud and her colleagues believed that projection and introjection would not be available in early childhood, since the structures of personality have not adequately developed, members of the English school believed that projection and introjection were a necessary part of that development. Although this debate and others between Freudian and Kleinian theorists became rather bitter (Mitchell & Black, 1995), Anna Freud did acknowledge the following:
These differences of opinion bring home to us the fact that the chronology of psychic processes is still one of the most obscure fields of analytic theory…So a classification of the defense mechanisms according to position in time inevitably partakes of all the doubt and uncertainty which even today attach to chronological pronouncements in analysis. It will probably be best to abandon the attempt so to classify them and, instead, to study in detail the situations which call for the defensive reactions. (pg. 53; A. Freud, 1936/1966)
The final outcome of personality development, whether primarily normal or abnormal, depends on the overall process of these defense mechanisms throughout development. It is natural that defense mechanisms are called upon by the ego during both waves of psychosexual development. Whether or not the ego develops as a yielding and flexible structure depends on the strength of the instincts during development and the environment in which the individual develops. If instinctual demands are excessively urgent during development, the ego will redouble its defensive activities. This can stiffen the resistance of the ego to the instinctual impulses, leading to symptoms and inhibitions that remain throughout life (A. Freud, 1936/1966). At least, they might remain until the patient is successfully analyzed by a qualified psychoanalyst.
What is the status of defense mechanisms in psychology today? Clinical psychologists have always found the concept of defense mechanisms useful, but for a period of time defense mechanisms did not receive much attention from academic psychologists (Cramer, 2000). The primary reason for this was that early studies aimed at demonstrating the existence of the defense mechanisms and their processes were not promising. However, these are particularly difficult processes to study, since much of the processing occurs unconsciously (Cramer, 2000; Kernberg, 2004). According to Cramer (2000), as the various fields of psychology developed, they began to examine psychological processes that received new names within the particular field, even though the processes being studied were actually defense mechanisms that had already been discovered within psychoanalysis. Just to cite a few examples: what cognitive psychologists describe as selective attention may involve the defenses of splitting and dissociation, in social psychology scapegoating is a form of displacement, and in developmental psychology a child’s verbal report of positive emotion while their facial expression clearly represents negative emotion is a classic case of denial (for a variety of examples and references see Cramer, 2000). Therefore, one can conclude that defense mechanisms, and defensive processes, have remained an important aspect of psychology and psychotherapy since they were first described by Sigmund Freud and Josef Breuer in 1895 (Freud & Breuer, 1895/2004).
Discussion Question: Anna Freud believed that even normal personality development involved the common use of defense mechanisms. Consider your own personality. Are there situations that make you anxious and, if so, can you recognize the defense mechanisms you rely on? Do you have a common defense mechanism that you use more than any other?
Psychoanalysis with Children
As mentioned above, Anna Freud began her career as a school teacher. This interest in children never diminished, and as she began to devote her career to psychoanalysis and psychoanalytic research her focus remained on the psychological lives of children. In 1946 she published The Psycho-Analytical Treatment of Children (A. Freud, 1946). This book is a collection of works she had written mostly in 1926 and 1927, with the final portion having been written in 1945. The book begins with an interesting preface, an apology that the book had not been available in English at an earlier date, particularly in the country of England. The reason for this, according to Anna Freud (and many historians agree), is that in England the theories of Melanie Klein dominated the psychoanalytic community (see also Mitchell & Black, 1995). Klein and her colleagues believed that psychoanalysis could be conducted successfully with young children, and that the process of transference occurred in the same manner as it did with adult patients. Initially, Anna Freud believed that psychoanalysis could not be performed with young children. Later, she acknowledged that the efforts of her colleagues had helped to make that a possibility, but she steadfastly denied that she had ever seen the normal process of transference in anyone younger than adulthood (A. Freud, 1946).
Table \(1\): Common Defense Mechanisms
Repression
Repression involves blocking an impulse from conscious expression. Examples include forgetting a traumatic event, such as sexual abuse, or being unaware of hostile feelings toward family members.
Regression
When faced with difficult situations that we cannot resolve, we may regress to behavior indicative of an earlier stage of development. For example, when we are very sick, we may act as helpless as if we were an infant and hope that someone will take care of us.
Denial
Denial refers to simply refusing to believe an unpleasant reality. For example, when someone is told they have a terminal illness, they may deny it and refuse to follow treatment recommendations.
Projection
Projection involves attributing our own negative impulses to another person. If, for example, we want to see another person fail, perhaps to make us feel superior, we may claim that they are trying to interfere with our success.
Reaction-Formation A reaction-formation is the process of suppressing unacceptable impulses and adopting an opposite course of action. For example, a parent who resents having children may shower them with love.
Identification
We often model our behavior after people we admire, or adjust our behavior based on people we fear. Internalizing this process of identifying with others is primarily how the superego develops, how we adopt the rules and guidelines of our culture and make them our own.
Displacement Sometimes we cannot respond directly to unpleasant situations, so we displace (or transfer) our impulses onto another object. For example, if your boss yells at you at work, you then go home and yell at people in your family.
Rationalization
Rationalization is the process of finding logical reasons for unacceptable behavior or thoughts. For example, a professor may constantly battle with administrators about policies, while claiming that he/she only has the best interests of their students in mind.
Isolation Isolation involves separating the anxiety-provoking aspects of an event from one’s other thoughts and behaviors. For example, following the death of a child, one parent may set aside their grief in order to be able to provide support for the other parent.
Sublimation
Sometimes referred to as the successful defense mechanism, sublimation is the process of channeling unacceptable impulses into socially acceptable forms. It is often said that great artists must suffer before they can find the inspiration to master their craft.
The importance of the analysis of children in terms of research is threefold, according to Anna Freud. It helps to confirm the theories develop by Sigmund Freud and others based on the analysis of adults, it leads to fresh conclusions and new conceptions (and she commends Melanie Klein on this point), and it serves as a point of transition to a field of applied analysis that she felt might become the most important of all: working with children as they develop (A. Freud, 1927/1973). What Anna Freud tried most to do in her writings was to point out the circumstances that make psychoanalysis with children different than psychoanalysis with adults. Fundamentally, there is no difference in the process. However, the results of the process must be viewed differently in order to understand what happens with children. Since Melanie Klein was actively pursuing the same goals, Anna Freud often wrote specifically about Klein, acknowledging her accomplishments, but also pointing out their differences.
The basic argument was aimed at the intellectual and psychological abilities of young children, and the extent to which the psychical apparatus (the id, ego, and superego) have developed. Since all three personality structures have developed in an adult, there is no need for the analyst to worry about that. All the analyst needs to do is to bring into consciousness the neurotic processes that have led to the patient’s symptoms (granted, that may be easier said than done). In children, however, the ego and especially the superego are still developing. Therefore, the analyst must consider the role he/she may play in the development of the child. The analyst must consider the extent to which the superego has already developed, and the analyst may be able to take advantage of its continuing development and help to direct and/or instruct superego development. According to Anna Freud (1927/1973):
…In the analysis of the adult we are at a point where the superego has already established its independence - an independence which is unshakable by any influence from the outside world...But child analysis must include all those cases in which the superego has as yet not reached any true independence. Only too clearly it strives to please its taskmasters, the child’s parents and others responsible for his training…we have to use our influence from without in an educational manner by changing the child’s relation to those who are bringing him up… (pgs. 138-139)
As these processes are actually observed, Anna Freud believed that the child’s symptoms could transform in the presence of the psychoanalyst, in a way that simply did not happen with adults. Thus, it was essential to observe children from a different point of view than one observes adults. She acknowledged that Melanie Klein had contributed to our understanding of how children might be observed, but she felt that Klein had attributed too much to what Klein and her colleagues observed. Klein allowed children the opportunity to play with toys in her office, a situation in which the child’s imagination can run wild. Klein believed this was the same for a child as free association was for an adult. However, Anna Freud countered that an adult is aware of their goals in psychoanalysis, whereas a child at play is not aware of being in therapy. As a result, Anna Freud viewed the play of children as fundamentally different than an adult’s free association:
The play technique worked out by Mrs. Melanie Klein is certainly valuable for observing the child. Instead of taking the time and trouble to pursue it into its domestic environment we establish at one stroke the whole of its known world in the analyst’s room, and let it move about in it under the analyst’s eye but at first without his interference…
Mrs. Klein however…assumes the same status for these play-actions of the child as for the free associations of the adult patient…if the child’s play is not dominated by the same purposive attitude as the adult’s free association, there is no justification for treating it as having the same significance. (pgs. 28-29; A. Freud, 1946)
Anna Freud’s steadfast belief that children do not have the intellectual or psychological capacity for free association, in part because they simply can’t relax and lie still for an hour on the psychoanalyst’s couch, also raises questions for the use of the second most common psychoanalytic technique, dream analysis. Dream analysis depends on the patient’s ability to freely associate about the manifest content of the dream. With children, it is necessary for the psychoanalyst to connect the manifest content with the latent content, and this process will always be somewhat suspect (A. Freud, 1946). These problems lead into another controversy, the age at which psychoanalysis can occur. Whereas Klein and her colleagues believed that psychoanalysis could occur at any age, since babies are involved in play as part of their earliest activities, Anna Freud believed that some amount of speech was necessary to form an adequate therapeutic relationship with a child (so the earliest reasonable age for psychoanalysis would be around two to three years of age; A. Freud, 1946).
In her conclusion to The Psycho-Analytical Treatment of Children, Anna Freud re-emphasizes the role that the developmental processes play as a child (and their id, ego, and superego) grows. As such, a child analyst needs to be “as intimately familiar with the normal sequence of child development as he is familiar with the neurotic or psychotic disturbances of it” (A. Freud, 1946). She specifically mentions academic psychology and the tests being created by psychologists for the measurement of personality as useful in this regard. She also mentions one test as being especially useful in examining libido development and its disturbances: the Rorschach test. Still, she acknowledges that our understanding of the developmental processes of the libido and of the ego is “very incomplete.” Yet she cautions psychoanalytic investigators “not to confine examinations to short-cuts of any kind…” (A. Freud, 1946). Clearly her concern for children, and for a professional approach to psychoanalytic research and practice, were foremost in her mind.
So what does current research tell us about the effectiveness of psychoanalysis on children? As is often the case, the results are not clear. Although a number of studies have shown that children benefit from psychoanalysis, the degree of that benefit has been disappointing (see Jarvis, 2004). When children of different age groups were studied, the results showed that psychoanalysis was more effective for younger children than it was for adolescents, something that Anna Freud would probably not have predicted. An important problem in many of the studies providing positive results, however, is that the results are based on reports by the therapists. Such reports are highly subjective and open to bias (Jarvis, 2004). Also, as we might expect, the effectiveness of psychoanalysis is dependent on the experience and skill of the analyst. Typically, analysts who have experience teaching and supervising psychoanalysis, as well as those who are prepared to try a variety of psychoanalytic techniques, achieve significantly better outcomes with their patients (Kernberg, 2004). So we must consider the question of the effectiveness of child psychoanalysis as one that remains unanswered.
Discussion Question: Is a child at play engaging in the same mental activity as an adult engaged in free association? Melanie Klein believed yes, but Anna Freud disagreed. Do you think that children are capable of the same participatory role in psychoanalysis as adults, and is play the best way to observe children?
Late in her life and career, Anna Freud extended her work beyond the psychoanalytic treatment of children to larger issues of child advocacy. In collaboration with Joseph Goldstein, a professor of law at Yale University, and Albert Solnit, a professor of pediatrics and psychiatry at Yale’s medical school and Director of the Child Study Center at Yale, she co-authored two books: Beyond the Best Interests of the Child (Goldstein, A. Freud, & Solnit, 1973) and Before the Best Interests of the Child (Goldstein, A. Freud, & Solnit, 1979). These books focus on the importance of placing the interests of children first when the government intervenes in cases involving the custody and placement of children. These situations arise is many circumstances, such as in the case of orphans or following a difficult divorce, but also in more extreme cases of abuse or when certain parents do not believe in allowing medical care for very sick children. Since these situations can pit one parent against another, or the parents against the interests of society, the authors addressed very clearly reasons why the interests of the child should be placed first:
Some will assert that the views presented in this volume are so child-oriented as to neglect the needs and rights of the adults. In fact, this is not the case. There is nothing one-sided about our position, that the child’s interests should be the paramount consideration once, but not before, a child’s placement becomes the subject of official controversy. Its other side is that the law, to accord with the continuity guideline, must safeguard the rights of any adults, serving as parents, to raise their children as they see fit, free of intervention by the state, and free of law-aided and law-abetted harassment by disappointed adult claimants. To say that a child’s ongoing relationship with a specific adult, the psychological parent, must not be interrupted, is also to say that this adult’s rights are protected against intrusion by the state on behalf of other adults.
As set out in this volume, then, a child’s placement should rest entirely on consideration for the child’s own inner situation and developmental needs… (Goldstein, A. Freud, & Solnit, 1973)
So long as the child is part of a viable family, his own interests are merged with those of the other members. Only after the family fails in its function should the child’s interests become a matter for state intrusion. (Goldstein, A. Freud, & Solnit, 1979) | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/05%3A_Neo-Freudian_Perspectives_on_Personality/5.02%3A_Anna_Freud_and_Ego_Psychology.txt |
There are those who say that it is inappropriate to refer to object relations theory as if it were a single theory. It is more appropriate to refer to object relations theorists, a group of psychoanalysts who share a common interest in object relations, but whose theories tend to vary with each individual theorist. Sigmund Freud used the term object to refer to any target of instinctual impulses. In the current context, an object is a person, or some substitute for a person such as a blanket or a teddy bear, which is the aim of the relational needs of a developing child. Melanie Klein is generally recognized as the first object relations theorist, and her change in emphasis from Sigmund Freud’s view was rather profound. Freud believed that a child is born more like an animal than a human, driven entirely by instinctual impulses. Only after the ego and the superego begin to develop is the child psychologically human. Klein, however, felt that a baby is born with drives that include human objects, and the corresponding need for relationships. In other words, the infant’s instinctual impulses are designed to help the child adapt to the distinctly human world into which the child is born (Mitchell & Black, 1995).
Melanie Klein
Melanie Klein (1882-1960) was also born in Vienna, about 13 years before Anna Freud. However, she did not remain there. She moved first to Budapest, where Klein entered into psychoanalysis with Sándor Ferenczi. She then moved to Berlin, where she continued her psychoanalysis with Karl Abraham. Since the move to Berlin occurred in 1921, and since she credited this period with Abraham much more significantly than the time she spent with Ferenczi, the most significant portion of her psychoanalysis actually occurred shortly after that of Anna Freud (Mitchell, 1986). However, the time periods are so close that, despite the difference in age, they really should be considered contemporaries. But they certainly did not agree, as we have already seen.
There are two factors that contributed to the differences between Klein and Anna Freud. Since Klein underwent psychoanalysis with Ferenczi in Budapest, and then Abraham in Berlin, her exposure to multiple points of view likely gave her a unique perspective on psychoanalysis. Anna Freud, remember, never left her father’s home while he was alive. Also, in 1925, just as the two women were embarking fully on their own careers, Klein moved to England following the death of her mentor Karl Abraham. This separation from the continent of Europe, in a country where analysts already shared ideas similar to Klein’s, led to a freedom of thought that allowed Klein to develop her own theories without restraint (Mitchell, 1986).
As mentioned above, Klein believed that an infant is born with the capacity and drive to relate to others. An inherent problem with this reality, however, is that the infant must be prepared to deal with all types of people and relationships. Thus, Klein believed that the death-instinct and its aggressive energy are every bit as important as the life-instinct (Eros) and its libidinal energy:
…What then happens is that the libido enters upon a struggle with the destructive impulses and gradually consolidates its positions…the vicious circle dominated by the death-instinct, in which aggression gives rise to anxiety and anxiety reinforces aggression, can be broken through by the libidinal forces when these have gained in strength. As we know, in the early stages of development the life-instinct has to exert its power to the utmost in order to maintain itself against the death-instinct. But this very necessity stimulates the growth of the sexual life of the individual. (pgs. 211-212; Klein, 1932/1963)
As the child continues to develop, love becomes the manifestation of the life-instinct, and hate becomes the manifestation of the death-instinct (Mitchell, 1986). As for people in the child’s life, the child will begin to recognize both good and bad elements of their support for and relationship to the child. The child will also recognize good and bad aspects of its own thoughts and behaviors. As a result, the child will begin a process known as splitting, in which the bad parts of an object are split off and not allowed to contaminate the good parts of the object. In simpler terms, a child can continue to love its parents, even though there may be times that the parents do not satisfy the impulses of the child. Similarly, the child can continue to feel a positive sense of self-esteem, even though they sometimes fail or do bad things. Such split attitudes can continue into adulthood, and we sometimes hear people talk about “love-hate” relationships.
Since the child is born with the life-instincts and death-instincts necessary to establish and maintain object relations, Klein did not focus on development as going through a series of stages. Instead, she suggested two basic developmental orientations that help the child to reconcile its emotions and feelings regarding the inner and outer worlds in which the child exists: the paranoid-schizoid position and the depressive position (Jarvis, 2004; Kernberg, 2004; Mitchell, 1986; Mitchell & Black, 1995). The means by which the child processes these emotions and orientations is based largely on fantasy. Klein believed that the child is capable at birth of an active fantasy-life. This fantasy emanates from within, and imagines what is without, and it represents the child’s primitive form of thinking about the world and about the child’s relationships (Jarvis, 2004; Kernberg, 2004; Mitchell, 1986). With regard to the mother, the child’s first object:
In the baby’s mind, the ‘internal’ mother is bound up with the ‘external’ one, of whom she is a ‘double’, though one which at once undergoes alterations in his mind through the very process of internalization; that is to say, her image is influenced by his phantasies, and by internal stimuli and internal experiences of all kinds. (pgs. 148-149; Klein, 1940/1986)
Klein believed that object relations are present at birth, and the first object is the mother’s breast (Klein, 1946/1986). Due, in part, to the trauma of birth, the child’s destructive impulses are directed toward the mother’s breast from the beginning of life. As the child fantasizes attacking and destroying its mother, it begins to fear retaliation. This leads to the paranoid position. Because of this fear, and in order to protect itself, the child begins the process of splitting the mother’s breast and itself into good and bad parts (the schizoid position). The child then relies on two principle defense mechanisms to reduce this anxiety: introjection leads the child to incorporate the good parts of the object into itself, and projection involves focusing the bad parts of the object and the child onto the external object. This introjection and projection then provide the basis for the development of the ego and the superego (Klein, 1946/1986; Mitchell, 1986).
As the child continues to develop, it becomes intellectually capable of considering the mother, or any other object, as a whole. In other words, the mother can be both good and bad. With this realization, the child begins to feel guilt and sadness over the earlier fantasized destruction of the mother. This results in the depressive position, and it represents an advancement of the child’s maturity (Jarvis, 2004; Kernberg, 2004; Klein, 1946/1986; Mitchell, 1986).
Discussion Question: Melanie Klein is unique in her emphasis on aggression and the death-instinct. Does it seem reasonable to consider aggression as important in human development as libido (and Eros)? Is it possible that aggression was an essential element in the development of the human species, but one that is no longer needed?
Another important contribution by Klein was the method of play analysis. She acknowledged that some psychoanalytic work had been done with children prior to 1920, particularly by Dr. Hug-Hellmuth (Klein, 1955/1986). Dr. Hug-Hellmuth used some drawings and play during psychoanalysis, but she did not develop a specific technique and she did not work with any children under the age of 6. Although Klein believed that even younger children could be psychoanalyzed in the same manner as adults, that doesn’t mean they have the same ability to communicate as adults. Klein’s interest in play analysis began with a 5 year-old boy known as ‘Fritz.’ Initially Klein worked with the child’s mother, but when his symptoms were not sufficiently relieved, Klein decided to psychoanalyze him. During the course of psychoanalysis, she not only listened to the child’s free associations, she observed his play and considered that to be an equally valuable expression of the child’s unconscious mind (Klein, 1955/1986). In The Psycho-Analysis of Children (1932/1963), she described the basics of the technique:
On a low table in my analytic room there are laid out a number of small toys of a primitive kind - little wooden men and women, carts, carriages, motor-cars, trains, animals, bricks and houses, as well as paper, scissors and pencils. Even a child that is usually inhibited in its play will at least glance at the toys or touch them, and will soon give me a first glimpse into its complexive life by the way in which it begins to play with them or lays them aside, or by its general attitude toward them. (pg. 40)
Figure \(1\)
Klein believed that by watching children at play an analyst can gain a deep understanding of the psychodynamic processes taking place in the child’s mind.
It is interesting to note that although Anna Freud often commented on Klein’s work, Klein seldom mentioned Anna Freud. It may be that Anna Freud felt compelled to address the work of a leading figure whom Anna Freud considered to be incorrect, whereas Klein felt no such need to address the work of the younger Anna Freud. Klein certainly cited Sigmund Freud’s work extensively, but when she mentioned Anna Freud she typically failed to give credit where credit is due. For example, in The Psycho-Analysis of Children (Klein, 1932/1963), she mentions Anna Freud only once, in the introduction to the book:
Anna Freud has been led by her findings in regard to the ego of the child to modify the classical technique, and has worked out her method of analysing children in the latency period quite independently of my procedure…In her opinion children do not develop a transference-neurosis, so that a fundamental condition for analytical treatment is absent…My observations have taught me that children can quite well produce a transference-neurosis, and that a transference-situation arises just as in the case of grown-up persons…Moreover, in so far as it does so without having recourse to any educational influence, analysis not only does not weaken the child’s ego, but actually strengthens it. (pg. 18-19)
This quote not only emphasizes a fundamental disagreement between Klein and Anna Freud, it also seems to dismiss the value Anna Freud placed on her educational background. Later in her career, Klein even went so far as to suggest that she herself was closer to Sigmund Freud’s perspective than Anna Freud was:
I do not know Anna Freud’s view about this aspect of Freud’s work. But, as regards the question of auto-eroticism and narcissism, she seems only to have taken into account Freud’s conclusion that an auto-erotic and a narcissistic stage precede object relations, and not to have allowed for the other possibilities implied in some of Freud’s statements such as the ones I referred to above. This is one of the reasons why the divergence between Anna Freud’s conception and my conception of early infancy is far greater than that between Freud’s views, taken as a whole, and my view. (pg. 206; Klein, 1952/1986)
Clearly, whereas Anna Freud felt that Klein was reading too much into her analysis of children, Klein felt that Anna Freud had failed to consider the wider perspectives allowed by the work of Sigmund Freud. Given the complexity of individual personality, it may be that the true answer to this question is different for each person undergoing psychoanalysis.
Placing the Neo-Freudians in Context - 2: The Psychoanalysis of Children
Before continuing our examination of object relations theorists, it is important to stop and ask why the psychoanalysis of children received so much attention. Many people think of early childhood as a carefree time to run and play, a time when our parents take care of every need, and we have no responsibilities at all. However, for many children, life holds much more challenging problems than just the normal psychological processes of growing up. Abuse, neglect, being caught in the middle of a bitter divorce, these are just some of the things that occur in the lives of too many children. In considering situations where society is forced to intervene, Anna Freud and her colleagues believed that we should shift our focus from thinking about the “best interests” of the child and think instead about providing the “least detrimental available alternative for safeguarding the child’s growth and development” (Goldstein, Freud, & Solnit, 1973). Their reasoning was that in cases of abuse, neglect, divorce, etc., the “best interests” of the child are no longer possible, and certainly cannot be restored by a judge. Therefore, the best that society can hope to do is to help the child as much as possible. Obviously, psychotherapy may play an important role in this process for those children who are emotionally disturbed.
The question remains, however: at how early an age can psychoanalysis be effective? The answer depends somewhat on your perspective. As we have already seen, Anna Freud did not consider children capable of fully participating in psychoanalysis as adults can; she did not consider their play behavior to be the same thing as free association. Melanie Klein, however, did consider children to be good subjects for psychoanalysis at very early ages. In fact, Klein took it one step further: she practically considered psychoanalysis necessary for normal development! Klein’s childhood was not easy. Her father seemed to care only for her sister Emilie, and Emilie and their brother Emmanuel constantly harassed Klein. Her closest sister in age, Sidonie, took pity on Klein and taught her arithmetic and how to read. However, when Klein was only 4 years old, both she and Sidonie came down with tuberculosis. Sidonie died, and her death was very traumatic for Klein. Klein suffered from depression throughout her life, and even spent some time in a hospital being treated for it during her 20s (Sayers, 1991; Segal, 2004). This may have had a lot to do with Klein’s focus on the death instinct and aggression during early childhood development. Her own descriptions of childhood can seem quite frightening:
We get to look upon the child’s fear of being devoured, or cut up, or torn to pieces, or its terror of being surrounded and pursued by menacing figures, as a regular component of its mental life; and we know that the man-eating wolf, the fire-spewing dragon, and all the evil monsters out of myths and fairy stories flourish and exert their unconscious influence in the fantasy of each individual child, and it feels itself persecuted and threatened by those evil shapes. (pgs. 254-255; Klein, 1930/1973)
Not only are such early childhood challenges frightening for individuals, Klein also believed that all attempts to improve humanity as a whole have failed because no one has understood “the full depth and vigor” of the aggressive instincts in each person. Klein believed that psychoanalysis could help both individuals and all humanity by alleviating the anxiety caused by the hatred and fear that she proposed all children experience during their psychodynamic development (Klein, 1930/1973). And so, Klein expressed the following desire for psychoanalysis:
…I hope, child analysis will become as much a part of every person’s upbringing as school education is now. Then, perhaps, that hostile attitude, springing from fear and suspicion, which is latent more or less strongly in each human being, and which intensifies a hundredfold in him every impulse of destruction, will give way to kindlier and more trustful feelings toward his fellow men, and people may inhabit the world together in greater peace and goodwill than they do now. (pgs. 267-268; Klein, 1930/1973).
Donald W. Winnicott
Anna Freud and Melanie Klein represent two extremes in the debate over the development of personality in childhood and how psychoanalysis can help to understand that development and treat psychological disorders. Anna Freud strictly adhered to her father’s theory, believing that young children lacked the psychological development necessary for participating fully in adult-like psychoanalysis. Klein, on the other hand, considered children quite advanced at birth, with the death-instinct and its aggressive impulses being every bit as important as Eros and the libido. In contrast to these extremes, an independent school of object relations theorists developed with more moderate views. Donald Winnicott was one of the most influential of these more moderate theorists, as were Margaret Mahler and Heinz Kohut. We will take a look at some of the ideas of Mahler and Kohut in the next section.
Winnicott (1896-1971) was a pediatrician before becoming an analyst, so he brought a wealth of experience in observing mother-infant interactions to psychoanalysis. Already well respected for his medical treatment of children, Winnicott became increasingly interested in their emotional disorders. So, he joined a group of psychoanalysts being formed in London under the guidance of Sigmund Freud (Winnicott, Shepherd, & Davis, 1986). His first analyst was James Strachey, the man responsible for translating much of Freud’s work into English and who was also instrumental in bringing Klein to England. Winnicott continued his analysis with Joan Riviere, one of Klein’s closest colleagues, and he was eventually supervised by Klein herself (Mitchell & Black, 1995). Due to his prior experience and independent spirit, however, he developed his own theories separately from those of Klein.
Winnicott saw the early years of life as being a time when the child must transition from a state of subjective omnipotence toward one of objective reality. When a newborn is hungry, the breast appears. When a newborn is cold, it is wrapped in a blanket and warmed. The baby believes that it has created these conditions through its own wishing, and so it feels omnipotent. The mother’s responsibility during this time is to cater to the baby’s every wish, to anticipate the needs of the child. As a result, the baby does indeed have its wishes granted almost immediately. This subjective sense of self, as an empowered individual, is crucial to the core of personality as the child grows and represents the true self (Kernberg, 2004; Mitchell & Black, 1995; Winnicott, 1967/1986).
For this development to proceed in a healthy manner, the child must have what Winnicott called a good enough mother (Winnicott, 1945/1996, 1968a,b/2002, 1968c/1986). The good enough mother at first fulfills the child’s wishes immediately and completely, but then withdraws when not needed. This creates an environment in which the child is protected without realizing it is being protected. Over time, the mother slowly withdraws even from the immediate satisfaction of the child’s needs. This allows the child to develop a sense of objective reality, the reality that the world does not immediately and completely satisfy anyone’s desires and needs, and that wishing does not lead to satisfaction. So the good enough mother is not a perfect mother in the sense that she provides forever anything that the child wants. Instead, she does what is best for the development of the child, offering fulfillment and protection when needed, and withdrawing when the child must pursue its own development. Winnicott considered the unique condition of the good enough mother as something quite fascinating:
A good enough mother starts off with a high degree of adaptation to the baby’s needs. That is what “good-enough” means, this tremendous capacity that mothers ordinarily have to give themselves over to identification with the baby...The mother is laying down the basis for the mental health of the baby, and more than health - fulfillment and richness, with all the dangers and conflicts that these bring, with all the awkwardnesses that belong to growth and development. (pg. 234; Winnicott, 1968b/2002)
Figure \(2\)
A good enough mother satisfies the needs of her child, but withdraws when the child does not need her, eventually no longer being available to the child in an instant. Over time, this allows the child to develop a realistic sense of the world.
Discussion Question: Donald Winnicott believed that healthy development required a child to have a good enough mother. Do you think you had a good enough mother (or father), and do you agree with this approach to raising an infant?
There is at least one big problem with discussing how extraordinary the good enough mother is: it seems to ignore the role of the father. However, this was not the case. Although Winnicott emphasized the biological reality that the father does not share the same physiological relationship that the mother and child share, he did acknowledge that in the course of development the father plays an important role (Winnicott, 1968b/2002, 1968c/1986). Thus, in considering the overall development of the child, he acknowledges the role of good enough parents:
I must be careful. So easily in describing what very young children need I can seem to be wanting parents to be selfless angels, and expecting the world to be ideal…Of children, even of babies, it can be said that they do not do well on mechanical perfection. They need human beings around them who both succeed and fail.
I like to use the words “good enough.” Good enough parents can be used by babies and young children, and good enough means you and me. In order to be consistent, and so to be predictable for our children, we must be ourselves. If we are ourselves our children can get to know us. Certainly if we are acting a part we shall be found out when we get caught without our make-up. (pg. 179; Winnicott, 1969/2002)
Objective reality is not, however, the goal of development. It is just as extreme as subjective omnipotence. While it is true that wishing does not lead to satisfaction, it is also true that loved ones will help to satisfy our needs and desires to the best of their ability. An individual living entirely in the realm of objective reality lacks the subjective core of their true self and cannot connect with others. Instead, they live in expectation of what others will do, influenced entirely by external stimuli (Mitchell & Black, 1995). Such individuals develop what is called a false self disorder (Winnicott, 1964/1986, 1967/1986, 1971). Although Winnicott described the false self as a successful defense, within the context of ongoing development, he did not consider it to be a condition of psychological good health (Winnicott, 1964/1986, 1967/1986). However, it is part of normal development in every person’s life. For example, children are taught to say “thank you” even when they may not be thankful for something. We actually teach them to lie, as part of the price for socialization. However, some children find it difficult because of the need to continually re-establish the importance of the true self relative to the false self (Winnicott, 1964).
For Winnicott, the process of transitioning from subjective omnipotence toward objective reality is crucial to development. The transitional experience is not just a concept, however, since it often involves transitional objects. A child’s blanket, or a teddy bear, is very important to the child. They do not exist merely as a substitute for the mother, they are also an extension of the child’s own self. This allows the child to experience a world that is neither entirely within its control nor entirely beyond its control (Kernberg, 2004; Mitchell & Black, 1995). Such a world is closer to the condition in which most of us actually live, and fits well with Winnicott’s definition of the good enough parent: one who is honest and real in dealing with their children. The relationship between the child and its mother, as well as the relationships between the child and its larger family, are actively involved in this transitional experience. There is an intimate connection between a mother and a child when they are playing, and that connection exists in a common ground: the transitional space that is neither child nor mother. Because this is a shared and secret place, it is a symbol of the trust and union between them. Taken further, this space becomes an opportunity for the child to see itself mirrored in the mother’s face. If the mother is loving and supportive, the child is able to develop a sense of feeling real (Winnicott, 1968a/2002). Although the relationship with the mother may be the most special, these phenomena do carry over to the father and the rest of the family as well (Winnicott, 1966/2002).
Discussion Question: Winnicott felt that transitional objects were important for helping children to develop without too much anxiety. Did you have a favorite transitional object, and do you still have it? Do you think it is healthy for children to have such objects, and what might you do with your own children if you have them? If you already have children, do they have transitional objects, and did you ever consciously expect them to have them?
Winnicott proposed that the transition that occurs during early development, from subjective omnipotence to objective reality, is facilitated by transitional objects. In the picture on the left, John is cuddling his blanket. To the right is John’s other important transitional object, his gorilla HaHas, and the author’s old Teddy bear. [Images © 2010 Mark Kelland]
For Winnicott, the psychoanalytic process was an opportunity for the patient to re-experience the early subjective experiences of a relationship with the good enough mother. The therapist takes the role of the good enough mother, allowing the patient to spontaneously “be” in the relationship, while the analyst tries to anticipate and accommodate the patient’s needs. The hope is that the analyst and the therapeutic environment will allow the patient’s aborted development to be reanimated, with the patient’s true self emerging as a result (Mitchell & Black, 1995). However, there can be no single technique in this process, as each case is different (Winnicott, 1971). More important than technique is the analyst’s overall skill as an analyst, their ability to make use of various techniques within the psychoanalytic session. Perhaps the most important aspect of this overall view of what is necessary for effective psychoanalysis, according to Winnicott, is that the analyst needs to have been a good, healthy candidate in the first place. Winnicott believed that “it is not easy to turn a badly selected candidate into a good analyst…” (Winnicott, 1971).
Although Winnicott may have felt that technique was not some special trick to be used by anyone in performing psychoanalysis, he did have some favorite techniques. As described above, he watched the playful interaction between child and mother, in much the same way as Klein used her play technique. Winnicott also liked to use the Squiggle Game, a technique that makes use of drawings by the child and the analyst, including the opportunity for each to make changes in the other’s drawings. Winnicott believed that this process provided a special opportunity to make contact with the child, in which it felt to him as if the child were alongside him helping to describe the case (Winnicott, 1971). In Therapeutic Consultations in Child Psychiatry, Winnicott (1971) offers many examples of such drawings along with brief descriptions and analyses of the corresponding cases.
In closing, Winnicott felt it was important to focus on psychological health, and he defined this as something much more than simply making it through each day, going to work, and raising a family. He believed that healthy individuals actually lived three different lives: 1) a life in the world, with interpersonal relationships being key; 2) a personal psychic reality, including creativity and dreams; and 3) their cultural experience. Winnicott admitted that it was difficult to incorporate the cultural experience into the life of an individual. However, he favored the transitional space between the child and its mother, and felt that it was dependent on the mother having been very supportive of the child during development (Winnicott, 1967/1986). In considering the overall purpose of life, in contrast to Freud’s perspective, Winnicott wrote:
...What is life about? I do not need to know the answer, but we can agree that it is more nearly about BEING than about sex…Being and feeling real belong essentially to health, and it is only if we can take being for granted that we can get on to the more positive things…the vast majority of people take feeling real for granted, but at what cost? To what extent are they denying a fact, namely, that there could be a danger for them of feeling unreal, of feeling possessed, of feeling they are not themselves, of falling for ever, of having no orientation, of being detached from their bodies, of being annihilated, of being nothing, nowhere? Health is not associated with denial of anything. (pgs. 34-35; Winnicott, 1967/1986)
The Final Development of Individuality: Margaret Mahler and Heinz Kohut
Margaret Mahler (1897-1985), was also a pediatrician before becoming a child analyst, and the early relationship between a child and its mother had a significant impact on her views of developmental ego psychology. At birth, according to Mahler, a child is focused entirely on itself, in a state of primary narcissism known as the normal autistic phase. In agreement with Sigmund Freud, Mahler believed that in the first few weeks of life there is very little cathexis of libido outside of the child itself. She borrowed Freud’s analogy of a bird’s egg to describe this period in which the child has minimal interaction with external stimuli. Through contact with the mother, however, the child slowly becomes aware that it cannot satisfy its needs by itself. As the child becomes dimly aware of the mother’s activities, the child begins to think of itself and its mother as an inseparable system. This intimate connection between child and mother is called normal symbiosis (Kernberg, 2004; Mahler, Pine, & Bergman, 1975; Mitchell & Black, 1995). As important as this stage is for the development of the child, the child still needs to develop a sense of individuality. That process is known as separation-individuation:
We refer to the psychological birth of the individual as the separation-individuation process: the establishment of a sense of separateness from, and relation to, a world of reality, particularly with regard to the experiences of one’s own body and to the principal representative of the world as the infant experiences it, the primary love object. Like any intrapsychic process, this one reverberates throughout the life cycle. It is never finished; it remains always active…(pg. 3; Mahler, Pine, & Bergman, 1975)
Separation-individuation, therefore, refers to the two main tasks that a young child must accomplish in order to grow up. First, they must separate from their mother (including the psychological understanding that they and their mother are two separate beings), and then they must fully develop their individuality. According to Mahler, this process involves a series of four subphases:differentiation, practicing, rapprochement, and consolidation. The earliest subphase, differentiation, is signaled by the child’s increasing alertness around the age of 4 to 5 months. Following a “hatching process”, the child directs much of its attention outward, but this alternates with the child often turning back to the mother as its point of orientation. Transitional objects, as described by Winnicott, are also important during this period. As the child becomes old enough to start crawling, it moves out into the world and begins practicing its ability to interact with the environment. The practicing subphase enters full force as the child begins to walk, and an important aspect of this is a full, physical understanding of the child’s separateness from its mother. Accordingly, its interests can now spill over into the many toys and other objects the child discovers in the world (Kernberg, 2004; Mahler, Pine, & Bergman, 1975; Mitchell & Black, 1995).
During the rapprochement subphase (approximately 1 ½ to 2 years of age), the child’s psychological development catches up with its physical development, and the child potentially enters a state of confusion and anxiety. The child becomes aware that the mobility it gained during the practicing subphase has had the unfortunate effect of truly, and physically, separating the child from its mother. The distress this causes leads the child to regularly check in with its mother for security. This is a progressive stage, but is often seen as a regression by the parents (Mitchell & Black, 1995). Pushing the child away too early at this stage can lead to psychological problems later in life, and Mahler urged that one cannot emphasize too strongly the importance of the mother providing optimal emotional availability to the child (Mahler, Pine, & Bergman, 1975). If all goes well, the child will then enter the final subphase and consolidate a definite, and in some aspects lifelong, individuality. Mahler believed that this process indicated a far-reaching structuralization of the ego and definite signs that the child has internalized parental demands, an indication that the superego has developed as well (Mahler, Pine, & Bergman, 1975).
Louise Kaplan, who worked with Mahler for a time, was interested in applying the theory Mahler had developed to the full range of human life, both in terms of age and cultural differences. Although Kaplan agreed that the most profound development occurs during early childhood, she emphasized that the purpose of all this, from the point of view of society, is what sort of person will grow out of each child.
In the first three years of life every human being undergoes yet a second birth, in which he is born as a psychological being possessing selfhood and separate identity. The quality of self an infant achieves in those crucial three years will profoundly affect all of his subsequent existence. (pg. 15; Kaplan, 1978)
The conditions of these early years, however, are not always good. In many cultures women are oppressed, sometimes violently. This has an effect on the mothering these women are able to provide their children. Male children may be valued, but in a possessive way. Female children may be scorned, as they lack the male privileges the mother wishes she had herself (Kaplan, 1978). Of course, not all cultures are like this. Kaplan describes a wide variety of cultures, both primitive and modern, and considers some of the many factors that contribute to the nature of adulthood. She compared hunter/gatherer cultures such as the Zhun/twasi or the Ik, tribes found in southern Africa, as they are compelled to transition from old ways of life toward more modern ways. The increased aggressiveness and general life stress that Kaplan observed coinciding with these changes in culture suggests to her that our modern way of life has led to many of these psychological problems. She believed that in “every adult human there still lives a helpless child who is afraid of aloneness.” When social conditions are competitive and/or abusive, adults are as alone and helpless as children. According to Kaplan, this would be true even if there were perfect babies and perfect mothers (Kaplan, 1978).
Discussion Question: Mahler believed that children develop through three stages. First the child focuses on itself, then the child becomes aware of their intimate relationship with their mother, and finally a sense of individuality develops. If you look at your relationship with your parents, which stage seems more dominant: your narcissism, your symbiosis, or your separation-individuation?
Heinz Kohut (1913-1981) continued and expanded on this perspective of the important and revealing relationship between childhood development and the life and psychological health (or not) of adults. Kohut was born in Vienna, and studied medicine at the University of Vienna, as Sigmund Freud had. Also similar to Freud, he took some time to study medicine in Paris. In 1937, Kohut’s father died and he was deeply troubled. He first went to a psychologist for treatment, but later sought psychoanalysis from August Aichhorn. Aichhorn was a highly respected analyst, and a close personal friend of both Sigmund and Anna Freud. The success of his analysis greatly interested Kohut himself, and led to his becoming an analyst as well. After fleeing Nazi controlled Austria in 1939, Kohut eventually settled in America. He continued his psychoanalytic training at the Chicago Institute for Psychoanalysis (where Karen Horney had been the first associate director), but not without difficulty. Initially, Kohut was soundly rejected by the institute. He then entered into therapy with Ruth Eissler, a training and supervising analyst at the institute, and the wife of a protégé of the well-respected Aichhorn. Making these connections was an intentional effort at good networking, and Kohut was later accepted into training (Strozier, 2001).
In his theory, Kohut focused on the self and narcissism. Most theorists express a negative view of narcissism, but Kohut felt it served an essential role in the development of individuality. Early childhood is a time of vitality, children are exuberant, expansive, and creative. Kohut was interested in the fate of this vitality, and how it can be preserved into adulthood (Mitchell & Black, 1995). The development of a healthy self depends on three kinds of selfobject experiences. Selfobjects are the adults who care for the child, and they need to provide for both physiological and psychological needs. First, a child needs selfobjects who confirm the child’s vitality, who look on the child with joy and approval. In this first basic narcissistic process, known as mirroring, the child is able to see itself as wonderful through the eyes of others. An important aspect of mirroring is empathy, a state in which the mother and child actually share their feelings as if they were one (Strozier, 2001). The second type of selfobject satisfies the child’s need to be involved with powerful others, people the child can look up to as images of calmness, control, and omnipotence. This second basic narcissistic process, known as idealizing, allows the child to experience the wonder of others, and to consider itself special due to its relationship with them. Finally, the child needs to experience others who are open and similar to the child, allowing the child to sense an essential likeness between the child and the selfobject. Although this was not described as a basic narcissistic process, its lack of development can be seen in the twinship transference described below. These various relationships will help the child to develop a healthy narcissism, a realistic sense of self-esteem. Although reality will begin to chip away at this narcissism, in a healthy environment the child will survive the occasional frustration and disappointment and develop a secure, resilient self that maintains some kernel of the vitality of early childhood into adulthood (Mitchell & Black, 1995).
An important question, however, is how are the selfobjects incorporated into the child’s sense of self? As suggested above, mirroring is the first important step. As the child observes the mother’s joy and approval of the child, the child comes to believe that it must be wonderful. Why else would the mother be so happy to see the child? Similarly, as the child observes selfobjects that are powerful and calm, those selfobjects the child has idealized, the child projects the best part of itself onto those selfobjects. Accordingly, the child sees those selfobjects as wonderful and, since the child is with them, the child must be wonderful too. In these instances the child strengthens its own sense of self, its own narcissism, in comparison to others. These processes can be seen in the psychoanalytic session with patients who have not developed a healthy sense of self. They will exhibit three types of selfobject transference toward the analyst: mirroring transference, idealizing transference, and twinship transference. In mirroring transference, the attention of the analyst allows the patient to feel more real and more internally substantial. In idealizing transference, the patient comes to believe that the analyst is an important and powerful person, and the patient is to be valued by virtue of their association with the analyst. And finally, in twinship transference, the patient feels as if they are a companion to the analyst in the process of therapy (Mitchell & Black, 1995; Strozier, 2001).
Discussion Question: Heinz Kohut also considered a degree of narcissism to be necessary for a child to develop a sense of individuality. Are you more likely to choose friends who admire you (mirroring), or whom you admire (idealizing)? Or do you choose friends who are similar to you, and who help you to develop a realistic sense of self (twinship)? In each instance, is your choice an overwhelming desire, or just one aspect of choosing your friends?
Late in his career Kohut turned his attention to a topic that had also captured Sigmund Freud’s attention late in his career: God and religion. Kohut felt that Freud had made a crucial error in evaluating religion. Freud believed that religion would be undone by the study of science, but Kohut felt that it was simply wrong to try evaluating religion in a scientific way. He did not consider God to be an internalized image of the frightening and all-powerful father, but rather an internalization of the earliest and most wonderful relationship in life: the love of a mother (Strozier, 2001). In keeping with his basic theory, he tried to outline the precise psychological needs that were being satisfied by religion. Most importantly, there is something uplifting about religion. The mirroring need is typically referred to as grace, the gifts freely given to us by God, something psychologically similar to the love shown by a mother holding and cuddling her beloved child. God is, of course, the ultimate in idealization, a perfect being, all-knowing and all-powerful. While an immense and ornate cathedral or temple may seem awesome to those who are religious, other spiritual people can be similarly impressed looking down from a mountaintop, walking along the ocean shore, or listening to beautiful music. As for the final selfobject need, twinship, one can easily relate the community of a religious congregation. Perhaps it is no coincidence that we often hear priests and ministers talking about a congregation as the children of God. Although it was never quite clear what Kohut’s own religious or spiritual beliefs were, he did write:
There is something about this world in our experience that does lift us up beyond the simplicity of an individual existence, that lifts us into something higher, enduring, or, as I would rather say, timeless. (pg. 332; quoted in Strozier, 2001)
connections across cultures
Cultural Perspectives on Parent-Child Attachment
This is a true story. I was at our local gym while my older son was at gymnastics practice. There were some children attending a party at the gym, including a little boy about 2 years old who was running around on one of the gymnastics floors. He fell down and hurt himself, and he started crying. A couple of the coaches walked over to help him, but he just cried louder and roughly turned away from them. Then he heard his mother calling him. He ran over to his mother, crying all the way, and she scooped him up into her arms. Almost immediately he stopped crying, started squirming around, and when she put him down he raced back onto the floor and started running wildly in circles and yelling for joy! This is a marvelous example of what psychologists call a secure attachment.
Attachment theory was developed by John Bowlby and advanced by Mary Ainsworth (see Jarvis, 2004; Mitchell & Black, 1995; Rothbaum, Weisz, Pott, Miyake, & Morelli, 2000). Bowlby considered attachment theory to fit within an object relations approach to psychodynamic theory, but it was largely rejected by the psychodynamic community. He proposed an evolutionary basis for attachment, a basis that serves the species by aiding in the survival of the infant. In other words, the attachment between an infant and its primary caregivers helps to ensure both that the infant stays close to the parents (the objects, if we consider object relations theory) and the parents respond quickly and appropriately to the needs of the infant. Ainsworth studied the attachment styles of children using a technique called the strange situation. In the strange situation, one of the caregivers (let’s say the mother) takes a child into an unfamiliar playroom, and allows the child to explore. A stranger enters, interacts with the mother, and then tries to interact with the child. The mother leaves, then returns, the stranger leaves, and then the mother leaves again. The stranger then returns, then leaves, and finally the mother returns. Throughout all of these events, the child is observed for evidence of having a secure base (feeling comfortable enough to explore the unfamiliar room), separation anxiety (due to the absence of the mother), stranger anxiety (due to the presence of the stranger), and, finally, for its attachment to its mother (when the mother returns at the end of the experiment) (Jarvis, 2004). A securely attached child, as in the story above, will feel free to explore a new environment. When hurt or frightened, however, the child will seek its mother for protection and comfort. Having found that comfort, having affirmed its secure base, the child will then venture out again. But is this true for children in all cultures?
It has been suggested that attachment theory and interpretations of the strange situation are embedded in Western perspectives and ideals, particularly those of middle-class White Americans. In particular, a secure attachment seems to promote the independence of the child, and its ability to separate from the mother and move out into the world. One of the key measures of a secure attachment is that child is comforted by the presence of its mother, particularly after the child has been in the presence of strangers. However, numerous cultural problems arise from these perspectives. For example, in many African American households children are raised by different members of an extended family, possible including individuals who are not related to the family. Thus, African American children raised in such an environment may respond quite differently to the strange situation, it may not be novel to them (Belgrave & Allison, 2006). As mentioned briefly in Chapter 1, Kenneth and Mamie Clark were two very important individuals who studied the development of African American children. Respectively, they were the first African American man and African American woman to receive Ph.D. degrees in psychology. In addition to studying racial identification in African American children during the 1940s (Clark & Clark, 1947), they established what became the Northside Center for Child Development in Harlem, New York. Primarily under Mamie Clark’s guidance, the center provided a broad range of psychological services including consultations for behavioral and emotional problems, vocational guidance for adolescents, and child-rearing education for African American parents. In addition, the center provided the same services for a smaller number of White and Puerto Rican children from working-class families in Harlem. Mamie Clark’s goal was to give the children of Harlem the same sense of emotional security that she had enjoyed as a child, a sense of security that was elusive in the poor neighborhoods of Harlem (Lal, 2002).
Rothbaum et al. (2000) compared American perspectives on attachment to those in Japan, a country with similar socioeconomic conditions but a very different history and culture. Attachment theory has been considered to have three, universal core hypotheses: sensitivity, competence, and the secure base. In order for a child to feel secure, the mother must respond quickly and appropriately when the child perceives a threat. In other words, she must be sensitive to the child’s needs. When a child feels secure, and has a secure relationship with its primary caregivers, attachment theory predicts that the child will grow up socially and emotionally competent. And finally, the secure base is intimately linked with the child’s exploration of the environment and the child’s ability to respond appropriately to environmental stimuli.
If we compare Japan to the United States, and how we define each of the factors listed above, we come to very different conclusions. According to Rothbaum et al. (2000), so-called sensitive parents in the United States emphasize the child’s autonomy. They expect their children to explore the environment, and they wait for their children to express their needs before responding. In Japan, however, mothers try to anticipate their children’s needs, and they promote the child’s dependence on its mother. In Japan, mothers emphasize emotion and social factors, as opposed to communication and physical objects. Similar differences are seen with regard to social competence. An American who grows up socially competent (assumed to be the result of secure attachments in childhood) is expected to be independent and self-sufficient, willing to express and defend their own opinions. In Japan, however, as in all typical collectivist cultures, a socially competent adult is expected to be dependent on the social in-group and emotionally restrained (Rothbaum et al., 2000). With regard to the secure base, in the United States it is expected to encourage the child’s autonomy, exploration, and general orientation to the environment first. In contrast, Japanese children are encouraged to focus more on their mothers, in both distressing situations and in those involving positive emotions. Since the expectations of each aspect of attachment theory are so different in Japan and the United States, which are assumed to be representative of Western and Eastern societies, Rothbaum et al. (2000) question whether attachment theory itself is truly universal. They do not question that children and their parents form important and deeply meaningful attachments, but they do question whether attachment can be reasonably evaluated the same way in all cultures.
There are other researchers, however, who question whether the perspectives of Rothbaum et al. (2000) justify rejecting the universality of attachment theory. For example, Posada and Jacobs (2001) acknowledge differences in behavior among different cultures, but they emphasize that all children have the potential for developing secure base relations with their parents and the subsequent secure attachments. It is important to keep in mind that Bowlby’s theory was originally proposed in an evolutionary context and humans are, after all, primates. Also, Ainsworth first coined the term secure base relationship after studying a rural, African community in Uganda, not in a Western culture (Posada and Jacobs, 2001). Rothbaum et al. (2000) also suggest that the relationship between Japanese mothers and their children is better expressed by amae, a dependence on and presumption of another’s love. Amae has been described as what a child feels when seeking his or her mother (consider the child in the story at the beginning of this section, as he ran crying to his mother). However, when the question is asked in the right way, Japanese mothers would prefer their children to fit a definition of a secure child as opposed to one experiencing amae (van IJzendoorn and Sagi, 2001). Indeed, the very meaning of amae is not clearly understood, and may not be easily compared to behaviors recognized in Western cultures (Gjerde, 2001). It may also be true that insecure relationships may be more adaptive in some cultures than secure attachments, and our misunderstanding of these concepts does not allow us to conclude which perspective on attachment theory, if any, should be preferred (Kondo-Ikemura, 2001).
Finally, since attachment problems do sometimes arise, and since attachment must be defined within a relational context, is an individual therapy such as psychoanalysis the best course? If family therapy might be a better option in some circumstances, is anything being done to address cultural issues there? Fortunately, the answer is yes. Psychologists have begun comparing and contrasting family therapy in such diverse cultures as Japan, Israel, and the U.S. Virgin Islands (Dudley-Grant, 2001; Halpern, 2001; Kameguchi & Murphy-Shigematsu, 2001; see also Kaslow, 2001). In keeping with the hopeful sentiments that Melanie Klein expressed regarding child psychoanalysis, Kaslow (2001) believes that family psychology has a role to play “in undertaking the challenges of working with and for families in creating a healthier, more peaceful, less violent world for all.”
A Contemporary Perspective: Otto Kernberg
Otto Kernberg (1928-present) is one of the leading figures in psychodynamic theory today. Kernberg has focused on two major paths: trying to integrate the various psychodynamic, ego psychology, and object relations theories into a unified perspective and trying to provide a research-based methodology for the treatment of patients, particularly patients with borderline personality organization (a pathological identity formation that includes all of the major personality disorders; Kernberg, 2004, Kernberg & Caligor, 2005).
Despite seemingly significant differences between Freud’s classical theory and the theories of the neo-Freudians we have examined above (as well as others we have not looked at), Kernberg has done an admirable job of bringing the theories into a cohesive framework. This was accomplished by setting up a hierarchical series of developmental levels at which failure to develop normally causes characteristic types of disorders, whereas successful development leads to a healthy individual. In contrast to Freud, Kernberg believes that an infant begins life as an emotional being unable to separate its own reality from others around it. As the child experiences object relations in this first stage of development, those emotions develop into the drives described by Freud: pleasant emotions lead to libidinal drives and unpleasant emotions lead to aggressive drives. During the second stage of development, the child’s continued development in relation to others leads to an understanding that objects can be both negative and positive (the process of splitting described by Klein), and this leads to a reduction in the intensity of love and hate toward those objects. In other words, the child can love flawed individuals, since the child does not need to completely love or completely hate the important objects in their life. In simple terms, according to Kernberg, individuals who fail to accomplish the first stage of development, an understanding that they are separate from others, develop psychotic disorders. Individuals who fail to accomplish the splitting necessary in the second stage of development will develop borderline disorders, characterized by an exaggerated fixation on “bad” self and object representations (Kernberg, 2004). Completing these first two stages does not end the process, however, because the third level is the one described by Freud himself: the developmental stage in which unconscious id (emotional) impulses threaten the individual’s sense of what is good and acceptable behavior. Thus, classic neurotic disorders still potentially face those who have moved beyond the more severe psychological pathologies of psychotic and borderline conditions (Kernberg, 2004; Mitchell & Black, 1995). We will examine Kernberg’s theory in more detail at the end of the chapter, where we will examine his psychoanalytic theory of personality disorders.
In 2004, Kernberg published an excellent book entitled Contemporary Controversies in Psychoanalytic Theory, Techniques, and Their Applications. In this chapter we have seen that many disagreements arose between neo-Freudian theorists, and at first glance their theories seem to disagree more than they agree. Kernberg, however, has this to say:
Psychoanalytic object relations theories constitute so broad a spectrum of approaches that it might be said that psychoanalysis itself, by its very nature, is an object relations theory: all psychoanalytic theorizing deals, after all, with the impact of early object relations on the genesis of unconscious conflict, the development of psychic structure, and the re-actualization or enactments of past pathogenic internalized object relations in transference developments in the current psychoanalytic situation. (pg. 26; Kernberg, 2004)
He offers an excellent summary of the basic elements of theorists we have examined (Klein, Winnicott, Sullivan, Mahler), as well as some we haven’t (Fairbairn, Jacobson), and how their theories can be blended with classical Freudian psychoanalytic theory. He then examines how psychoanalysts today are addressing a wide variety of unresolved topics, including: Freud’s dual-drive theory (libido and aggression), homosexuality and bisexuality, mourning and depression, social violence, and the resistance among many in the field of psychoanalysis to improved research and changes in psychoanalytic education and training (Kernberg, 2004).
In the final chapter of his book on Contemporary Controversies…, Kernberg examines the historical progression of psychoanalytic thought in English speaking countries (the so-called English schools). The “controversial discussions” of the 1940s led to a mutual agreement to disagree among three major lines of thought: the ego psychologists following Anna Freud, the object relations theorists following Melanie Klein, and the independent school that included D. W. Winnicott. Although the result of these discussion was to delineate the differences among these approaches, over time practicing psychoanalysts recognized the limitations of each approach (Kernberg, 2004). So, many theorists and clinicians began bringing together those elements of each approach that were most valuable. Along the way came some very different perspectives, such as those of Kohut and his self psychology and the culturalist views of Sullivan, and the field was changed dramatically. Kernberg also contrasts these developments to those within the French school of psychoanalysis, a somewhat more traditional approach that emphasizes psychoanalytic method over technique (Kernberg, 2004). He concludes by suggesting that the future of psychoanalytic thought may be a blending of the English and French schools (Kernberg, 2004). One notable early French psychoanalyst was Princess Marie Bonaparte, a personal friend of Sigmund and Anna Freud. We will briefly look at her contributions to psychoanalytic theory in a later chapter. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/05%3A_Neo-Freudian_Perspectives_on_Personality/5.03%3A_Object_Relations_Theory.txt |
Kernberg’s Psychoanalytic Theory of Personality Disorders
Otto Kernberg is one of the leading figures advocating a psychoanalytic theory of personality disorders, particularly within an object relations perspective (see Kernberg & Caligor, 2005). In important ways he has followed the model of Sigmund Freud, in that he has based much of this theory on experience psychoanalyzing patients. His theory has been developed in conjunction with the therapeutic approach that grew out of both that experience and his developing theory. Thus, Kernberg’s work represents an applied approach to the study of personality disorders.
Kernberg’s model of personality disorder emphasizes personality structures, which are derived from the interaction of constitutional (i.e., temperamental) and environmental factors during early childhood. These structures are relatively stable mental functions or processes that serve to organize an individual’s behavior and subjective experiences. Psychological structures that are conscious and observable are typically referred to as “surface” structures, whereas those that are primarily unconscious are called “deep” structures. The basic building blocks of these personality structures are internalized object relations. Internalized object relations are particular emotional states linked to a specific image of a particular relationship (e.g., anxiety linked with an image of a confused and unsure self and a critical, judgmental parent). These internal object relations are integrated and hierarchically organized into the higher-order structures that form the personality. At the core of this personality organization is the individual’s “identity.” According to Kernberg and Caligor (2005), a healthy, consolidated identity corresponds with a stable and realistic sense of self and others. In contrast, a pathological identity stems from an unstable, polarized, and unrealistic sense of self and others. This pathology arises because the emotional states of the internalized object relations are predominately negative; they are crude, intense, and poorly modulated. There is also a preponderance of aggression and defensive mechanisms based on primitive dissociation (splitting).
A normal personality, according to Kernberg, is characterized by an integrated concept of self and an integrated concept of significant others. Individuals with a normal personality can express a wide range of emotions, and even intense emotions do not lead to a loss of impulse control. Normal individuals have an integrated and mature system of internalized values, and they can appropriately manage their sexual, dependent, and aggressive motivations. The development of the normal personality depends to a large extent on the relationship the child has with its mother (the primary caregiver). If the mother is successful in helping the child transform highly emotional states into integrated experiences, then the child’s internalized object relations will be primarily positive. Erik Erikson first proposed this concept, and he believed that ego identity was not complete until adolescence (see Kernberg & Caligor, 2005).
The abnormal personality, in contrast, results from early childhood interactions with caregivers who do not help to transform highly emotional states into integrated experiences. On the contrary, caregiver’s failure to help the child integrate its emotional experiences can intensify the child’s anger and anxiety, perhaps leading to an increase in aggression. Consequently, a child who cannot integrate the good and bad aspects of its emotional states and object relations will come to depend on defense mechanisms that enhance continued splitting. The child becomes fixated at a poorly integrated level of development. One of the most important implications of this approach to personality disorders is the role that primary caregivers play. What constitutes a parent, or other caregiver, who cannot help the child to integrate its emotional states in a healthy, normal manner? Numerous studies in different countries have identified a high rate of physical and sexual abuse in patients with borderline disorders.
The level at which integration fails to occur results in the nature of the pathological personality organization. A psychotic personality organization occurs when the individual has not integrated a clear concept of self and significant others. They do not have a clear identity formation, they may not distinguish intrapsychic processes from external stimuli, and therefore there may be a lack of reality testing. According to Kernberg, psychotic personality organization represents an atypical form of psychosis (Kernberg & Caligor, 2005). Borderline personality organization is similar, but less severe. The individual has achieved a level of integration in which the self and others are seen as separate, but that integration is pathological. There is a great deal of defensive splitting, and the individual lacks a clearly developed set of internalized values (the superego). Emotion fluctuates from intense to superficial, emotion is generally negative, and there may be excessive aggression. There is also a lack of integration of the sense of others, making relationships particularly unstable and unrealistic. Curiously, achieving an integrated sense of self and others does not resolve all psychological problems associated with personality development. Even if an individual has moved beyond the stages of psychotic and borderline personality development, and developed an integrated sense of self and others, they may still be prone to neurotic personality organization. At this level, defenses are based primarily on repression and stable reality testing. This is the level at which Sigmund Freud studied personality and psychological disorders, according to Kernberg (2004).
With this perspective in mind, how then do we treat individuals with personality disorders? Kernberg’s primary focus is an exploration of the patient’s internal object relations. These pathological internal object relations play out in the patient’s current interpersonal relationships, and through the process of transference they play out in the therapeutic relationship as well. In patients with neurotic personality disorganization these transferences are relatively stable and understandable within a psychoanalytic context. With more severe personality organizations, the transferences are poorly organized, unstable, unrealistic, and the activation of the internal object relations can be immediate and chaotic. There is also a rapid interchange between the roles played by the patient with regard to which object of an internal object relation they identify with, and, accordingly, which object they attribute as the analyst. With severe borderline patients special attention must always be paid to the strong tendency toward acting out, which can lead to suicide attempts, drug abuse, self-mutilation, and other aggressive behavior (Kernberg & Caligor, 2005).
Therapy with these patients is a long and difficult task. In order for psychoanalysis to be successful, it may require multiple sessions each week for 4 to 6 years. This is necessary because the goal is no less ambitious than modifying personality organization and the quality of the patient’s internal object relations, all of which were laid down during the formative years of infancy and early childhood (Kernberg & Caligor, 2005). Within the context of this theory, the outcome for individuals with a neurotic personality organization is hopeful, whereas the outcome for those with a borderline personality organization remains challenging. Kernberg and Caligor (2005) do not propose an approach to the treatment of patients with a psychotic personality organization. Therefore, continued research and clinical application will be necessary if we hope to be able to treat all patients suffering from personality disorders.
5.S: Chapter Summary
Review of Key Points
• Anna Freud began her career as a teacher. This concern for children continued throughout her career, much of which was spent caring for children at the Hampstead War Nursery (which later became the Hampstead Clinic, and is now called the Anna Freud Centre, as a tribute to the career of Anna Freud).
• As her father had, Anna Freud described defense mechanisms as the means by which the ego avoids the anxiety associated with being unable to meet the demands of the id or the constraints of the superego.
• Anna Freud was one of the first psychoanalysts to work with children, and she used the same basic approach that she did with adults.
• When working with children, Anna Freud felt it was important to fill in gaps that the child could not (such as connecting manifest and latent content in dreams). She also believed that the psychoanalyst should help to educate the child with regard to his/her relationships.
• Since all aspects of relationships have importance, Melanie Klein proposed that the death-instinct and aggression are just as important as the life-instinct (Eros) and libido.
• Klein proposed that an infant goes through two developmental orientations: the paranoid-schizoid position later develops into the depressive position.
• Anna Freud and Melanie Klein disagreed about how fully the child could be psychoanalyzed, and how young they could be during psychoanalysis.
• In order for a child to develop a healthy personality and realize their true self, according to Winnicott, the child must have a good enough mother (and good enough parents).
• The transitional experience that children must go through may be facilitated by transitional objects (such as a blanket or teddy bear).
• Winnicott was an advocate of the Squiggle Game, a therapeutic technique that allows children to draw pictures to represent their thoughts and feelings.
• In order for the child to develop a sense of individuality, according to Mahler, the child must go through a process known as separation-individuation.
• Kohut believed that a certain measure of narcissism was necessary for the development of individuality.
• During psychoanalysis, the analyst can provide each of these types of relationships through mirroring transference, idealizing transference, and twinship transference. This allows the patient to feel more real and more substantial.
• Otto Kernberg has offered a perspective that blends all of the neo-Freudian and object relations theories together, suggesting that they represent a continuum of stages in human development. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/05%3A_Neo-Freudian_Perspectives_on_Personality/5.04%3A_Personality_Theory_in_Real_Life.txt |
Karen Horney stands alone as the only woman recognized as worthy of her own chapter in many personality textbooks, and the significance of her work certainly merits that honor. She did not, however, focus her entire career on the psychology of women. Horney came to believe that culture was more important than gender in determining differences between men and women. After refuting some of Freud’s theories on women, Horney shifted her focus to the development of basic anxiety in children, and the lifelong interpersonal relationship styles and intrapsychic conflicts that determine our personality and our personal adjustment.
Personally, Horney was a complex woman. Jack Rubins, who knew Horney during the last few years of her life, interviewed many people who knew her and came away with conflicting views:
She was described variously as both frail and powerful, both open and reticent, both warm and reserved, both close and detached, both a leader and needing to be led, both timid and awesome, both simple and profound. From these characterizations, the impression emerges that she was not only a complex personality but changeable and constantly changing. She was able to encompass and unify, though with struggle, many diverse attitudes and traits… (pg. 13; Rubins, 1972)
Erich Fromm, who was a lay-analyst with a Ph.D. (not an M.D. like most early psychoanalysts), focused even more than Horney on social influences, particularly one’s relationship with society itself. He not only knew and worked with Horney personally, but the two were intimately involved for a number of years, and Fromm analyzed Horney’s daughter Marianne. Both Horney and Fromm can be seen as extending Adler’s emphasis on social interest and cooperation (or the lack thereof), and their belief that individuals pursue safety and security to overcome their anxiety is similar to Adler’s concept of striving for superiority.
6.02: Brief Biography of Karen Horney
Karen Clementine Theodore Danielssen was born on September 16th, 1885, in Hamburg, Germany. Her father was Norwegian by birth, but had become a German national. A successful sailor, he had become the captain of his own ship, and his family accompanied him on a few of his voyages, including trips around Cape Horn, along the west coast of South America, and as far north as San Diego in the United States. Those trips established a life-long interest in travel, foreign customs, and diversity in the young Karen Horney. Although her father was a stern and repressive man, her mother, who was Dutch and 17 years younger than Horney’s father, was a dynamic, intelligent, and beautiful woman who maintained a very happy home for the children (Kelman, 1971; Rubins, 1972, 1978).
From early childhood, Horney enjoyed reading, studying, and going to school. She was particularly interested in the novels of Karl May, who often wrote about the Native Americans, and Horney would play many games in which she pretended to be an Indian (usually, Chief Winnetou, a fictional character from May’s novels). Her father believed that education was only for men, but her mother encouraged Horney’s schooling, and in doing so, set an example of independence that greatly influenced Horney’s life and career. Horney followed the traditional education of the day, covering science, math, French, Latin, English, and the humanities. She also took special classes in speech, and for a time was very interested in dancing, drama, and the theatre. Despite the challenging curriculum, she was an excellent student, and often placed first in her class. After being impressed by a friendly country doctor when she was 12, she decided to pursue a career in medicine. When she began college at the University of Freiburg-in-Breisgau, at the age of 20, her mother came along to get her settled in and care for her. Horney soon became good friends with Ida Grote, who moved in with Horney and her mother to help offset the costs of attending college. In 1906, Horney also met her future husband, Oskar Horney (Kelman, 1971; Rubins, 1972, 1978).
Over the next few years, she began her medical studies at the University of Gottingen, and then transferred to the University of Berlin, where she received her medical degree in 1911. In 1909 she had married Oskar Horney, who was described as a tall, slim, handsome man, a brilliant thinker, gifted organizer, and possessing great physical and emotional strength. He also attended the University of Berlin, eventually receiving doctorate degrees in Law, Economics, and Political Science! They soon had three daughters, Brigitte, Marianne, and Renate (between 1911 and 1915). Both Karen and Oskar Horney were successful in their careers during the beginning of their marriage. He worked as a lawyer for a munitions company, and did very well financially. She was actively developing her medical career, but had to work that much harder due to continued discrimination against women at the time. Still, the family spent time together on weekends, when her brother’s family often visited, and vacations. Nonetheless, the Horneys grew apart during these years. In 1923, during the turmoil following World War I, Oskar’s investments collapsed, and he eventually went bankrupt. A year later, he was stricken with severe encephalomeningitis, and spent 8 months in critical condition. These events radically altered his personality, as he became a broken and depressed person. In 1926 they separated, and never got back together. It was not, however, until 1939 that Karen Horney legally divorced her husband (Kelman, 1971; Rubins, 1972, 1978).
For Karen Horney’s career, the years in Berlin were important and productive. She entered into psychoanalysis with Karl Abraham, and later she was also analyzed by Hanns Sachs for a brief time. Abraham appointed her as an instructor in the Berlin Psychoanalytic Poliklinik in 1919, and brought her to the attention of Sigmund Freud (with high praise). She came to know many of the candidates for psychoanalytic training, and also became friends with many of them, including Melanie Klein, Wilhelm Reich, and Erich Fromm. She also had many friends outside psychoanalytic circles, including the existential theologian Paul Tillich and the neurologist Kurt Goldstein (who coined the term self-actualization). The psychoanalytic scene in Berlin was active and dynamic, and Horney was very much in the middle of it all, never shy about expressing her own ideas and different opinions. One such issue was that of training lay-analysts (psychologists, as opposed to psychiatrists). She favored allowing the training for the purposes of research, but clearly favored medical training for those who would actually practice therapeutic psychoanalysis. This eventually led to conflict between Horney and her close friend Erich Fromm. Despite the many favorable circumstances in Berlin at the time, in the early 1930s Hitler was elected, and the Nazi regime began. Although Horney was not Jewish, psychoanalysis was considered a “Jewish” science. So, when Franz Alexander, who had been asked to come to Chicago to establish a new psychoanalytic training institute, asked her to be the Associate Director of the newly established Chicago Institute of Psychoanalysis, she accepted (Kelman, 1971; Rubins, 1972, 1978). This dramatic turn in the events of her life did not, however, occur without a bit of chance. Alexander had first asked Helene Deutsch, one of the first women to join Freud’s psychoanalytic group (see Sayers, 1991), but Deutsch was not interested at the time. Thus, Horney was the second choice for the position that brought her to America for the rest of her life (Kelman, 1971; Rubins, 1972, 1978).
Once in Chicago, however, her theoretical differences with Alexander became a clear source of disagreement. Alexander was not willing, as Horney was, to discard significant elements of Freud’s original theories. So, just 2 years later, in 1934, Horney moved to New York City and joined the New York Psychoanalytic Institute. A number of her friends from Berlin had also come to New York, including Erich Fromm and Paul Tillich, and Wilhelm Reich also visited her there. She soon met Harry Stack Sullivan and Clara Thompson, as they were establishing their new training institute in New York. She also began teaching at the New School for Social Research, and the American Institute for Psychoanalysis. Her private practice grew steadily, and Alvin Johnson, the president of the New School (as it is commonly known) introduced her to W. W. Norton, who established a well-known publishing house that produced all of Horney’s books. Her first book was entitled The Neurotic Personality of Our Time (1937), which was followed by perhaps her two most radical books, New Ways in Psychoanalysis (1939) and Self-Analysis (1942). Horney had pursued new techniques in psychoanalysis and self-analysis, in part, because of her dissatisfaction with her own results as both a patient and a psychoanalyst. Later, she published Our Inner Conflicts (1945), Are You Considering Psychoanalysis (1946), and Neurosis and Human Growth: The Struggle Toward Self-Realization (1950). After her death, Harold Kelman (who was both a friend and colleague) brought together a number of her early papers in Feminine Psychology (Kelman, 1967), and, as a special tribute, Douglas Ingram published the transcripts of her final lectures, presented during a class she taught in the fall of 1952 (Ingram, 1987).
During the 1930s and 1940s, Horney’s personal life was a social whirlwind. She entertained frequently, often cooking herself, and when her own home was in disarray she would arrange the party at a friend’s home. She bought and sold vacation homes often, including one where Oskar Horney stayed for a time, and she traveled frequently. She enjoyed playing cards, and wanted to win so much that she would sometimes cheat! When caught, she would freely admit it, laugh, and say that her opponents should have stopped her sooner. Sometimes she would even gather her friends together and loudly sing German songs, in memory of their homeland (Kelman, 1971; Rubins, 1972, 1978).
At work, however, there was constant tension regarding theoretical and political issues in the psychoanalytic societies. In 1941, the New York Psychoanalytic Institute voted to disqualify Horney as a training analyst, due to her seemingly radical ideas on psychoanalytic techniques. Half the society did not vote, however, and they soon left to form a new institute. Immediately following the vote, Horney walked out, and a group of analysts led by Clara Thompson followed her. The very same month, twenty analysts joined Horney in forming the Association for the Advancement of Psychoanalysis, and Horney was asked to become the Dean of their soon to be established American Institute for Psychoanalysis. When Thompson suggested that Sullivan be granted honorary membership, and Horney recommended the same for Fromm, Fromm refused because he was not going to be recognized as a clinical psychoanalyst. The resulting controversy led to a committee review, which voted against Fromm’s membership. Among others, Fromm, Thompson, and Sullivan left the society. There were other political battles as well, and Horney was routinely torn between her professional beliefs, her need to control the direction of the society and institute, and her personal friendships with the individuals involved. Through it all, although she held strong beliefs (such as opposing therapeutic psychoanalysis by lay-analysts like Fromm), she nonetheless encouraged challenging the original theories developed by Freud, as well as her own theories:
I recall being impressed by her response at my first meeting with her, when I indicated my own curiosity and bent for research. She had warmly hoped I would continue this way, since her views needed further work and clarification. Indeed, during an interview in 1952, she stated that she knew her ideas would be changed, if not by herself by someone else. (pg. 37; Rubins, 1972)
By 1950, Horney seemed to be feeling lonely and isolated. Perhaps the political and theoretical battles had taken their toll, perhaps it was her strained relationships with her daughters (they were never really close), or perhaps it was the beginning of the cancer that would eventually take her life. Although Horney would not consult with her physician about the abdominal pains she was experiencing (thus she did not know that she had cancer), she did begin to develop strong spiritual interests. She occasionally attended Tillich’s sermons at St. John the Divine Church, though she seemed more interested in the philosophical and ethical aspects of religion than the spiritual aspects. She kept a copy of Aldous Huxley’s The Perennial Philosophy (1945/2004) by her bedside for over a year, reading daily on Huxley’s interpretations of Eastern and Western mystics. A few years earlier she had met D. T. Suzuki, and she became particularly interested in Zen. She was especially impressed by a book he recommended entitled Zen in the Art of Archery (Herrigel, 1953; based on an article he wrote in 1936). In 1951, Suzuki led Horney on a trip to Japan, where she visited a number of Zen temples and had lengthy discussions with Zen monks. Although she seemed more interested in the practical aspects of being a student of Zen, she nonetheless endeavored to put Zen principles into a context she could understand (such as equating enlightenment with self-realization; Rubins, 1972, 1978). Late in 1952, her cancer became so advanced that she finally sought medical care. However, it was too late. On December 4, 1952, she died peacefully, surrounded by daughters.
Placing Horney in Context: Culture and the Female Psyche
Karen Horney’s career intersected many areas of psychology, relevant both to the past and to the future. One of the first women trained in psychoanalysis, she was the first to challenge Freud’s views on women. She did not, however, attempt to reject his influence, but rather, felt that she honored him by building upon his achievements. The most significant change that she felt needed to be made was a shift away from the biological/medical model of Freud to one in which cultural factors were at least as important. Indeed, she challenged Freud’s fundamental belief that anxiety follows biological impulses, and instead suggested that our behaviors adapt themselves to a fundamental anxiety associated with the simple desire for survival and to cultural determinants of abnormal, anxiety-provoking situations.
Horney was also significant in the development of psychodynamic theory and psychoanalysis in America. She helped to establish psychoanalytic societies and training institutes in Chicago and New York. She was a friend and colleague to many influential psychoanalysts, including Harry Stack Sullivan and Erich Fromm. She encouraged cross-cultural research and practice through her own example, not only citing the work of anthropologists and sociologists, but also through her personal interest and support for the study of Zen Buddhism.
Although Horney herself abandoned the study of feminine psychology, suggesting instead that it represented the cultural effect of women being an oppressed minority group, her subsequent emphasis on the importance of relationships and interpersonal psychodynamic processes laid the foundation for later theories on the psychology of women (such as the relational-cultural model). Thus, her influence is still being felt quite strongly today. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/06%3A_Karen_Horney_and_Erich_Fromm/6.01%3A_Chapter_Introduction.txt |
Horney did not establish a specific theory of personality. Rather, her career proceeded through a series of stages in which she addressed the issues that were of particular concern to her at the time. Accordingly, her theories can be grouped into three stages: feminine psychology, culture and disturbed human relationships, and finally, the mature theory in which she focused on the distinction between interpersonal and intrapsychic defenses (Paris, 1994).
Feminine Psychology
Horney was neither the first, nor the only, significant woman in the early days of psychodynamic theory and psychoanalysis. However, women such as Helene Deutsch, Marie Bonaparte, Anna Freud, and Melanie Klein remained faithful to Freud’s basic theories. In contrast, Horney directly challenged Freud’s theories, and offered her own alternatives. In doing so, she offered a very different perspective on the psychology of women and personality development in girls and women. Her papers have been collected and published in Feminine Psychology by her friend and colleague Harold Kelman (1967), and an excellent overview of their content can be found in the biography written by Rubins (1978).
In her first two papers, On the Genesis of the Castration Complex in Women (Horney, 1923/1967) and The Flight from Womanhood(Horney, 1926/1967), Horney challenged the Freudian perspective on the psychological development of females. Although she acknowledged Freud’s pioneering theories, even as they applied to women, she believed that they suffered from a male perspective, and that the men who originally offered these theories simply did not understand the feminine perspective. Horney agreed that girls develop penis envy, but not that it is the only dynamic force influencing development during the phallic stage. Girls envy the ability of boys to urinate standing up, the fact that boys can see their genitals, and the relative ease with which boys can satisfy their desire for masturbation. More important for girls than penis envy, however, was the fear and anxiety young girls experience with regard to vaginal injury were they to actually have intercourse with their fathers (which, Horney agreed, they may fantasize). Thus, they experience a unique dynamic force called female genital anxiety. Another element of the castration complex in women, according to Horney, was the consequence of castration fantasies that she called wounded womanhood (incorporating the belief that the girl had been castrated).
Far more important than these basic processes, however, was the male bias inherent in society and culture. The very name phallic stage implies that only someone with a phallus (penis) can achieve sexual satisfaction and healthy personality development. Girls are repeatedly made to feel inferior to boys, feminine values are considered inferior to masculine values, even motherhood is considered a burden for women to bear (according to the Bible, the pain of childbirth is a curse from God!). In addition, male-dominated societies do not provide women with adequate outlets for their creative drives. As a result, many women develop a masculinity complex, involving feelings of revenge against men and the rejection of their own feminine traits. Thus, it may be true that women are more likely to suffer from anxiety and other psychological disorders, but this is not due to an inherent inferiority as proposed by Freud. Rather, women find it difficult in a patriarchal society to fulfill their personal development in accordance with their individual personality (unless they naturally happen to fit into society’s expectations).
Perhaps the most curious aspect of these early studies was the fact that Horney turned the tables on Freud and his concept of penis envy. The female’s biological role in childbirth is vastly superior (if that is a proper term) to that of the male. Horney noted that many boys express an intense envy of pregnancy and motherhood. If this so-called womb envy is the male counterpart of penis envy, which is the greater problem? Horney suggests that the apparently greater need of men to depreciate women is a reflection of their unconscious feelings of inferiority, due to the very limited role they play in childbirth and the raising of children (particularly breast-feeding infants, which they cannot do). In addition, the powerful creative drives and excessive ambition that are characteristic of many men can be viewed, according to Horney, as overcompensation for their limited role in parenting. Thus, as wonderful and intimate as motherhood may be, it can be a burden in the sense that the men who dominate society have turned it against women. This is, of course, an illogical state of affairs, since the children being born and raised by women are also the children of the very men who then feel inferior and psychologically threatened.
In a later paper, Horney (1932/1967) carried these ideas a step further. She suggested that, during the Oedipus stage, boys naturally judge the size of their penis as inadequate sexually with regard to their mother. They dread this inadequacy, which leads to anxiety and fear of rejection. This proves to be quite frustrating, and in accordance with the frustration-aggression hypothesis, the boy becomes angry and aggressive toward his mother. For men who are unable to overcome this issue, their adult sexual life becomes an ongoing effort to conquer and possess as many women as possible (a narcissistic overcompensation for their feelings of inadequacy). Unfortunately, according to Horney, these men become very upset with any woman who then expects a long-term or meaningful relationship, since that would require him to then prove his manhood in other, non-sexual ways.
For women, one of the most significant problems that results from these development processes is a desperate need to be in a relationship with a man, which Horney addressed in two of her last papers on feminine psychology: The Overvaluation of Love(1934/1967) and The Neurotic Need for Love (1937/1967). She recognized in many of her patients an obsession with having a relationship with a man, so much so that all other aspects of life seem unimportant. While others had considered this an inherent characteristic of women, Horney insisted that characteristics such as this overvaluation of love always include a significant portion of tradition and culture. Thus, it is not an inherent need in women, but one that has accompanied the patriarchal society’s demeaning of women, leading to low self-esteem that can only be overcome within society by becoming a wife and mother. Indeed, Horney found that many women suffer an intense fear of not being normal. Unfortunately, as noted above, the men these women are seeking relationships with are themselves seeking to avoid long-term relationships (due to their own insecurities). This results in an intense and destructive attitude of rivalry between women (at least, those women caught up in this neurotic need for love). When a woman loses a man to another woman, which may happen again and again, the situation can lead to depression, permanent feelings of insecurity with regard to feminine self-esteem, and profound anger toward other women. If these feelings are repressed, and remain primarily unconscious, the effect is that the woman searches within her own personality for answers to her failure to maintain the coveted relationship with a man. She may feel shame, believe that she is ugly, or imagine that she has some physical defect. Horney described the potential intensity of these feelings as “self-tormenting.”
In 1935, just a few years after coming to America, Horney rather abruptly stopped studying the psychology of women (though her last paper on the subject was not published until 1937). Bernard Paris found the transcript of a talk that Horney had delivered that year to the National Federation of Professional and Business Women’s Clubs, which provided her reasoning for this change in her professional direction (see Paris, 1994). First, Horney suggested that women should be suspicious of any general interest in feminine psychology, since it usually represents an effort by men to keep women in their subservient position. In order to avoid competition, men praise the values of being a loving wife and mother. When women accept these same values, they themselves begin to demean any other pursuits in life. They become a teacher because they consider themselves unattractive to men, or they go into business because they aren’t feminine and lack sex appeal (Horney, cited in Paris, 1994). The emphasis on attracting men and having children leads to a “cult of beauty and charm,” and the overvaluation of love. The consequence of this tragic situation is that as women become mature, they become more anxious due to their fear of displeasing men:
…The young woman feels a temporary security because of her ability to attract men, but mature women can hardly hope to escape being devalued even in their own eyes. And this feeling of inferiority robs them of the strength for action which rightly belongs to maturity.
Inferiority feelings are the most common evil of our time and our culture. To be sure we do not die of them, but I think they are nevertheless more disastrous to happiness and progress than cancer or tuberculosis. (pg. 236; Horney cited in Paris, 1994)
The key to the preceding quote is Horney’s reference to culture. Having been in America for a few years at this point, she was already questioning the difference between the greater opportunities for women in America than in Europe (though the difference was merely relative). She also emphasized that when women are demeaned by society, this had negative consequences on men and children. Thus, she wanted to break away from any perspective that led to challenges between men and women:
…First of all we need to understand that there are no unalterable qualities of inferiority of our sex due to laws of God or of nature. Our limitations are, for the greater part, culturally and socially conditioned. Men who have lived under the same conditions for a long time have developed similar attitudes and shortcomings.
Once and for all we should stop bothering about what is feminine and what is not. Such concerns only undermine our energies…In the meantime what we can do is to work together for the full development of the human personalities of all for the sake of general welfare. (pg. 238; Horney cited in Paris, 1994)
In her final paper on feminine psychology, Horney (1937/1967) concludes her discussion of the neurotic need for love with a general discussion of the relationship between anxiety and the need for love. Of course, this is true for both boys and girls. This conclusion provided a clear transition from Horney’s study of the psychology of women to her more general perspectives on human development, beginning with the child’s need for security and the anxiety that arises when that security seems threatened.
Discussion Question: After a number of years studying feminine psychology, Horney came to believe that women are no different than any other minority group, and she began to pursue different directions in her career. Are the problems faced by women different than other minority groups? If so, how are they different?
Anxiety and Culture
In the introduction to The Neurotic Personality of Our Time, Horney (1937) makes three important points. First, she acknowledged that neuroses have their roots in childhood experiences, but she also considered the experiences of adulthood to be equally important. Second, she believed that neuroses can only develop within a cultural context. They may stem from individual experience, but their form and expression are intimately tied to one’s cultural setting. And finally, she emphasized that she was not rejecting Freud’s basic theory. Though she disagreed with many of his ideas, she considered it an honor to build upon the foundation of his “gigantic achievements.” To do so, she wrote, helps to avoid the danger of stagnation. If any more evidence than her word was necessary to demonstrate her loyalty to Freud, in this introduction we also find mention of Alfred Adler. Although Horney acknowledges some similarities with Adler’s perspective, she insists that her ideas are grounded in Freudian theory, and she describes Adler’s work as having become sterile and one-sided.
Horney believed that anxiety was a natural state of all living things, something the German philosophers had called Angst der Kreatur (anxiety of the creature), a feeling that one is helpless against such forces as illness, old age, and death. We first experience this anxiety as infants, and it remains with us throughout life. It does not, however, lead to neurotic anxiety. But if a child is not cared for, if their anxiety is not alleviated by the protection of their parents, the child may develop basic anxiety:
The condition that is fostered…is an insidiously increasing, all-pervading feeling of being lonely and helpless in a hostile world…This attitude as such does not constitute a neurosis but it is the nutritive soil out of which a definite neurosis may develop at any time. (pg. 89; Horney, 1937)
Thus, in contrast to Freud’s belief that anxiety followed the threat of id impulses breaking free of the unconscious mind, Horney places anxiety before behavior. The child, through interactions with other people (particularly the parents), strives to alleviate its anxiety. If the child does not find support, then basic anxiety develops, and neurotic disorders become a distinct possibility. From that point forward, the child’s drives and impulses are motivated by anxiety, rather than being the cause of anxiety as proposed by Freud. Basic anxiety is considered basic for two reasons, one of which is that it is the source of neuroses. The other reason is that it arises out of early, but disturbed, relationships with the parents. This leads to feelings of hostility toward the parents, and Horney considered there to be a very close connection between anxiety and hostility. And yet, the child remains dependent on the parents, so it must not exhibit that hostility. This creates a vicious circle in which more anxiety is experienced, followed by more hostility, etc. Unresolved, these psychological processes leave the child feeling not only basic anxiety, but also basic hostility (Horney, 1937; May, 1977). In order to deal with this basic anxiety and basic hostility, Horney proposed both interpersonal and intrapsychic strategies of defense (which we will examine in the next two sections). First, however, let’s take a brief, closer look at Horney’s views on culture and anxiety.
A neurotic individual, simply put, is someone whose anxiety levels and behavior are significantly different than normal. What is normal, of course, can only be defined within a cultural context. Horney cited a number of famous anthropologists and sociologists to support this claim, including Margaret Mead and Ruth Benedict. She cites H. Scudder Mekeel’s somewhat famous example of Native Americans having high regard for individuals who have visions and hallucinations, since those visions are considered to be special gifts, indeed blessings, from the spirits. This is in sharp contrast to the standard Western view, which considers hallucinations to be a symptom of psychosis. And yet, Native Americans are not fundamentally different than Westerners. Only one year after Horney’s book was published, Mekeel led Erik Erikson on the first of Erikson’s studies of Native American development, which led Erikson to conclude that his stages of psychosocial crisis were valid, since they seemed to apply to Europeans, European-Americans, and Native Americans. After citing many such examples, from simple matters such as preferred foods to complex matters such as attitudes toward murder, Horney concluded that every aspect of human life, including personality, was intimately tied to cultural factors:
It is no longer valid to suppose that a new psychological finding reveals a universal trend inherent in human nature…This in turn means that if we know the cultural conditions under which we live we have a good chance of gaining a much deeper understanding of the special character of normal feelings and attitudes. (pg. 19; Horney, 1937)
This emphasis on culture, however, should not be confused with the importance of individuality. Anxieties and neurotic symptoms exist within individuals, and present themselves within personal relationships. Culture, once again, merely guides the nature or form of those anxieties. In Western culture, we are driven primarily by economic and individual competition. Thus, other people are seen as competitors, or rivals. For one person to gain something, another must lose. As a result, according to Horney, there is a diffuse hostile tension pervading all of our relationships. For those who cannot resolve this tension, most likely due to having experienced the culturally determined anxieties in exaggerated form during a dysfunctional childhood, they become neurotic. Accordingly, Horney described the neurotic individual as “a stepchild of our culture” (Horney, 1937).
Interpersonal Strategies of Defense
Horney considered inner conflicts, and the personality disturbances they cause, to be the source of all psychological illness. In other words, calm, well-balanced individuals do not suffer psychological disorders (consider the stress-diathesis model of abnormal psychology). Although Freud approached this concept in his work, it was those who followed him, such as Franz Alexander, Otto Rank, Wilhelm Reich, and Harald Schultz-Nencke, who defined it more clearly. Still, Horney felt they all failed to understand the precise nature and dynamics of character structure, because they did not take into account the cultural influences. It was only during her own work on feminine psychology that Horney came to the full understanding of these psychodynamic processes (at least, in her own view; Horney, 1945).
At the core of these conflicts is a basic conflict, which Freud described as being between one’s desire for immediate and total satisfaction (the id) and the forbidding environment, such as the parents and society (the superego). Horney generally agreed with Freud on this concept, but she did not consider the basic conflict to be basic. Rather, she considered it an essential aspect of only the neurotic personality. Thus, it is a basic conflict in the neurotic individual, one which expresses itself in the person’s predominant style of relating to others. The three general attitudes that arise as neurotic attempts to solve conflict are known as moving toward people, moving against people, and moving away from people (Horney, 1945). Although they provide a way for neurotics to attempt solutions in their disturbed interpersonal relationships, they achieve only an artificial balance, which creates new conflicts. These new conflicts create greater hostility, anxiety, and alienation, thus continuing a vicious circle, which Horney believed could be broken by psychoanalysis.
Psychoanalysis is important for understanding neurotic individuals in part because they build a defensive structure around their basic conflict. Their behavior, according to Horney, reflects more of their efforts to solve conflicts, rather than the basic conflict itself. Thus, the basic conflict becomes so deeply embedded in the personality, that it can never be seen in its pure form. Nonetheless, when one of the basic character attitudes becomes predominant, we can observe characteristic behaviors that reflect the neurotic failure to resolve one’s inner conflicts.
Moving toward people, also known as the compliant personality, incorporates needs for affection and approval, and a special need for a partner who will fulfill all of one’s expectations of life. These needs are characteristic of neurotic trends: they are compulsive, indiscriminate, and they generate anxiety when they are frustrated. In addition, they operate independently of one’s feelings toward or value of the person who is the object of those needs (Horney, 1945). In order to ensure the continued support of others, the compliant individual will do almost anything to maintain relationships, but they give themselves over so completely that they may enjoy nothing for themselves. They begin to feel weak and helpless, and they subordinate themselves to others, thinking that everyone is smarter, more attractive, and more worthwhile than they are. They rate themselves by the opinions of others, so much so that any rejection can be catastrophic. Love becomes the most compulsive desire, but their lack of self-esteem makes true love difficult. Accordingly, sexual relations become a substitute for love, as well as the “evidence” that they are loved and desired.
Just as the compliant type clings to the belief that people are “nice,” and is continually baffled by evidence to the contrary, so the aggressive type takes it for granted that everyone is hostile, and refuses to admit that they are not. To him life is a struggle of all against all, and the devil take the hindmost. (pg. 63; Horney, 1945)
As noted in the preceding quote, those who move against people, the aggressive personality, are driven by a need to control others. They view the world in a Darwinian sense, a world dominated by survival of the fittest, where the strong annihilate the weak. The aggressive person may seem polite and fair-minded, but it is mostly a front, put up in order to facilitate their own goals. They may be openly aggressive, or they may choose to manipulate others indirectly, sometimes preferring to be the power behind the throne. Love, which is such a desperate need for the compliant person, is of little consequence for the aggressive person. They may very well be “in love,” and they may marry, but they are more concerned in what they can get out of the relationship. They tend to choose mates for their attractiveness, prestige, or wealth. What is most important is how their mate can enhance their own social position. They are keen competitors, looking for any evidence of weakness or ambition in others. Unfortunately, they also tend to suppress emotion in their lives, making it difficult, if not impossible, to enjoy life.
Those who move away from people, the detached personality, are not merely seeking meaningful solitude. Instead, they are driven to avoid other people because of the unbearable strain of associating with others. In addition, they are estranged from themselves, they do not know who they are, or what they love, desire, value, or believe. Horney described them as zombies, able to work and function like living people, but there is no life in them. A crucial element appears to be their desire to put emotional distance between themselves and others. They become very self-sufficient and private. Since these individuals seek negative goals, not to be involved, not to need help, not to be bothered, as opposed to having clear goals (needing a loving partner or needing to control others) their behavior is more subject to variability, but the focus remains on being detached from others in order to avoid facing the conflicts within their psyche (Horney, 1945).
Each of these three character attitudes has within it some value. It is important and healthy to maintain relationships with others (moving toward), ambition and a drive to excel have definite benefits in many cultures (moving against), and peaceful solitude, a chance to get away from it all, can be very refreshing (moving away). The healthy individual is likely able to make use of each of these solutions in the appropriate situations. When someone needs our help, we reach out to them. If someone tries to take advantage of us, we stand up for ourselves. When the daily hassles of life wear us down, we retreat into solitude for a short time, maybe exercising, going to a movie, or listening to our favorite music. As Horney attempted to make very clear, the neurotic individual is marked by a compulsion to use one style of relating to others, and they do so to their own detriment.
connections across cultures
Cultural Differences in Interpersonal Relationship Styles
As Horney repeatedly pointed out, neurotic behavior can only be viewed as such within a cultural context. Thus, in the competitive and individualistic Western world, our cultural tendencies are likely to favor moving against and moving away from others. The same is not true in many other cultures.
Relationships can exist in two basic styles: exchange or communal relationships. Exchange relationships are based on the expectation of some return on one’s investment in the relationship. Communal relationships, in contrast, occur when one person feels responsible for the well-being of the other person(s). In African and African-American cultures we are much more likely to find communal relationships, and interpersonal relationships are considered to be a core value amongst people of African descent (Belgrave & Allison, 2006). While there may be a tendency in Western culture to consider this dependence on others as somehow “weak,” it provides a source of emotional attachment, need fulfillment, and the influence and involvement of people in each other’s activities and lives.
Cultural differences also come into play in love and marriage. In America, passionate love tends to be favored, whereas in China companionate love is favored. African cultures seem to fall somewhere in between (Belgrave & Allison, 2006). When considering the divorce rate in America, as compared to many other countries, it has been suggested that Americans marry the person they love, whereas people in many other cultures love the person they marry. In a study involving people from India, Pakistan, Thailand, Mexico, Brazil, Japan, Hong Kong, the Philippines, Australia, England, and the United States, it was found that individualistic cultures placed greater importance on the role of love in choosing to get married, and also on the loss of love as sufficient justification for divorce. For intercultural marriages, these differences are a significant, though not insurmountable, source of conflict (Matsumoto & Juang, 2004). Attempting to maintain awareness of cultural differences when relationship conflicts occur, rather than attributing the conflict to the personality of the other person, can be an important first step in resolving intercultural conflict. However, it must also be remembered that different cultures acknowledge and tolerate conflict to different extents (Brislin, 2000; Matsumoto, 1997; Okun, Fried, & Okun, 1999; for a brief discussion of intergroup dialogue and conflict resolution options, see Miller & Garran, 2008).
These cultural differences are so fundamental, that even at the level of considering basic intelligence we see the effects of these contrasting perspectives. In a study on the Kiganda culture (within the country of Uganda, in Africa), Wober (1974) found that they consider intelligence to be more externally directed than we do, and they view successful social climbing and social interaction as evidence of intelligent behavior. This matches the attitude amongst Mediterranean cultures that notable people will be devoted to a life of public service (in contrast, the word “idiot” is derived from a Greek word meaning a private man).
Thus, moving toward others would be favored much more in other cultures than it might be in the Western world. Consequently, a significant attitude and the behavior of moving toward others would be less likely to be viewed as neurotic. Such issues are, of course, very important as we interact with people of other cultures, as we may consider their behavior to be odd according to our standards. Naturally, they may be thinking the same thing about us. What is probably most important is that we learn about and experience other cultures, so that differences in customs and behavior are not surprising when they occur.
There are two other mechanisms that Horney suggested are used by people in their attempts to resolve inner conflict: the idealized image, and externalization (Horney, 1945). The idealized image is a creation of what the person believes themselves to be, or what they feel they can or ought to be. It is always flattering, and quite removed from reality. The individual may see themselves as beautiful, powerful, saintly, or a genius. Consequently, they become quite arrogant. The more unrealistic their view is, the more compulsive their need for affirmation and recognition. Since they need no confirmation of what they know to be true, they are particularly sensitive when questioned about their false claims! The idealized image is not to be confused with authentic ideals. Ideals are goals, they have a dynamic quality, they arouse incentive to achieve those goals, and they are important for personal growth and development. Having genuine ideals tends to result in humility. The idealized image, in contrast, is static, and it hinders growth by denying or condemning one’s shortcomings.
The idealized image can provide a temporary refuge from the basic conflict, but when the tension between the actual self and the idealized image becomes unbearable, there is nothing within the self to fall back on. Consequently, an extreme attempt at a solution is to run away from the self entirely. Externalization is the tendency to experience one’s own psychodynamic processes as having occurred outside oneself, and then blaming others for one’s own problems. Such individuals become dependent on others, because they become preoccupied with changing, reforming, punishing, or impressing those individuals who are responsible for their own well-being. A particularly unfortunate consequence of externalization is a feeling Horney described as a “gnawing sense of emptiness and shallowness” (pg. 117; Horney, 1945). However, rather than allowing themselves to feel the emotion, they might experience it as an empty feeling in the stomach, and attempt to satisfy themselves by, for example, overeating. Overall, the self-contempt they feel is externalized in two basic ways: either despising others, or feeling that others despise them. Either way, it is easy to see how damaged the individual’s personal relationships would become. Horney described externalization as a process of self-elimination, which aggravates the very process with set it in motion: the conflict between the person and their environment.
Discussion Question: Horney described three basic attitudes regarding other people: moving toward, moving against, or moving away from them. Do you easily use all three styles of relating to others, or do you tend to rely on one more than the others? Does this create problems in your relationships?
Intrapsychic Strategies of Defense
In Neurosis and Human Growth, Horney (1950) addressed the psychodynamic struggle toward self-realization. She described a series of psychological events that occur in the development of a neurotic personality, and how they interfere with the healthy psychological growth of the real self. Indeed, neurotic symptoms arise out of the conflict between the real self, our deep source of growth, and the idealized image. She began this book with a simple statement as to why she focused so much of her work on neurotic personalities:
The neurotic process is a special form of human development, and - because of the waste of constructive energies which it involves - is a particularly unfortunate one. (pg. 13; Horney, 1950)
Horney believed in an innate potentiality within all people, which she referred to as growth toward self-realization. The real self underlies this tendency toward self-realization, but it can be diverted by the development of basic anxiety. In order to overcome basic anxiety, the child adopts one of the strategies described above, attempting to solve its conflicts by moving toward, against, or away from others. Under adverse conditions, the child adopts one of these strategies in a rigid and extreme fashion, and begins the neurotic development. And yet, the tendency toward self-realization remains deep within the psyche, demanding that the neurotic development seek some higher level. Thus, the idealized image is formed, and a variety of intrapsychic processes begin an attempt to justify oneself based upon that idealized image.
The establishment of the idealized image involves self-glorification, and it reflects a need to lift oneself above others. The psychic energy associated with self-realization is shifted toward realization of the idealized image, establishing a general drive that Horney called the search for glory (Horney, 1950). The search for glory includes several elements, which are manifested as drives or needs. There is a need for perfection, which aims at the complete molding of the personality into the idealized self, and a drive for neurotic ambition, or striving for external success. The most damaging element of the search for glory, however, is the drive toward vindictive triumph. The aim of vindictive triumph is to put others to shame, or to defeat them, through one’s own success. Horney considered this drive to be vindictive because its motivating source is the desire to take revenge for humiliations suffered in childhood (i.e., to pay others back for the circumstances that created basic anxiety).
The elements of the search for glory are not necessarily bad. Who wouldn’t want to be perfect, ambitious, and triumphant? However, in their compulsive and neurotic form, Horney believed that people came to expect these elements, creating what she called the neurotic claims. When simple desires or needs become claims, individual feel they have a right to those things, they feel they are entitled. They fully expect to be satisfied in every way, and they also expect, indeed feel they are entitled, to never be criticized, doubted, or questioned (Horney, 1950). These claims are not only made on other people, but also on institutions, such as the workplace or society as a whole. The individual becomes highly egocentric, reminding others of a spoiled child, and they expect their needs to be satisfied without putting forth any effort of their own. Obviously, it is highly unlikely that such a person’s needs are going to be fulfilled, creating a diffuse state of frustration and discontent, so all-encompassing that Horney suggested it can actually be viewed as a character trait in the neurotic individual. From the therapist’s point of view, neurotic claims are particularly serious because they take the place of the patient’s actual personality growth. In other words, the patient believes that merely wanting or intending to change is enough, and no effort is necessary. Indeed, the claims themselves are the neurotic’s guarantee of future glory (Horney, 1950).
While these neurotic claims and the feelings of entitlement that accompany them may seem to be just a personal problem, the fact is that many people make seriously flawed self-assessments of their abilities, attributes, and future behavior. Indeed, the “average” person typically rates themselves as “above average” in many areas of their lives. These flawed self-assessments come into play in many aspects of our lives, and can easily affect others (Dunning, Heath, & Suls, 2004; Williams, 2004). For example, the United States spends more of its gross domestic product on health care than any other major industrialized country, and yet many people seriously underestimate the consequences of a wide range of unhealthy behaviors, such as smoking, drinking alcohol, overeating to the point of obesity, and avoiding exercise. The poor physical health of many Americans has become a regular topic in the mainstream media, as it threatens both individual lives (and, consequently, the family and friends of those who die) and our ability to fund healthcare for those who are poor or aged. In education, students dramatically overestimate the extent to which they have learned, limiting the likelihood that they will take fuller advantage of their education. And in business, the consequences can be severe for many employees, and therefore their families, when a President or CEO is so over-confident that they make poor decisions that bankrupt the company. As suggested above, these problems are common, not just confined to those who are neurotic. Thus, the problem of overconfidence, whether the result of an unreasonable trend in society to ensure everyone’s self-esteem or the result of neurotic claims, as well as the extent to which individuals are able to know themselves and, therefore, function in the real world, is critical to everyone (Dunning, Heath, & Suls, 2004; Williams, 2004).
Whereas the neurotic claims are directed outward, the individual then turns their attention back into the self. They begin to tell themselves (though this may unconscious) to forget about the worthless creature they believe they are, and start behaving as they should. In order to match up with the idealized image, they should be honest, generous, and just, they should be able to endure any misfortune, they should be the perfect friend and lover, they should like everyone, they should never feel hurt, they should never be attached to anyone or anything, they should know, understand, and foresee everything, they should be able to overcome any difficulty, etc. Obviously, no one can be everything at all times. Horney described this tragic state as the tyranny of the should. Since it is virtually impossible for anyone to maintain such discipline in their life, rather than developing real self-confidence, the neurotic individual develops a questionable alternative: neurotic pride. However, the pride is not in who the individual is, but rather in who the individual believes they should be (Horney, 1950).
Sooner or later, it is inevitable that the neurotic individual will have their pride hurt in real life. When this happens, the other side of neurotic pride comes out: self-hate. Indeed, Horney believed that pride and self-hate are a single entity, which she called the pride system. As the neurotic individual becomes more aware of their failure to live up to the idealized self, they develop self-hate and self-contempt. According to Horney, the battle lines are now drawn between the pride system and the real self. It is not the real self that is hated, however, but the emerging constructive forces of the real self (the actual aim of psychotherapy!). This conflict, between the pride system and the constructive forces for change inherent in the real self, are so profound, that Horney named it the central inner conflict! In her earlier writings, Horney used the term neurotic conflict to refer to conflicts between incompatible compulsive drives. The central inner conflict is unique, in that it sets up a conflict between a neurotic drive (the pride system) and a healthy drive (the trend toward self-realization). Horney believed that individuals who have arrived at this psychological state of affairs were indeed in a difficult situation:
Surveying self-hate and its ravaging force, we cannot help but see in it a great tragedy, perhaps the greatest tragedy of the human mind. Man in reaching out for the Infinite and Absolute also starts destroying himself. When he makes a pact with the devil, who promises him glory, he has to go to hell - to the hell within himself. (pg. 154; Horney, 1950).
Discussion Question: Horney defined the central inner conflict as the battle between the constructive forces for change inherent in the real self and the self-hate that arises out of the pride system. Have you ever found yourself giving up on something important because you feel incapable, unworthy, or overly self-critical? If you have ever been aware of these feelings at the time they occurred, what, if anything, did you do about them?
Horney’s Challenge for Psychoanalysis
One of the actions that made Horney most controversial was her willingness to challenge how psychoanalysis should be conducted with patients. In New Ways in Psychoanalysis (Horney, 1939), Horney made it very clear why she thought that psychoanalysis needed to be questioned:
My desire to make a critical re-evaluation of psychoanalytical theories had its origin in a dissatisfaction with therapeutic results. (pg. 7; Horney, 1939)
Simply put, she had asked many leading psychoanalysts questions about problems in treating her patients, and none of them could offer meaningful answers (at least, they had no meaning for Horney). In addition, a few of them, such as Wilhelm Reich, encouraged her to question orthodox psychoanalytic theory. As always, Horney did not see this as a rejection of Freud. Indeed, she felt that as she pursued new ideas, she found stronger reasons to admire the foundation that Freud had established. More importantly, she was upset that those who criticized psychoanalysis often simply ignored it, rather than looking more deeply into the valuable insights she believed it still had to offer for any therapist. As before, she saved her most serious critiques for the study of feminine psychology, though she still considered psychoanalysis with an emphasis on culture to be a valid therapeutic approach:
The American woman is different from the German woman; both are different from certain Pueblo Indian women. The New York society woman is different from the farmer’s wife in Idaho. The way specific cultural conditions engender specific qualities and faculties, in women as in men - this is what we may hope to understand. (pg. 119; Horney, 1939)
In her second book on therapy, Horney proposed something quite radical: the possibility of Self-Analysis (Horney, 1942). She considered self-analysis important for two main reasons. First, psychoanalysis was an important means of personal development, though not the only means. In this assertion, she was both emphasizing the value of psychoanalysis for many people, while at the same time saying that it wasn’t so important that it had to conducted in the orthodox manner by an extensively trained psychoanalyst, since there are many paths to self-development (e.g., good friends and a meaningful career). Second, even if many people sought traditional psychoanalysis, there simply aren’t enough psychoanalysts to go around. So, Horney provided a book to help those willing to pursue their own self-analysis, even if they do so only occasionally (which she believed could be quite effective for specific issues). She did not suggest that self-analysis was by any means easy, but more important was the realization that it was possible. With regard to the possible criticism that self-analysts might not finish the job, that they might not delve into the darkest and most repressed areas of their psyche, she simply suggested that no analysis is ever complete. What matters more than being successful is the desire to continue (Horney, 1942).
When the Association for the Advancement of Psychoanalysis was established, an important part of their mission was community education. One of the courses was entitled Are You Considering Psychoanalysis? This course was so popular, that the instructors decided to publish a book by the same name, and Horney was chosen the editor-in-chief (Horney, 1946). The chapters present very practical topics, such as: What Are Your Doubts About Psychoanalysis? (Kelman, 1946); What Do You Do in Analysis? (Kilpatrick, 1946); and How Does Analysis Help? (Ivimey, 1946). Perhaps reflecting her own concerns about the ability of psychoanalysis to “cure” a person’s problems, Horney entitled the final chapter, which she wrote herself: How Do You Progress After Analysis? She begins the chapter by addressing the concern that many of her patients had: why would a person need more progress after psychoanalysis? Isn’t psychoanalysis supposed to resolve all of a person’s psychological problems? As noted above, however, Horney felt that no analysis is ever complete. But this time the reasoning is not based on questioning the effectiveness of psychoanalysis itself. Rather, it is based on the potential for human growth, a potential that is boundless:
Your growth as a human being, however, is a process that can and should go on as long as you live…analytical therapy merely sets this process in motion… (pg. 236; Horney, 1946)
Discussion Question: Have you ever tried self-analysis, in either a formal or an informal way? If yes, were your efforts based on any personal experience or knowledge, and did it prove to be helpful? | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/06%3A_Karen_Horney_and_Erich_Fromm/6.03%3A_Horney%27s_Shifting_Perspective_on_Psychodynamic_Theory.txt |
Erich Fromm was a colleague and long-time friend of Horney. He became interested in psychoanalysis at the beginning of World War I, when he was amazed at how readily so many people seemed eager for war. Unlike most other psychoanalysts, however, he earned a Ph.D., not an M.D. This eventually proved to be a source of conflict between Fromm and Horney, as she believed that lay-analysts should not be allowed to conduct therapy. Still, Fromm acknowledged Horney as influencing his career and sharing his own interests in culture and particularly in society itself (Evans, 1981a). Fromm also considered himself as remaining especially true to the theories of Sigmund Freud, though some authors consider him to be more of a philosopher than a psychologist (Evans, 1981a; Lundin, 1979; see also Funk, 1982, 2000).
Fromm was born on March 23, 1900, the only son of Orthodox Jewish parents, in Frankfurt, Germany. He studied the Talmud and law, but eventually switched from the University of Frankfurt to the University of Heidelberg and changed his major to sociology and economics. In 1922 he received his doctorate, and in 1924 he was psychoanalyzed by Frieda Reichmann. He turned away from Orthodox Judaism, married Frieda Reichmann (whom he later divorced), and became active in the Berlin psychoanalytic community (where he completed his psychoanalytic training). In 1933, Horney invited Fromm to guest lecture in Chicago. A year later, he moved to New York. There he collaborated with Horney, Harry Stack Sullivan (whom he also acknowledged as a significance influence on his thinking; see, e.g., Evans, 1981a and Fromm, 1941, 1955a), and Clara Thompson. In 1940 he became a United States citizen, then in 1941 he published Escape from Freedom (Fromm, 1941) and began teaching at the New School (Funk, 1982, 2000).
After his break with Horney (both personally and professionally), Fromm married his second wife and spent some time teaching at Yale University. A few years later his wife died, Fromm soon married for the third time, and that marriage lasted until his death. Shortly after his third marriage, Fromm moved to Mexico City, Mexico, where he lived for the next 24 years. He joined the medical faculty at the National Autonomous University of Mexico, and co-founded a Mexican psychoanalytic society. In 1956, he published his acclaimed book The Art of Loving (Fromm, 1956). He taught a seminar with D. T. Suzuki, and their friendship led to the publication of Zen Buddhism & Psychoanalysis (Suzuki, Fromm, and De Martino, 1960). He also conducted important cross-cultural studies in a Mexican peasant village, resulting in the publication of Social Character in a Mexican Village (Fromm & Maccoby, 1970),
In 1966, Fromm suffered a heart attack and began spending more time back in Europe. In 1974, he sold his home in Mexico and settled permanently in Switzerland (where he had been spending his summers). After a series of three more heart attacks, Fromm died in 1980 (Funk, 1982, 2000).
Placing Fromm in Context: Individuality in Relation to Society
Erich Fromm was a colleague and close personal friend of Karen Horney for many years. He shared her interest in the role of culture in personality, and was even more interested in the interactions between the individual and society as a whole. Fromm viewed societies as forces that lead to alienation from a more natural, primitive way of life. As a result, freedom and individuality actually create psychological problems, as we become disconnected from our immediate social groups (such as the family or local community). This often leads to unfortunate consequences, such as seeking fellowship within a society at the expense of one’s regard for self and others, providing a framework within which dictatorships can develop (as individuals completely surrender their freedom).
Fromm examined and combined many different interests in his career, including philosophy, economics, and psychology, and he felt that such a combination of interests was essential for the study of psychology to have real meaning. In one of the longest projects of his life, he and a number of colleagues applied a unique form of “psychoanalysis” to an entire village in rural Mexico. He then described how an understanding of social character can lead to an understanding of individual character, providing guidance for future considerations on planning social development during times of dramatic socioeconomic change. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/06%3A_Karen_Horney_and_Erich_Fromm/6.04%3A_Brief_Biography_of_Erich_Fromm.txt |
Fromm was a prolific writer, whose interests included psychoanalysis, economics, religion, ethics, culture, and societal systems. He evaluated both Freud the man and Freud’s theories in Sigmund Freud’s Mission (Fromm, 1978) and Greatness and Limitations of Freud’s Thought (Fromm, 1980). His religious works include such provocative titles as The Dogma of Christ (Fromm, 1955b) and You Shall Be as Gods (Fromm, 1966). He addressed the person’s place within society in books such as The Sane Society (1955a) and The Revolution of Hope (1968). And a collection of his works on gender psychology, Love, Sexuality, and Matriarchy, was edited by Rainer Funk (1977). The unifying theme throughout Fromm’s writings is each person’s relationship to society, which he addressed most directly in Escape from Freedom (Fromm, 1941).
Fromm interpreted Freud’s theories on the satisfaction of drives as necessarily involving other people, but for Freud those relationships are only a means to an end. Although hunger, thirst, and sex may be common needs, Fromm suggested that the needs that lead to differences in people’s character, such as love and hatred, lusting for power or yearning to submit, or the enjoyment of sensuous pleasure as well as the fear of it, are all the result of social processes. One’s very nature is a product of the interaction between the individual and their cultural setting. We are the creation and achievement of human history, and at the same time we influence the course of that history and culture. In modern times, particularly in the Western world, our pursuit of individuality has alienated us from others, from the very social structure that is inherent to our nature. Consequently, our freedom has become a psychological problem, it has isolated us from the connections necessary for our survival and development (Fromm, 1941). The danger with this situation, according to Fromm, is that when an entire society is suffering from feelings of isolation and disconnection with the natural order (from nature itself, in Fromm’s view), the members of that society may seek connection with a societal structure that destroys their freedom and, thus, integrates their self into the whole (albeit in a dysfunctional way). The three ways in which individuals escape from freedom are authoritarianism, or giving oneself up to some authority in order to gain the strength that the individual lacks, destructiveness, in which the individual tries to destroy the object causing anxiety (e.g., society), and automaton conformity, in which the person renounces their individual integrity. Fromm believed that these phenomena provided an explanation for the development of dictatorships, such as the rise of Fascism in Europe during the 1920s and 1930s. For the leaders of these societies, these processes are such a deeply ingrained aspect of their character that Fromm actually described Adolf Hitler’s destructiveness as evidence of a necrophilous character (a necrophiliac is someone sexually attracted to the dead; Fromm, 1973).
In order to approach a solution for this problem, Fromm pursued an overall integration of the person and society. He believed that psychology cannot be divorced from philosophy, sociology, economics, or ethics. The moral problem facing people in the modern world is their indifference to themselves. Although democracy and individuality seem to offer freedom, it is only a promise of freedom. When our insecurities and anxieties lead us to submit to some source of power, be it a political party, church, club, whatever, we surrender our personal power (Fromm, 1947). Consequently, we become subject to the undue influence of others (and in extreme situations, to a Hitler or a Stalin). The solution may be as simple as love, but Fromm suggests that love is by no means an easy task, and it is not simply a relationship between two people:
…love is not a sentiment which can be easily indulged in by anyone, regardless of the level of maturity reached by him. It [Fromm’s book] wants to convince the reader that all his attempts for love are bound to fail, unless he tries most actively to develop his total personality, so as to achieve a productive orientation; that satisfaction in individual love cannot be attained without the capacity to love one’s neighbor, without true humility, courage, faith and discipline. (pg. xxi; Fromm, 1956)
An individual’s capacity for love is a reflection of the extent to which their culture encourages the development of the capacity for love as part of the character of each person. Capitalist societies, according to Fromm, emphasize individual freedom and economic relations. Thus, a capitalist society values economic gain (amassed wealth) over labor (the power of people). And yet, such an economy needs large groups of people working together (the labor force). As individuals become anxious in their pursuit of life, they become psychologically invested in the capitalist system, they surrender themselves to capitalism, and become the labor force that leads to the wealth of those who own the company. Fromm believed this alienated us from ourselves, from others, and from nature (or, the natural order). In order to regain our connection to others in a healthy way, we need to practice the art of love, love both for ourselves and for others. Doing so requires discipline, concentration, and patience, personal strengths that are all taught in the practice of Zen. Indeed, Fromm recommends one of Horney’s favorite books: Zen in the Art of Archery (Herrigel, 1953). We will examine the relationship between Zen and the approaches of Horney and Fromm to solving society’s problems in more detail in “Personality Theory in Real Life.” But first, Fromm chose to examine whether the principles of psychoanalysis could be used to examine the relationship between individuals and society. He and his colleagues addressed this question in a Mexican village, a study we will examine in the next section.
Discussion Question: Fromm believed that the freedom we have in modern, Western societies actually separates and alienates us from others, becoming a source of great anxiety. Can you agree that freedom can become a problem? Can you agree that people within an entire society could become so anxious that they support the rise of a dictator? | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/06%3A_Karen_Horney_and_Erich_Fromm/6.05%3A_Our_Relationship_to_Society.txt |
Feminine Psychology, Zen Mindfulness, Psychoanalysis, and Everyday Relationships
The ancient practice of mindfulness, which is associated with Buddhism but also has roots in other spiritual practices and religions, has become an important and fairly common psychotherapeutic technique (see, e.g., Germer, Siegel, & Fulton, 2005; Richards & Bergin, 2000; Sperry & Shafranske, 2005). There are also some interesting connections between the practice of Buddhist mindfulness and those who established feminine psychology. At the end of her life, Karen Horney went to Japan to study Zen Buddhism with the renowned Buddhist scholar D. T. Suzuki, and Janet Surrey, one of the founding members of the Stone Center (which will be introduced in the next chapter), has been practicing mindfulness and working to synthesize Buddhist practices with relational-cultural approaches to psychology for over 20 years (Surrey, 2005). Surrey is also on the faculty of the Institute for Meditation and Psychotherapy, and teaches seminars on the use of mindfulness in conjunction with relational-cultural therapy (and I can personally attest to the wonderful job she does).
Since Horney became interested in Zen near the end of her life, she wrote very little about it. Indeed, most of what is recorded is in the book Final Lectures (Ingram, 1987), which was published by Douglas Ingram many years after Horney died. However, her close friend and colleague Erich Fromm also worked with Suzuki. Fromm mentions Yoga and Buddhism often in his books, and Suzuki and Fromm (along with another colleague) co-authored Zen Buddhism & Psychoanalysis in 1960.
Horney equated Zen mindfulness with living fully in each moment, with wholehearted concentration (Horney, 1945, 1950; Ingram, 1987). This general theme is expressed quite eloquently in one of Horney’s favorite books, Zen in the Art of Archery (Herrigel, 1953), as well as in Herrigel’s other book, The Method of Zen (Herrigel, 1960). In the latter book, Herrigel expresses the essence of Zen from his perspective, presenting a psychological view that fits well with the relational-cultural perspective we will examine in the next chapter:
…the Zen Buddhist is far from limiting his feelings of joy and compassion to human beings and to every aspect of human existence. He embraces in these feelings everything that lives and breathes…The Zen Buddhist is constantly confirmed in his experience that there is a fundamental communication which embraces all forms of existence…He does not pass by the joys and sufferings of others without taking them to himself and reinforcing them with his own feelings… (pp. 119-120; Herrigel, 1960)
Fromm knew Suzuki at the same time as Horney, but the two men really got to know each other when Suzuki spent a week in Mexico in 1956, and Fromm then visited Suzuki in New York. In 1964, Fromm wrote to Suzuki that every morning he read a passage on Zen or something by Meister Eckhart (a well-known Christian mystic). In addition, Fromm was interested in Kabbalah and Sufism, as well as other spiritual approaches to understanding people (Funk, 2000). Fromm examined many of these diverse perspective in books such as The Nature of Man (Fromm & Xirau, 1968) and Psychoanalysis and Religion (Fromm, 1950), and he drew interesting connections between the physical activities of Yoga and Wilhelm Reich’s somatic psychology (Fromm, 1992). He was by no means an unqualified supporter, however, suggesting that some self-proclaimed gurus can do more harm than good when seeking to serve their own selfish interests (usually in order to make money; Fromm, 1994).
In their work together, Suzuki provided a brief overview of the essentials of Zen practice, which focuses on living life:
Zen may occasionally appear too enigmatic, cryptic, and full of contradictions, but it is after all a simple discipline and teaching:
To do goods,
To avoid evils,
To purify one’s own heart:
This is the Buddha-Way.
Is this not applicable to all human situations, modern as well as ancient, Western as well as Eastern? (pg. 76; Suzuki, Fromm, & DeMartino, 1960)
Fromm, for his part, identified ways in which Zen principles appeared to be compatible with psychoanalysis. He considered psychoanalysis to be the Western parallel to Zen, since Zen arose from Indian rationality and abstraction mixed with Chinese concreteness and realism, whereas psychoanalysis arose from Western humanism and rationalism. Fromm described the Western world as suffering from a spiritual crisis, resulting from a change in the pursuit of the perfection of humanity to the pursuit of the perfection of things (e.g., technology). Since we have lost our connection to nature, and to ourselves and our communities, we have become anxious and depressed. Psychoanalysis was developed to help us deal with these anxieties, as an alternative to the flawed ways in which we had been dealing with them in the past: religion (according to Freud). As described very simply in the quote above, Zen Buddhism also seeks to resolve human anxiety, simply by doing good and avoiding evil. In Freudian terms, doing good results from knowing oneself, and one can only know oneself through the process of psychoanalysis. Then, a person can act in accordance with reality, rather than being influenced by unconscious, repressed, and dysfunctional psychological processes. Therefore, Fromm considered the essential nature of psychoanalysis to be compatible with Zen (Suzuki, Fromm, & DeMartino, 1960), a perspective supported more recently by Mark Epstein in his comparison of Buddhist meditation and psychoanalysis, Thoughts Without a Thinker (Epstein, 1995).
Fitting even more closely with Fromm’s perspective on human development and psychoanalysis, Zen art is intimately involved with nature, and with humanity’s relationship with nature (Herrigel, 1953, 1960; Suzuki, Fromm, & DeMartino, 1960). Fromm used Zen perspectives to reform his views on psychoanalysis and development. He considered the development of the individual to be a re-enactment of the development of the species (i.e., ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny). Prior to birth there is no anxiety, following birth we must deal with anxiety. We can try to deal with our anxieties by regressing to our earliest state, or we can attempt to complete the process of birth, which Fromm described as a lifelong process:
Birth is not one act; it is a process. The aim of life is to be fully born, though its tragedy is that most of us die before we are thus born. To live is to be born every minute. (pg. 88; Suzuki, Fromm, & DeMartino, 1960)
Fromm does not suggest that this is easy, but it is possible. However, which method is to be preferred: psychoanalysis or the practice of Zen Buddhism? That would appear to be a personal matter, since both psychoanalysis and Zen Buddhism aim toward the same goal:
This description of Zen’s aim could be applied without change as a description of what psychoanalysis aspires to achieve; insight into one’s own nature, the achievement of freedom, happiness and love, liberation of energy, salvation from being insane or crippled…The aim of Zen transcends the goal of ethical behavior, and so does psychoanalysis. It might be said that both systems assume that the achievement of their aim brings with it an ethical transformation, the overcoming of greed and the capacity for love and compassion. (pp. 122-123; Suzuki, Fromm, & DeMartino, 1960)
Just as love is considered an essential element of being Christian, compassion is essential to Buddhism. In The Art of Loving, Fromm (1956) noted that a person cannot love themselves if they do not love others. Thus, love and compassion are intertwined, one must love and care for all people, indeed for all things, to be fulfilled. Zen teaches this peace in many ways, even sword fighting and archery become art when performed by a Zen master. Fromm acknowledged that a Zen master of sword fighting has no wish to kill and experiences no hate for his opponent. Although a classic psychoanalyst might insist that the sword master is motivated by some unconscious hatred or anger, Fromm says that such a psychoanalyst simply does not grasp the spirit of Zen. Likewise, citing Herrigel’s Zen in the Art of Archery again, Fromm notes how archery has been transformed from a military skill into an exercise of spirituality, or in non-spiritual terms, a form of playful violence (as opposed to aggressive violence; Fromm, 1964, 1973).
Thus, the practice of mindfulness, the art of love, compassion, all play similar roles in helping people to be aware of who they are and of their relationships with others. In addition, they encourage and support a genuine desire to be connected to others, and to maintain healthy interpersonal connections, even in such diverse activities as eating breakfast, going to work, or practicing archery.
6.S: Chapter Summary
Review of Key Points
• Horney did not deny that girls envy boys for certain anatomical advantages that boys have, but she suggested that another dynamic force comes into play: female genital anxiety.
• Because girls are repeatedly made to feel inferior to boys, and few outlets are available for their creative drives, many women develop a masculinity complex. This complex is manifested by a desire for revenge against men and the rejection of feminine traits.
• As the result of cultural pressure, Horney felt that many women overvalue love, and experience a desperate need to be with a man.
• Horney believed that all children are born with an anxiety related to survival. When they are not nurtured and cared for fully, they then develop a basic anxiety toward the seemingly unsafe world.
• As the neurotic personality progresses, due to the continued failure to resolve one’s conflicts, an idealized image is formed. In addition, the neurotic individual externalizes their anxiety.
• The neurotic individual then embarks on a search for glory, which includes neurotic claims. The neurotic claims then lead to a powerful compulsion known as the tyranny of the should.
• Horney felt that psychoanalysis needed to be re-evaluated because in many cases it was ineffective. Her most radical suggestion involved the possibility of teaching people about self-analysis.
• Individuals who feel anxious and alienated seek connection by any means, according Fromm, including submitting themselves to authoritarian regimes.
• In his extensive study of a Mexican village, Fromm believed that psychodynamic principles could be used to study the social character of groups. He also felt that the evolution of groups, or societies, over time reflects a type of social selection.
• Both Horney and Fromm believed that Zen Buddhism and psychoanalysis shared common elements, and that each discipline could benefit from studying the other. They attempted to incorporate these ideas in ways that might enhance interpersonal relationships in our everyday lives. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/06%3A_Karen_Horney_and_Erich_Fromm/6.07%3A_Personality_Theory_in_Real_Life.txt |
Although Karen Horney was the first female psychoanalyst to openly challenge Sigmund Freud’s theories regarding the psychology of women, she abandoned this line of work when she came to the conclusion that culture was a more significant issue than gender in determining the psychology of women. Of course, that decision is based on separating gender from culture, which is not something that everyone would agree with. In the 1970s, the Stone Center was established, as a group of pioneering women began the work that led to a theory on the personality development and psychology of women based on a combination of seeking and forming relationships within a cultural context. This work continues today, and the theory is being expanded to include the personality development of all people, women and men.
07: Psychology of Women
Although Karen Horney was the first female psychoanalyst to openly challenge Sigmund Freud’s theories regarding the psychology of women, she abandoned this line of work when she came to the conclusion that culture was a more significant issue than gender in determining the psychology of women. Of course, that decision is based on separating gender from culture, which is not something that everyone would agree with. In the 1970s, the Stone Center was established, as a group of pioneering women began the work that led to a theory on the personality development and psychology of women based on a combination of seeking and forming relationships within a cultural context. This work continues today, and the theory is being expanded to include the personality development of all people, women and men.
However, not all female theorists have separated themselves so clearly from Freud’s basic theories. One of those women holds a special place in the history of psychology, since she was instrumental in helping both Sigmund and Anna Freud escape Austria as the Nazi regime came to power. Her name was Marie Bonaparte. Bonaparte was a princess, a great-grandniece of Emperor Napoleon I of France, a patient and student of Sigmund Freud, and in 1953 she wrote Female Sexuality (Bonaparte, 1953). Her perspective on women closely followed a traditional Freudian view. In contrast, Nancy Chodorow’s feminist perspective has significantly separated her perspective on the psychology women from that of Freud. Still, Chodorow has worked to combine feminist and psychoanalytic perspectives, in a manner similar to the object relations theories put forth by the Neo-Freudians, and she has focused on the unique female experience of mothering.
We will begin this chapter by examining the work of Princess Bonaparte, as an example of a female theorist who remained true to Freud’s own theories. Then, we will examine the alternative presented by the members of the Stone Center group. Finally, this chapter will conclude with a brief look at Chodorow’s efforts to combine the psychoanalytic and feminist perspectives.
7.02: Feminine Psychology in the Freudian Tradition
Although Sigmund Freud believed that female psychology was the result of an incomplete and frustrated male development, he also acknowledged that he did not fully understand the psychology of women. A particularly interesting passage can be found in his New Introductory Lectures on Psycho-Analysis:
One might consider characterizing femininity psychologically as giving preference to passive aims. This is not, of course, the same thing as passivity; to achieve a passive aim may call for a large amount of activity...we must beware in this of underestimating the influence of social customs, which similarly force women into passive situations. All this is still far from being cleared up… (pgs. 143-144; Freud, 1933/1965)
So, Freud did suggest the possibility that cultural factors (social customs) play a role in the development of girls and women. Furthermore, he acknowledged that there was much more to learn about these developmental processes. Freud ended his lecture on femininity with the following:
That is all I had to say to you about femininity. It is certainly incomplete and fragmentary and does not always sound friendly. But do not forget that I have only been describing women in so far as their nature is determined by their sexual function. It is true that that influence extends very far; but we do not overlook the fact that an individual woman may be a human being in other respects as well. If you want to know more about femininity, enquire from your own experiences of life, or turn to the poets, or wait until science can give you deeper and more coherent information. (pg. 167; Freud 1933/1965)
Published in 1933, this was one of the last times Freud wrote about femininity and the psychology of women. Always the scientist, Freud suggested that future research will provide a better understanding of this topic. The Stone Center group, whose work we will encounter shortly, is perhaps the most complete effort made toward fulfilling Freud’s expectations. First, however, let’s consider the interesting work of Princess Marie Bonaparte, as one of the female psychodynamic theorists who adhered closely to Freud’s perspective.
Princess Marie Bonaparte
Marie Bonaparte (1882-1962), Her Royal Highness Princess George of Greece, was a patient, student, and dear friend of Sigmund Freud. She was the great-grandniece of Napoleon Bonaparte, Emperor of France, and she married Prince George of Greece in 1907. As a wealthy aristocrat, she was able to help both Freud himself and the financially struggling International Psychoanalytic Publishing House (known more commonly as the Verlag, from its name in German). It was Marie Bonaparte who paid a ransom to the Nazis in Austria in order to secure Freud’s release as World War II approached. Earlier, she had used her wealth to help support the Verlag, which Freud had established to provide a means for publishing a variety of works on psychoanalysis (Gay, 1998; Jones, 1957). However, Bonaparte was far more than just a wealthy colleague.
Bonaparte shared Freud’s interest in antiquities, and often helped him find the best pieces for his collection (M. Freud, 1983). She also loved dogs, particularly Chows, and Freud came to love that breed as well. As Freud, his wife Martha, and their daughter Anna waited to escape Austria in 1938, Freud and Anna spent some of their time translating books and articles into German. One of those books was entitled Topsy, written by Bonaparte about her favorite dog (M. Freud, 1983; Jones, 1957). But it was not just a simple matter of waiting to leave Austria. In a particularly poignant story, Martin Freud described the time when his sister Anna was arrested by the Gestapo. Bonaparte was with her, and demanded to be arrested as well. However, at that point in time the Nazis were still intimidated by members of the royal houses of Europe, and Anna Freud was taken alone. She was released later, but Freud is said to have paced all day in his house worrying about her (M. Freud, 1983). When the Freud family finally left Austria for England, only Bonaparte was able to safely transfer their gold out of the country. She did so by sending the gold to the king of Greece, who then sent it to the Greek embassy in London (Jones, 1957). Thus, Freud and his family were financially secure upon reaching London, and Freud was able to repay the ransom that Bonaparte had paid for his release.
Bonaparte also served the field of psychoanalysis in an important way other than her own work. Early in Freud’s career, during the time when he underwent his own psychoanalysis, he had a very close friend named Wilhelm Fliess. So close were these friends, and at such a critical time in Freud’s career, that their correspondence contained a great many intimate details. In addition to personal correspondence, Freud sent many scientific notes about his theory to Fliess. When Fliess died in 1931, his widow asked Freud to return the letters Fliess had written to Freud. However, Freud had destroyed all of them years earlier, and he wanted her to do the same to his letters. However, she chose to sell the letters to a bookseller. The bookseller then sold them to Bonaparte. When Bonaparte told Freud that she had them, he insisted that she destroy them. She refused, however, and those letters eventually became available to the fields of psychology and psychiatry (Gay, 1998; Jones, 1953).
As Bonaparte became involved in psychoanalysis professionally, Freud both admired and supported her work (Gay, 1998; Jones, 1957). In a letter to Bonaparte after Freud had reviewed her paper on psychoanalysis and time, Freud wrote “The work does you honor.” (cited in Jones, 1957). She was also active in establishing the growing field as a whole. She had helped to establish a psychoanalytic society in France, and Freud later nominated her to be vice-president of the International Psychoanalytic Association. In nominating her, Freud considered her a worthy candidate:
…not “only because one can show her off to the outside world,” but because she “is a person of high intelligence, of masculine capacity for work, has done fine papers, is wholly devoted to the cause, and, as is well known, also in a position to lend material aid. She has now become 50 years old, will probably turn away increasingly from her private interests and steep herself in analytic work. I need not mention that she alone keeps the Fr[ench] group together.” (pg. 586; cited in Gay, 1998).
Female Sexuality
Bonaparte first met Freud as a patient seeking help with her frigidity. The psychoanalysis does not appear to have been successful, but the experience did provide Bonaparte with a new goal in life (Gay, 1998). Given the nature of her own problems, it should not be surprising that her writings on psychoanalysis focused on sexuality. Female Sexuality is a wide-ranging book that draws heavily on Freud’s work, but also relies on the works of Horney and Klein. In addition, she mentions Adler in a somewhat favorable light, though she concludes that both Freud and Adler failed to fully understand female sexuality (as they themselves acknowledged). Still, she bases most of her work on a paper of the same title written by Freud in 1931, although she attempts to describe the development of girls and women more thoroughly and with more consideration given to potential alternatives.
Bonaparte began by describing three types of women. The so-called “true women” are those who have succeeded in substituting the desire for a penis (penis envy) with a desire to have children (particularly a son); their sexuality is normal, vaginal, and maternal. They are known as acceptives. The second type, the renouncers, gives up all competition with men, fail to seek external love objects, and live largely unfulfilled lives. The claimers, however, deny reality and cling to both psychical and organic male elements present in all women. While it may appear to us today that the claimers are asserting themselves as being proud to be female, Bonaparte considered this position to cause an inability to adapt to one’s erotic function. As Freud had described, in order for a girl to develop, she must transfer both her love object (from mother to father) and her erotogenic zone (from clitoris to vagina). According to Bonaparte, claimers who will not transfer their love object will become lesbians, those who do not transfer their erotogenic zone will never achieve fully satisfying sexual relationships as adults. In other words, they will be frigid. Evidence of the psychical nature of the problem of frigidity can be seen in the responsiveness of patients to psychoanalysis. Patients who are totally frigid, those who experience no pleasure in sexual activity, often respond well to psychoanalysis. However, women who are partially frigid, those who have more specifically not transferred their erotogenic zone from the clitoris to the vagina, tend to be very resistant to psychoanalysis. According to Bonaparte, partial frigidity is much more common than total frigidity. Partial frigidity is also much more common than men realize, since many women hide this reality by pretending to enjoy sexual activity.
In agreement with Freud, Bonaparte considers boys and girls to begin their sexual lives equally, in an oral erotic stage focused on the mother’s breast. As they transition into the anal stage, there are the beginnings of a contrast between active and passive forces: the expulsion of feces vs. the retention of feces. The important activity of toilet training begins in this stage, and so social conditioning is also coming into play. Although Bonaparte, like Freud, continued to emphasize biological factors in sexual development, the acknowledgement that sociocultural factors related to toilet training come into play lays the foundation for girls being pushed toward the passive role that strict Freudians believe they must play.
In the transition from the anal stage to the phallic stage, the interplay between active and passive forces that were present during the anal stage takes a different direction in boys and girls. Very simply, since the boys penis actively protrudes, and his love object can continue to be his mother (or, later, other women as substitutes), the boy will develop an active relationship with the world around him. Girls, however, ultimately need to transfer their sexuality from the clitoris (which had been related to a small penis until this point) to the vagina, a passive organ with regard to sexuality. Girls must also transfer their love object to their father (or, later, to other men), and accept the physical penetration that is required for sexual intercourse. In this manner, according to Freud, Bonaparte, and others, boys grow into aggressive men and girls grow into passive women. Provided, of course, that women accept their role.
Adding to the complexity of this process for girls, who need to transfer the libidinal cathexes from both the clitoris and the love object of mother, is the consequence of when the girl first experiences an orgasm. Since this potentially can occur at any time during the dynamic processes of transferring these libidinal cathexes, the first orgasm can have a variety of either positive or negative effects. For boys it is simply easier, since the penis is the one obvious source of sexual pleasure, and the boy never has to transfer his love object away from women (though it should transfer from the mother to another woman). This difference in sexual development is summed up by Bonaparte:
It is on these diverse superimposed courses that the edifice of female sexuality rises. Constitutional factors are its foundation, and life builds thereon. Finally, we see the feminine psychosexual structure in its main varieties, varieties more multiform even than those to which male sexuality is susceptible, centered as it is on the phallus, that highly differentiated organ developed to serve the male erotic function. (pg. 140; Bonaparte, 1953)
As an interesting side note, Bonaparte also discussed some of the research that had been done up to that point in time on female circumcision/mutilation, particularly in primitive cultures. She speculated on how psychoanalytic theories of sexuality might apply to those practices, and how societies today might compare to primitive cultures that have retained such practices. Can we really say that things have changed since Bonaparte wrote the following passage?
It would appear that humans, living in communities, cannot dispense with sexual repression of some kind and that, if it has not succeeded in coming from within, it must go on coming from without. (pg. 157; Bonaparte, 1953)
Before we turn our attention to the Stone Center group, I would like to mention something that may have already entered your mind. This book is about personality, not sexuality. While it may be true that sexuality is an important part of life, it is certainly not the same thing as one’s personality. Unless, of course, you happen to be a strict Freudian theorist, as was Bonaparte. She does tend to equate the psychology of women with their sexuality. The psychologists of the Stone Center group, however, have moved beyond this biased view of the psychology of women.
Discussion Question \(1\)
In keeping with Freud’s original theory, Bonaparte believed that sexual development is much more difficult for girls than it is boys. Do you agree with that, and if you do, what is it that makes things so much more difficult for girls? Are there any unique challenges that only boys face?
Placing the Psychology of Women in Context: Sexism vs. Feminism
Sigmund Freud developed a theory of female sexuality that helped to explain his observation that most people in psychoanalysis were women. Karen Horney agreed that women suffer more than men, but she placed the blame on men, and the patriarchal culture that maintains special privileges for men only. Despite the fact that Freud and Adler admitted that they did not fully understand women, and that there were many women among the neo-Freudians, it was a long time before a unique perspective on the psychology of women developed.
In contrast to women like Princess Bonaparte and Helene Deutsch, the first leading female member of the Vienna Psychoanalytic Society (the very first female member, Hermine von Hug-Hellmuth, was murdered in 1924; Deutsch, 1973, Sayers, 1991) and the first person to devote an entire book to the psychology of women (a two volume set published in consecutive years; Deutsch, 1944, 1945), Jean Baker Miller and her colleagues at the Stone Center developed a unique theory on the psychological development and personality of women. Although their theory, based on personal relationships and culture, developed in part as a result of increasing interest in feminist studies in the 1960s and 1970s, the work that continues today strives to include the personality development of all people (women and men).
There are some women, however, who believe that a feminist perspective can be combined more readily with Freud’s basic ideas (see, e.g., Mitchell, 2000). Nancy Chodorow has worked to combine both psychodynamic and feminist ideas into a comprehensive theory. Although the result is basically an object relations theory, Chodorow’s work has been reserved for this chapter due to her inclusion of the feminist side of the perspective.
It is also important to note that the work of the Stone Center group and Nancy Chodorow is much more contemporary than that of Bonaparte, Deutsch, and many of the neo-Freudians discussed in this book (most of whom are no longer alive). Thus, the development of feminist perspectives on the psychology of women continues today. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/07%3A_Psychology_of_Women/7.01%3A_Prelude_to_the_Psychology_of_Women.txt |
Despite the valuable contributions of women included among the neo-Freudians, and Horney’s suggestion of womb envy as a powerful counterpart to penis envy, theories on the psychology of women remained framed within a psychodynamic perspective. Until, that is, the 1970s, when Jean Baker Miller and a group of women colleagues created a revolution in our potential understanding of the psychology of women.
Jean Baker Miller and the Stone Center Group
In 1974, Wellesley College in Massachusetts established the Center for Research on Women, and in 1981, the Stone Center for Developmental Services and Studies was established. Working in collaboration as the Wellesley Centers for Women (WCW), the Center for Research on Women conducts a variety of interdisciplinary studies on matters related to gender equity, while the Stone Center focuses on psychological well-being and a comprehensive understanding of human development, particularly the psychological development of women. A wide range of information on the WCW can be found on their website (http://www.wcwonline.org).
Jean Baker Miller (1927-present) was a practicing psychoanalyst who had already written one book on the psychoanalysis of women when she published Toward a New Psychology of Women (Miller, 1976). This book has been credited with nothing less than changing the very way in which we study the psychology of women. Since the earliest work of Sigmund Freud, women were seen as inferior, and so-called feminine attributes (e.g., vulnerability, weakness, emotionality, helping others; see Miller, 1976) were seen as psychologically weak. Miller and her colleagues at the Stone Center have worked hard to change that perspective. Typically working in collaboration, publishing collections of writing in books such as Women’s Growth in Connection (Jordan, Kaplan, Miller, Stiver, & Surrey, 1991), Women’s Growth in Diversity (Jordan, 1997b), and The Complexity of Connection (Jordan, Walker, & Hartling, 2004), they developed a relational model of human development that focuses on connections, disconnections, mutuality, and empathy. Examples of how relationships can be damaged when one person seeks connection but the other person seeks to disconnect are all around us. Miller presented an example from a patient she identified as Doris. Doris was trying to share with her husband how upset she was after a day of finding it very difficult to deal with her colleagues at work:
He listened for about ten minutes. That’s about his limit. Then he said, “Aw, don’t let the bastards upset you.” That’s just the sort of thing I suspect. It sounds fine and even supportive. But it really means, “Shut up. I’ve heard enough.” (pg. 100; Miller, 1976)
More recently, as members of the Stone Center became increasingly aware of the role of culture in development, the relational model evolved into the relational-cultural theory (RCT)of human development (Jordan & Walker, 2004). The inclusion of culture in the theory should not be underestimated or taken for granted. Psychological theories are not immune from the bias inherent in societies that seek to maintain their hierarchical power structures. Western societies are highly individualistic, and when individuality is favored in our theories the result can be unfortunate:
In a culture that valorizes separation and autonomy, persons with cultural privilege can falsely appear more self-sufficient and so will be judged as healthier, more mature, more worthy of the privilege the society affords. Those who enjoy less cultural privilege (whether by virtue of race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or economic status) will more likely be viewed as deficient and needy. They are more likely to be subject to systematic disadvantage and culture shaming. (pgs. 4-5; Jordan & Walker, 2004)
Relational-Cultural Theory
Miller established the foundation of RCT by addressing two fundamental differences in status and power that are part of human life: the differences between children and adults, and the differences between boys/men and girls/women. Children lack the privileges of adulthood, but this is temporary, and it is the role of parents and other adults (e.g., teachers) to help children grow up. In most modern cultures, women have typically lacked the privileges of men, and to a large extent that continues today. Since male/female differences are permanent, cultural phenomena usually develop in which men seek to maintain their power and status over women. This is the reason why psychology, a field traditionally dominated by men, has equated feminine attributes with psychological pathology (Miller, 1976). Curiously, not only men participate in this bias. Anna Freud did not challenge her father’s views on girls and women, Melanie Klein claimed to be closer to Freud’s point of view than even his daughter was, and Marie Bonaparte believed that women who do not accept the role defined for them by men would never be able to experience sexual satisfaction. It is not uncommon for a subordinate group to participate in this adaptive role, according to Miller, and as a result women may have gained their greatest advantage: the responsibility, and with it the privilege, of the intense emotional connection necessary to raise a child (Miller, 1976).
Considering the primary object relation necessary for a child to grow and thrive, the relationship between a mother and her infant, a relationship in which the mother serves the child first, many feminine attributes take on new meaning. Vulnerability, weakness, helplessness, emotionality, participating in the development of others, cooperation, and creativity are all essential to giving oneself over to others, which is necessary to care for a baby, while at the same time allowing that baby to develop its own sense of mastery over the world and its own sense of individuality. Should it be surprising that women want to relate to other adults in the same way? According to Miller, one of the greatest difficulties men face in relationships with women is that men actually want to reclaim those very same elements of personality that men have delegated to women, and that gave rise to the woman’s defined role in society. In accomplishing this task, as women advance their own place within society, men will have to adapt their coping strategies (Miller, 1976).
Now let us consider the essential elements of RCT. In RCT, the concept of object relations is viewed in light of connections vs. disconnections. People seek connections: family, friends, clubs, church groups, neighbors, the list goes on. Very few people live in isolation, and fewer still want it that way. But this raises a question about the meaning of the word “self.” If a woman’s experience is based on connections, do women develop a sense of self, and what is the nature of that self? Miller (1991) suggests that we don’t get caught up in technicalities regarding the words we use to define this construct, but simply accept an open-minded definition of self. It appears to her that boys do develop a more clearly delineated sense of self, whereas girls may develop a more encompassing sense of self. Women do talk more about relationships, but not because they want or need to be either dependent or independent. Women simply want to be in relationships with others, to be connected. Looking more closely at the meaning of being “dependent” in a relationship, Stiver (1991) suggests that women often adopt a role of apparent dependence in relationships with men in order to connect with them in a manner acceptable to the man’s gender role perspective. It does not appear to her that women are any more dependent in relationships than men, but when they do seek connection they do so by whatever means necessary. So when it is necessary for forming connections, Stiver considers “to depend” on another as part of an interpersonal dynamic:
I would like to define dependency as: A process of counting on other people to provide help in coping physically and emotionally with the experiences and tasks encountered in the world when one has not sufficient skill, confidence, energy, and/or time. I have defined it as a process to stress that it is not static but changes with opportunities, circumstances, and inner struggles. (pg. 160; Stiver, 1991)
Making successful connections involves two other important processes: mutuality and empathy. These closely related constructs come into play in meaningful relationships. Mutuality refers to both participants (or more, as the case may be) in a relationship being fully engaged in the connection. Each person is interested in and aware of the other, they are willing and able to share their thoughts, feelings, and needs, they do not manipulate each other, they value the connection, and they are open to change. Perhaps most importantly, they also experience empathy with other persons (Jordan, 1991a). Empathy, according to Jordan (1991b), is “an understanding of that aspect of the self that involves we-ness, transcendence of the separate, disconnected self.” Jordan acknowledges a connection between her views and those of Kohut, who considered empathy an essential aspect of the mirroring that helps an infant to first see itself through the eyes of another as it plays with its mother (see also Mitchell & Black, 1995; Strozier, 2001). Empathy is a complex cognitive and emotional process necessary for a sense of separateness within connection, and self-empathy is an important therapeutic construct (Jordan, 1991b). Interactions of such intimacy are not new to object relations theory, but are usually only considered in the context of the earliest relationship between mother and child. RCT considers mutuality and empathy as essential attributes of connections made by adults, particularly connections made by women. An often overlooked consideration is that mutuality and empathy need to be taught and learned. For example, Winnicott’s “good enough mother” does not simply appear when a child is born (Surrey, 1991).
Discussion Question: Relational-cultural theory proposes that people seek connections in their lives, such as family, friends, church groups, clubs, etc. What groups do you consider yourself to be a member of, and how important to you is that membership? Do you, or people you know, consider the groups they belong to as more important than themselves?
Figure \(1\)
According to relational-cultural theory (RCT), women seek connections in their lives, and support each other with mutuality and empathy. These attributes have helped women in their role as the primary caregivers for our children. However, as a cultural theory, RCT suggests that these so-called feminine attributes are the result of gender roles, not some inherent difference between males and females.
The source of most suffering in life, according to RCT, is disconnection. An acute disconnection can often be recognized by the loss of energy in the moment. This may be followed by negative emotions, such as sadness, anger, or depression. There may be a heightened sense of self-consciousness and relational awareness may slow down, we may even become immobilized (Jordan, 2004). After repeated disconnections we may become fearful of turning to others for help and support, even when we need it most. This has been referred to as the central paradox of connection/disconnection. When we hurt someone we love, or are hurt by someone we love, the conflict often leads to withdrawal and the development of strategies of disconnection. As a consequence of this ongoing process, although we all share a desire to connect with others, those who have been hurt by loved ones believe that they can connect with others only if they hold back part of themselves when they try to connect. Within the context of RCT, this desire for connection, while holding back from it, is also known as the central relational paradox (Miller et al., 2004).
This may very well be a significant factor in the fact that so many marriages end in divorce. Marriage is probably the most significant connection that adults in Western cultures choose to make, and so divorce would also be the most significant disconnection. There is certainly no easy answer for the high divorce rate, but an interesting possibility has been suggested by Harville Hendrix, who specializes in marital therapy. Hendrix (1988) believes that we choose a mate based on the unconscious recognition of characteristics they have in common with our parents, and that we hope through marriage to solve the psychological and emotional damage we suffered as children. In other words, we think we are connecting with our spouse, but we really want to reconnect with our parents. Unfortunately, this creates a false connection, a connection that cannot easily be resolved, especially given the apparently different communication styles of men and women (Gray, 1997, 1999, 2002, 2004; Vincent, 2006).
So how do we resolve problems of disconnection? Relational therapy is based on the idea that a therapist can provide a relationship in which the patient can experience connection, mutuality, and empathy. In looking at the therapeutic approaches of people like Sigmund Freud, Winnicott, and Kohut, Judith Jordan (1997a) argues that the actual engagement in the therapeutic relationship is aloof and disconnected. She feels that an obvious and overlooked aspect of therapy is that the more engaged the therapist is the more one enhances the self, the other, and the relationship. Consequently, the therapeutic relationship can enhance one’s capacity to be more whole, real, and integrated in other relationships as well. This relational perspective, which provides the basis for relational therapy, is based on three principles:
1. That people grow in, through, and toward relationships.
2. For women in particular, connection with others is central to psychological well-being.
3. Movement toward relational mutuality can occur throughout life, through mutual empathy, responsiveness, and contribution to the growth of each individual and to the relationship. (Jordan, 1997a)
Once again we see the importance of empathy. Empathy involves more than just sharing the other person’s feelings, it stresses the capacity to “feel into” the other person’s experience (Jordan, 1997a; Mitchell & Black, 1995). Kohut emphasized the importance of empathy, as did the humanistic psychologist Carl Rogers. In contrast to empathy, the emphasis that has existed in therapy on the autonomous self as the “real self” can result in the creation of pathologically isolated individuals, individuals who feel self-sufficient, but who are really disconnected from others. Relational therapy does not focus on the self, but rather on relationships. To accomplish this goal, the therapist must be willing to respond to their patients in an authentic manner (Miller, Jordan, Stiver, Walker, Surrey, & Eldridge, 2004). If the therapist can convey to the patient that they are moved, the patient will be moved, knowing that her/his thoughts and feelings have reached another person, they do matter, and they can be part of a mutual experience. This is connection, and appears to be the key source of change in relational therapy (Miller et al., 2004).
Discussion Question: Relational therapy focuses on providing an environment for the patient to experience connection, empathy, and mutuality. It requires an engaged therapist. What are your ideas about how therapy should be conducted?
connections across cultures
Janet Surrey and Eastern Perspectives on Human Relations
Janet Surrey is one of the founding members of the Stone Center group, and for over 20 years she has been working to synthesize Buddhist mindfulness with relational-cultural theory and relational therapy. Most people think of mindfulness meditation as a solitary activity, but at its core is a desire to connect with the universal spirit that we all share. So, from the latter perspective, mindfulness meditation fosters a deep connection with others. Connecting with others is also at the core of relational therapy (with disconnection seen as the primary cause of suffering in life). Thus, the practice of mindfulness meditation can enhance the connections sought in relational therapy, and relational therapy can enhance one’s attention to the present moment in both relational therapy and in one’s everyday relationships.
Of particular value for the therapist, the practice of mindfulness meditation can deepen one’s empathic skills. According to Surrey, during a mindfulness-informed therapy session the skilled therapist is attentive to their own sensations, feelings, thoughts, and memories as the patient is describing the same psychological phenomena. This helps the therapist to both experience the patient and attend to the flow of the relationship. Thus, the therapist can be fully aware of the shifting qualities of the connections and disconnections within the therapeutic relationship. Although therapists typically rely on verbal interaction, the practice of mindfulness offers a unique opportunity to experience a conscious silence. Just such a rare opportunity for silence in one’s busy life can be created in the genuine connection that results from a healthy and meaningful relationship (Surrey, 2005).
Surrey is by no means alone in drawing connections between Buddhist mindfulness and either the value of relationships or relational forms of therapy. His Holiness the Dalai Lama has emphasized that human beings cannot live in isolation, our very nature is that we are social animals. Our communities, indeed our entire society, require us to live cooperatively. This cooperation is best accomplished through love and compassion. It is not enough, however, to care only for those who care for us. When we harbor negative emotions toward those whom we do not like, those negative emotions harm ourselves. Thus, the Dalai Lama considers it essential to cultivate equanimity, the ability to care for everyone equally, no matter whom they may be (Dalai Lama, 2001, 2002). Likewise, the widely respected Buddhist monk Thich Nhat Hanh (nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize by Martin Luther King, Jr.) stresses the importance of practicing mindfulness within a supportive group, and then extending the compassion that arises to all others (Thich Nhat Hanh, 1995, 1999).
Within the field of psychology, the well-known therapist/authors Jon Kabat-Zinn, who developed the Mindfulness Based Stress Reduction program, and Steven Hayes, the founder of , have emphasized the importance of relationships with other people and the world around us, as well as how mindfulness can help to enhance those relationships (Hayes, 2004; Hayes et al., 1999; Kabat-Zinn, 1990). In addition, personal relationships appear to be particularly important for a variety of groups in American society, including: African Americans (Belgrave & Allison, 2006; Cook & Wiley, 2000; Taylor et al., 2004), Native Americans (Axelson, 1999; Trujillo, 2000), aged individuals (Belsky, 1999; Hillier & Barrow, 1999), and those who are dying (Kubler-Ross, 1969, 1983). Indeed, the ability to form and maintain healthy relationships has been identified as a vitally important human strength and an important aspect of well-being (Berscheid, 2003; Cantor, 2003; Cloninger, 2004; Sears, 2003). Thus, by examining cross-cultural factors that aid in developing and maintaining healthy relationships and, therefore, a healthy personality, we can continue to move toward a psychology that benefits us all. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/07%3A_Psychology_of_Women/7.03%3A_Human_Relations_and_a_Modern_Perspective_on_the_Psychology_of_Women.txt |
In 1974, Juliet Mitchell suggested that Freudian psychoanalysis offered an important means for understanding the psychology of women, and that feminism should embrace Freud’s theoretical perspective. She did not suggest that Freud was necessarily right about the psychological development of women, but she did emphasize the importance of object relations theory and the interactions between mothers, their children, and families as a whole (Mitchell, 2000). Some 50 years earlier, Helene Deutsch had suggested that women do not seek to become mothers due to penis envy, but rather they want to replace passive femininity with an active role as a woman and mother (Deutsch was analyzed and trained by Sigmund Freud himself; Deutsch, 1944, 1945, 1973, Sayers, 1991). Deutsch (1973) wrote that she had great admiration for Marie Bonaparte as a person and a scholar (Deutsch knew Bonaparte personally), but Deutsch found little of interest in Bonaparte’s strict application of Freudian theory to the psychology of women. The person best known today for attempting to combine elements of Freud’s theory with an objective perspective on a psychology of women is Nancy Chodorow (1944-present), a sociologist and psychoanalyst who has focused on the special relationship between mothers and daughters.
In 1978, Chodorow published The Reproduction of Mothering. Twenty years later, she wrote a new preface for the second edition, in which she had the advantage of looking back at both the success of her book and the criticism that it drew from some. Chodorow acknowledged that many feminists felt obliged to choose between a biologically-based psychology of women and mothering (the essential Freudian perspective) versus a view in which the psychology of women and their feelings about mothering were determined by social structure and cultural mandate. Chodorow believed that social structure and culture were important, but she insisted nonetheless that the biological differences between males and females could not be dismissed. Indeed, they lead to an essential difference in the mother-daughter relationship as compared to the mother-son relationship (Chodorow, 1999a).
According to Chodorow, when a woman becomes a mother, the most important aspect of her relationship with any daughter is the recognition that they are alike. Thus, her daughter can also become a mother someday. This special connection is felt by the daughter and incorporated into her psyche, or ego. It is important to remember that much of this is happening at an unconscious level. It is not as if women choose to favor their daughters over their sons, and it is not as if women reject their sons. Chodorow argues that it just simply happens, because of the biological similarity between females. As a consequence of this special relationship, daughters are subtly shaped in ways that lead to what we often think of as feminine attributes: a sense of self-in-relation, feeling connected to others, being able to empathize, and being embedded in or dependent on relationships. For Chodorow, the internalization of the mother-daughter relationship, from the daughter’s point of view, is the development of a most important object relation. As adults, many women feel a desire to have children, which is often described as a maternal instinct or a biological drive (the feeling that their “biological clock” is ticking). As an alternative, Chodorow suggests that these feelings have instead been shaped by the unconscious fantasies and emotions associated with the woman’s internal relationship to her own mother (Chodorow, 1999a).
In contrast to the development of daughters, Chodorow suggests that sons are influenced by the essential feelings of difference conveyed by their mother. Consequently, and in contrast to women, men grow up asserting their independence, and they will be anxious about intimacy if it signals dependence on another. In addition, within the cultural framework of society, men develop a greater concern with being masculine than women are concerned with their femininity (Chodorow, 1999a).
The cultural differences between men and women, as well as the early childhood differences in their relationships with their parents, create problems for the typical family structure. Since men tend to avoid relationships, they are unlikely to fulfill the relational needs that women have. In addition, young girls most likely experience their relationship with their father within the context of their relationship with their mother, whereas young boys have a more direct two-person relationship with their mother (in terms of heterosexual relationships; Chodorow, 1999a). Therefore, in order for a woman to balance the relational triangle she experienced with her mother and father, and the subsequent intrapsychic object-relational structure she developed, she needs to have a child. In other words, by having children, women can “reimpose intrapsychic relational structure on the social world,” and they can relate to the father of their child in terms of a family structure they were familiar with in childhood. Furthermore, having a child recreates the intimacy a woman shared with her own mother.
One critique of The Reproduction of Mothering that Chodorow agreed with was her emphasis on a universal mother-daughter experience, within a heterosexual nuclear family. In her later writings, Chodorow emphasized individual subjectivity, still in relation to others, but also within a wider range of family structures and individual situations (Chodorow, 1989, 1994, 1999b). She felt that a balance between the principles of psychoanalysis and an understanding of culture was the best overall approach:
A psychoanalysis that begins with the immediacy of unconscious fantasy and feeling found in the clinical encounter illuminates our understanding of individual subjectivity and potentially transforms all sociocultural thought…At the same time, feminist, anthropological, and other cultural theories require that psychoanalysts take seriously the ways in which cultural meanings intertwine with and help to constitute psychic life. (pg. 274; Chodorow, 1999b) | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/07%3A_Psychology_of_Women/7.04%3A_Nancy_Chodorow%27s_Psychoanalytic_Feminism_and_the_Role_of_Mothering.txt |
The Experience of Mothering
When Helene Deutsch wrote the first books devoted entirely to the psychology of women, the second volume was devoted entirely to Motherhood (Deutsch, 1945). She described motherhood as providing a wonderful opportunity to directly experience a sense of immortality. She distinguished, however, between motherhood and motherliness. Motherhood, according to Deutsch, refers to the relationship between mother and child, which varies from individual to individual and from culture to culture. When Deutsch wrote of motherliness, she referred to both a quality of character that pervades a woman’s whole personality and emotional phenomena related to a child’s helplessness and need for care. In a motherly woman, one’s own need for love is transferred from the ego to the child, and this maternal love has the chief characteristic of tenderness (Deutsch, 1945). Of course, no two women experience motherhood in exactly the same way. Deutsch recognized two primary types of mothers. The first type is the woman whose world is opened to a new reality by the birth of a child. She feels no loss, and she develops her own personality fully only after having a child. The second type of mother feels restricted and impoverished by her children. Such women, according to Deutsch, have spent their emotionality on other pursuits (such as sexuality, or a career), and they lack sufficient libido to withstand the emotional burden of children:
The woman’s relation to her husband and family, her economic situation, and the position of the child in her existence, give a personal color to each woman’s motherliness. (pg. 55; Deutsch, 1945)
Deutsch had several miscarriages in the early years of her marriage, causing her a great deal of anxiety during the pregnancy that finally gave her a son named Martin. In her autobiography, she speaks both fondly and proudly of her only child, as well as of the wonderful relationship he shared with his father. With regard to being a busy, working woman during her son’s childhood, Deutsch wrote that this could only be worked out on individual basis, and with some necessary compromise (Deutsch, 1973).
Although fathers play a role in parenting, only a woman can really understand what it’s like to be a mother. Two entertaining books written by mothers about their relationships with their children are good-enough mother (Syler, 2007) and Mother Shock: Loving Every (Other) Minute of It (Buchanan, 2003). In addition to stories about the joys of raising children, they also discuss the trials and tribulations as well. In accordance with the work of the Stone Center group, they also talk about how important it is for mothers, as women, to have meaningful relationships with friends both in and beyond their families. In a chapter entitled mommy needs a playdate, Syler writes:
…behind every good-enough mother is another good-enough mother with whom to commiserate, shop, or just hang out and have a crab-fest. It’s a healthy dose of friendship that fuels us to fight another day. (pg. 189; Syler, 2007)
But what happens when a woman is not a good mother? Christine Lawson has studied the mothering abilities of women who suffer from borderline personality disorder. In Understanding the Borderline Mother (2000), Lawson has identified four types of borderline mother: the waif (characterized by helplessness and hopelessness), the hermit (characterized by perfectionism and worrying), the queen (characterized by demanding attention and feelings of emptiness), and the witch (characterized by a desire for power and the very real threat of being physically abusive). The tragic challenge for the children of borderline mothers, according to Lawson, is that our mother is the first thing any of must understand in our lives, and our survival depends on understanding her. Although borderline personality is highly resistant to treatment in therapy, as with any personality disorder, therapy can help women with borderline personality disorder to avoid passing on the condition to their children.
While it is understandable that mothering would be difficult for women suffering from psychological disorders, it also appears to be true that no such thing as a “maternal instinct” exists. Anthropologist Sarah Hrdy, who has been elected to both the National Academy of Sciences and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, has studied infanticide in different cultures and other primate species. She found it quite surprising that some mothers (human, ape, and monkey) will contribute to the death of their own child (or children), and in some cases then mate with the male that killed them. While this is a complex issue, covered by Hrdy in a rather lengthy book entitled Mother Nature (Hrdy, 1999), she raises some profound questions. For example, if women instinctively love their children, why do so many women directly or indirectly contribute to their deaths? Since fathers contribute equally to the genetic makeup of the child, why haven’t fathers evolved a greater interest in and commitment to caring for their children? And perhaps most interestingly, “just why did these little creatures evolve to be so plump, engaging, and utterly adorable?” (Hrdy, 1999).
Consider your own mother and your relationship with her. Do you consider her to have been a good-enough mother? Whether you are a man or a woman, how has your relationship with your mother affected your relationships with others (especially if you have children)?
Discussion Question \(1\)
Chodorow proposed that women desire to have children in order to recreate the intimacy they had with their mother when they were a baby, and to balance their relationship with their husband in a manner similar to how they first experienced their father. Does this suggestion seem reasonable, or do you think there may be a more fundamental biological drive toward bearing offspring?
7.S: Chapter Summary
Review of Key Points
• Within a strict Freudian paradigm, Marie Bonaparte described three types of women. There are women who accept their proper role in society, those who give up on meaningful relationships, and those who fight society. Bonaparte believed that the women who fight their role in society can never be fulfilled sexually.
• Jean Baker Miller began addressing the differences in power and status that exist between boys/men and girls/women, and the cultural system that develop to maintain those differences.
• According to Miller, and other theorists at the Stone Center, a woman’s experience is based on connections with others. This led to the formation of relational-cultural theory.
• Problems arise when people become disconnected. Repeated disconnection can make individuals afraid to form connections, resulting in the central paradox of connection/disconnection.
• According to Chodorow, the mother-daughter relationship is special because the mother experiences her daughter(s) as similar to herself. The daughter incorporates this special relationship as a primary object relation.
• Chodorow believed that since mothers experience their sons as different, boys begin to develop as more independent individuals. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/07%3A_Psychology_of_Women/7.05%3A_Personality_Theory_in_Real_Life.txt |
In contrast to both the often dark, subconscious emphasis of the psychodynamic theorists and the somewhat cold, calculated perspectives of behavioral/cognitive theorists, the humanistic psychologists focus on each individual’s potential for personal growth and self-actualization. Carl Rogers was influenced by strong religious experiences (both in America and in China) and his early clinical career in a children’s hospital. Consequently, he developed his therapeutic techniques and the accompanying theory in accordance with a positive and hopeful perspective. Rogers also focused on the unique characteristics and viewpoint of individuals.
Abraham Maslow is best known for his extensive studies on the most salient feature of the humanistic perspective: self-actualization. He is also the one who referred to humanistic psychology as the third force, after the psychodynamic and behavioral/cognitive perspectives, and he specifically addressed the need for psychology to move beyond its study of unhealthy individuals. He was also interested in the psychology of the work place, and his recognition in the business field has perhaps made him the most famous psychologist.
Henry Murray was an enigmatic figure, who seemingly failed to properly acknowledge the woman who inspired much of his work, and who believed his life had been something of a failure. Perhaps he felt remorse as a result of maintaining an extramarital affair with the aforementioned woman, thanks in large part to the advice and help of Carl Jung! Murray extended a primarily psychodynamic perspective to the study of human needs in normal individuals. His Thematic Apperception Test was one of the first psychological tests applied outside of a therapeutic setting, and it provided the basis for studying the need for achievement (something akin to a learned form of self-actualization).
8.02: Carl Rogers and Humanistic Psychology
Carl Rogers is the psychologist many people associate first with humanistic psychology, but he did not establish the field in the way that Freud established psychoanalysis. A few years older than Abraham Maslow, and having moved into clinical practice more directly, Rogers felt a need to develop a new theoretical perspective that fit with his clinical observations and personal beliefs. Thus, he was proposing a humanistic approach to psychology and, more specifically, psychotherapy before Maslow. It was Maslow, however, who used the term humanistic psychology as a direct contrast to behaviorism and psychoanalysis. And it was Maslow who contacted some friends, in 1954, in order to begin meetings that led to the creation of the American Association for Humanistic Psychology. Rogers was included in that group, but so were Erich Fromm and Karen Horney, both of whom had distinctly humanistic elements in their own theories, elements that shared a common connection to Alfred Adler’s Individual Psychology (Stagner, 1988). In addition, the spiritual aspects of humanistic psychology, such as peak experiences and transcendence, have roots in the work of Carl Jung and William James, and go even further back in time to ancient philosophies of Yoga and Buddhism.
In at least one important way, Rogers’ career was similar to that of Sigmund Freud. As he began his clinical career, he found that the techniques he had been taught were not very effective. So, he began experimenting with his own ideas, and developing his own therapeutic approach. As that approach developed, so did a unique theory of personality that aimed at explaining the effectiveness of the therapy. Rogers found it difficult to explain what he had learned, but he felt quite passionately about it:
…the real meaning of a word can never be expressed in words, because the real meaning would be the thing itself. If one wishes to give such a real meaning he should put his hand over his mouth and point. This is what I should most like to do. I would willingly throw away all the words of this manuscript if I could, somehow, effectively point to the experience which is therapy. It is a process, a thing-in-itself, an experience, a relationship, a dynamic… (pp. ix; Rogers, 1951)
Brief Biography of Carl Rogers
Carl Ransom Rogers was born on January 8, 1902, in Chicago, Illinois. His parents were well-educated, and his father was a successful civil engineer. His parents loved their six children, of whom Rogers was the fourth, but they exerted a distinct control over them. They were fundamentalist Christians, who emphasized a close-knit family and constant, productive work, but approved of little else. The Rogers household expected standards of behavior appropriate for the ‘elect’ of God: there was no drinking of alcohol, no dancing, no visits to the theater, no card games, and little social life at all (DeCarvalho, 1991; Thorne, 2003).
Rogers was not the healthiest of children, and his family considered him to be overly sensitive. The more his family teased him, the more he retreated into a lonely world of fantasy. He sought consolation by reading books, and he was well above his grade level for reading when he began school. In 1914 the family moved to a large farm west of Chicago, a move motivated primarily by a desire to keep the children away from the temptations of suburban city life. The result was even more isolation for Rogers, who lamented that he’d only had two dates by the end of high school. He continued to learn, however, becoming something of an expert on the large moths that lived in the area. In addition, his father encouraged the children to develop their own ventures, and Rogers and his brothers raised a variety of livestock. Given these interests, and in keeping with family tradition, Rogers enrolled in the University of Wisconsin-Madison to study scientific agriculture (DeCarvalho, 1991; Thorne, 2003).
During his first year of college, Rogers attended a Sunday morning group of students led by Professor George Humphrey. Professor Humphrey was a facilitative leader, who refused to be conventional and who encouraged the students to make their own decisions. Rogers found the intellectual freedom very stimulating, and he also began to make close friends. This increased intellectual and emotional energy led Rogers to re-examine his commitment to Christianity. Given his strong religious faith, he decided to change his major to history, in anticipation of a career as a Christian minister. He was fortunate to be chosen as one of only twelve students from America to attend a World Student Christian Federation conference in Peking, China. He traveled throughout China (also visiting Korea, Hong Kong, Japan, the Philippines, and Hawaii) for 6 months, surrounded by other intelligent and creative young people. He kept a detailed journal, and wrote lengthy letters to his family and Helen Elliott, a childhood friend whom he considered to be his “sweetheart.” His mind was stretched in all directions by this profound cross-cultural experience, and the intellectual and spiritual freedom he was embracing blinded him to the fact that his fundamentalist family was deeply disturbed by what he had to say. However, by the time Rogers was aware of his family’s disapproval, he had been changed, and he believed that people of very different cultures and faiths can all be sincere and honest (Kirschenbaum, 1995; Thorne, 2003). As a curious side note, Rogers’ roommate on the trip was a Black seminary professor. Rogers was vaguely aware that it was strange at that time for a Black man and a White man to room together, but he was particularly surprised at the stares they received from the Chinese people they met, who had never seen a Black person before (Rogers & Russell, 2002). After his return from China, Rogers graduated from college, and 2 months later he married Helen. Again his family disapproved, believing that the young couple should be more established first. But Rogers had been accepted to the Union Theological Seminary in New York City, and both he and Helen wanted to be together. His family may have wanted them to wait because Union Theological Seminary was, perhaps, the most liberal seminary in America at the time (DeCarvalho, 1991; Rogers & Russell, 2002; Thorne, 2003).
Rogers spent 2 years at the seminary, including a summer assignment as the pastor of a small church in Vermont. However, his desire not to impose his own beliefs on others, made it difficult for him to preach. He began taking courses at nearby Teachers’ College of Columbia University, where he learned about clinical and educational psychology, as well as working with disturbed children. He then transferred to Teachers’ College, and after writing a dissertation in which he developed a test for measuring personality adjustment in children, he earned his Ph.D. in Clinical Psychology. Then, in 1928, he began working at the Rochester Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (DeCarvalho, 1991; Thorne, 2003).
Rogers was immersed in his work in Rochester for 12 years. He found that even the most elaborate theories made little sense when dealing with children who had suffered severe psychological damage after traveling through the courts and the social work systems. So Rogers developed his own approach, and did his best to help them. Many of his colleagues, including the director, had no particular therapeutic orientation:
When I would try to see what I could do to alter their behavior, sometimes they would refuse to see me the next time. I’d have a hard time getting them to come from the detention home to my office, and that would cause me to think, “What is it that I did that offended the child?” Well, usually it was overinterpretation, or getting too smart in analyzing the causes of behavior…So we approached every situation with much more of a question of “What can we do to help?” rather than “What is the mysterious cause of this behavior?” or “What theory does the child fit into?” It was a very good place for learning in that it was easy to be open to experience, and there was certainly no pressure to fit into any particular pattern of thought. (pg. 108; Rogers & Russell, 2002)
Eventually Rogers wrote a book outlining his work with children, The Clinical Treatment of the Problem Child (Rogers, 1939), which received excellent reviews. He was offered a professorship at Ohio State University. Beginning as a full professor gave Rogers a great deal of freedom, and he was frequently invited to give talks. It has been suggested that one such talk, in December 1940, at the University of Minnesota, entitled “Newer Concepts in Psychotherapy,” was the official birthday of client-centered therapy. Very popular with his students, Rogers was not so welcome amongst his colleagues. Rogers believed that his work was particularly threatening to those colleagues who believed that only their own expertise could make psychotherapy effective. After only 4 years, during which he published Counseling and Psychotherapy (Rogers, 1942), Rogers moved on to the University of Chicago, where he established the counseling center, wrote Client-Centered Therapy (Rogers, 1951) and contributed several chapters to Psychotherapy and Personality Change (Rogers & Dymond, 1954), and in 1956 received a Distinguished Scientific Contribution Award from the American Psychological Association. Then, in 1957, he accepted a joint appointment in psychiatry and psychology at the University of Wisconsin to study psychotic individuals. Rogers had serious doubts about leaving Chicago, but felt that the joint appointment would allow him to make a dramatic contribution to psychotherapy. It was a serious mistake. He did not get along with his colleagues in the psychology department, whom he considered to be antagonistic, outdated, “rat-oriented,” and distrustful of clinical psychology, and so he resigned. He kept his appointment in the psychiatry department, however, and in 1961 published perhaps his most influential book, On Becoming a Person (Rogers, 1961).
In 1963, Rogers moved to California to join the Western Behavioral Sciences Institute, at the invitation of one of his former students, Richard Farson. This was a non-profit institute dedicated to the study of humanistically-oriented interpersonal relations. Rogers was leery of making another major move, but eventually agreed. He became very active in research on encounter groups and educational theory. Five years later, when Farson left the institute, there was a change in its direction. Rogers was unhappy with the changes, so he joined some colleagues in leaving and establishing the Center for Studies of the Person, where he remained until his death. In his later years, Rogers wrote books on topics such as personal power and marriage (Rogers, 1972, 1977). In 1980, he published A Way of Being (Rogers, 1980), in which he changed the terminology of his perspective from “client-centered” to “person-centered.” With the assistance of his daughter Natalie, who had studied with Abraham Maslow, he held many group workshops on life, family, business, education, and world peace. He traveled to regions where tension and danger were high, including Poland, Russia, South Africa, and Northern Ireland. In 1985 he brought together influential leaders of seventeen Central American countries for a peace conference in Austria. The day he died, February 4, 1987, without knowing it, he had just been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize (DeCarvalho, 1991; Kirschenbaum, 1995; Thorne, 2003).
Placing Rogers in Context: A Psychology 2,600 Years in the Making
Carl Rogers was an extraordinary individual whose approach to psychology emphasized individuality. Raised with a strong Christian faith, exposed to Eastern culture and spirituality in college, and then employed as a therapist for children, he came to value and respect each person he met. Because of that respect for the ability of each person to grow, and the belief that we are innately driven toward actualization, Rogers began the distinctly humanistic approach to psychotherapy that became known as client-centered therapy.
Taken together, client-centered therapy and self-actualization offer a far more positive approach to fostering the growth of each person than most other disciplines in psychology. Unlike the existing approaches of psychoanalysis, which aimed to uncover problems from the past, or behavior therapies, which aimed to identify problem behaviors and control or “fix” them, client-centered therapy grew out of Rogers’ simple desire to help his clients move forward in their lives. Indeed, he had been trained as a psychoanalyst, but Rogers found the techniques unsatisfying, both in their goals and their ability to help the children he was working with at the time. The seemingly hands-off approach of client-centered therapy fit well with a Taoist perspective, something Rogers had studied, discussed, and debated during his trip to China. In A Way of Being, Rogers (1980) quotes what he says is perhaps his favorite saying, one which sums up many of his deeper beliefs:
If I keep from meddling with people, they take care of themselves,
If I keep from commanding people, they behave themselves,
If I keep from preaching at people, they improve themselves,
If I keep from imposing on people, they become themselves.
Lao Tsu, c600 B.C.; Note: This translation differs somewhat from the one
cited in the References. I have included the translation Rogers quoted,
since the difference likely influenced his impression of this saying.
Rogers, like Maslow, wanted to see psychology contribute far more to society than merely helping individuals with psychological distress. He extended his sincere desire to help people learn to really communicate, with empathic understanding, to efforts aimed at bringing peace to the world. On the day he died, he had just been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize. Since a Nobel Prize cannot be awarded to someone who has died, he was not eligible to be nominated again. If he had lived a few more years, he may well have received that award. His later years were certainly committed to peace in a way that deserved such recognition.
Basic Concepts
Rogers believed that each of us lives in a constantly changing private world, which he called the experiential field. Everyone exists at the center of their own experiential field, and that field can only be fully understood from the perspective of the individual. This concept has a number of important implications. The individual’s behavior must be understood as a reaction to their experience and perception of the field. They react to it as an organized whole, and it is their reality. The problem this presents for the therapist is that only the individual can really understand their experiential field. This is quite different than the Freudian perspective, in which only the trained and objective psychoanalyst can break through the defense mechanisms and understand the basis of the patient’s unconscious impulses. One’s perception of the experiential field is limited, however. Rogers believed that certain impulses, or sensations, can only enter into the conscious field of experience under certain circumstances. Thus, the experiential field is not a true reality, but rather an individual’s potential reality (Rogers, 1951).
The one basic tendency and striving of the individual is to actualize, maintain, and enhance the experiencing of the individual or, in other words, an actualizing tendency. Rogers borrowed the term self-actualization, a term first used by Kurt Goldstein, to describe this basic striving.
The tendency of normal life is toward activity and progress. For the sick, the only form of self-actualization that remains is the maintenance of the existent state. That, however, is not the tendency of the normal…Under adequate conditions the normal organism seeks further activity. (pp. 162-163; Goldstein, 1934/1995).
For Rogers, self-actualization was a tendency to move forward, toward greater maturity and independence, or self-responsibility. This development occurs throughout life, both biologically (the differentiation of a fertilized egg into the many organ systems of the body) and psychologically (self-government, self-regulation, socialization, even to the point of choosing life goals). A key factor in understanding self-actualization is the experiential field. A person’s needs are defined, as well as limited, by their own potential for experience. Part of this experiential field is an individual’s emotions, feelings, and attitudes. Therefore, who the individual is, their actual self, is critical in determining the nature and course of their self-actualization (Rogers, 1951). We will examine Maslow’s work on self-actualization in more detail below.
What then, is the self? In Rogers’ (1951) initial description of his theory of personality, the experiential field is described in four points, the self-actualizing tendency in three points, and the remaining eleven points attempt to define the self. First and foremost, the self is a differentiated portion of the experiential field. In other words, the self is that part of our private world that we identify as “me,” “myself,” or “I.” Beyond that, the self remains somewhat puzzling. Can the self exist in isolation, outside of relationships that provide some context for the self? Must the self be synonymous with the physical body? As Rogers’ pointed out, when our foot “goes to sleep” from a lack of circulation, we view it as an object, not as a part of our self! Despite these challenging questions, Rogers tried to define and describe the self.
Rogers believed the self is formed in relation to others; it is an organized, fluid, yet consistent conceptual pattern of our experiential interactions with the environment and the values attached to those experiences. These experiences are symbolized and incorporated into the structure of the self, and our behavior is guided largely by how well new experiences fit within that structure. We may behave in ways inconsistent with the structure of our self, but when we do we will not “own” that behavior. When experiences are so inconsistent that we cannot symbolize them, or fit them into the structure of our self, the potential for psychological distress arises. On the other hand, when our concept of self is mature enough to incorporate all of our perceptions and experiences, and we can assimilate those experiences symbolically into our self, our psychological adjustment will be quite healthy. Individuals who find it difficult to assimilate new and different experiences, those experiences that threaten the structure of the self, will develop an increasingly rigid self-structure. Healthy individuals, in contrast, will assimilate new experiences, their self-structure will change and continue to grow, and they will become more capable of understanding and accepting others as individuals (Rogers, 1951).
The ability of individuals to make the choices necessary for actualizing their self-structure and to then fulfill those choices is what Rogers called personal power (Rogers, 1977). He believed there are many self-actualized individuals revolutionizing the world by trusting their own power, without feeling a need to have “power over” others. They are also willing to foster the latent actualizing tendency in others. We can easily see the influence of Alfred Adler here, both in terms of the creative power of the individual and seeking superiority within a healthy context of social interest. Client-centered therapy was based on making the context of personal power a clear strategy in the therapeutic relationship:
…the client-centered approach is a conscious renunciation and avoidance by the therapist of all control over, or decision-making for, the client. It is the facilitation of self-ownership by the client and the strategies by which this can be achieved…based on the premise that the human being is basically a trustworthy organism, capable of…making constructive choices as to the next steps in life, and acting on those choices. (pp. 14-15; Rogers, 1977)
Discussion Question: Rogers claimed that no one can really understand your experiential field. Would you agree, or do you sometimes find that close friends or family members seem to understand you better than you understand yourself? Are these relationships congruent?
Personality Development
Although Rogers described personality within the therapist-client relationship, the focus of his therapeutic approach was based on how he believed the person had arrived at a point in their life where they were suffering from psychological distress. Therefore, the same issues apply to personality development as in therapy. A very important aspect of personality development, according to Rogers, is the parent-child relationship. The nature of that relationship, and whether it fosters self-actualization or impedes personal growth, determines the nature of the individual’s personality and, consequently, their self-structure and psychological adjustment.
A child begins life with an actualizing tendency. As they experience life, and perceive the world around them, they may be supported in all things by those who care for them, or they may only be supported under certain conditions (e.g., if their behavior complies with strict rules). As the child becomes self-aware, it develops a need for positive regard. When the parents offer the child unconditional positive regard, the child continues moving forward in concert with its actualizing tendency. So, when there is no discrepancy between the child’s self-regard and its positive regard (from the parents), the child will grow up psychologically healthy and well-adjusted. However, if the parents offer only conditional positive regard, if they only support the child according the desires and rules of the parents, the child will develop conditions of worth. As a result of these conditions of worth, the child will begin to perceive their world selectively; they will avoid those experiences that do not fit with its goal of obtaining positive regard. The child will begin to live the life of those who set the conditions of worth, rather than living its own life.
As the child grows older, and more aware of its own condition in the world, their behavior will either fit within their own self-structure or not. If they have received unconditional positive regard, such that their self-regard and positive regard are closely matched, they will experience congruence. In other words, their sense of self and their experiences in life will fit together, and the child will be relatively happy and well-adjusted. But, if their sense of self and their ability to obtain positive regard do not match, the child will develop incongruence. Consider, for example, children playing sports. That alone tells us that parents have established guidelines within which the children are expected to “play.” Then we have some children who are naturally athletic, and other children who are more awkward and/or clumsy. They may become quite athletic later in life, or not, but during childhood there are many different levels of ability as they grow. If a parent expects their child to be the best player on the team, but the child simply isn’t athletic, how does the parent react? Do they support the child and encourage them to have fun, or do they pressure the child to perform better and belittle them when they can’t? Children are very good at recognizing who the better athletes are, and they know their place in the hierarchy of athletics, i.e., their athletic self-structure. So if a parent demands dominance from a child who knows they just aren’t that good, the child will develop incongruence. Rogers believed, quite understandably, that such conditions are threatening to a child, and will activate defense mechanisms. Over time, however, excessive or sudden and dramatic incongruence can lead to the breakdown and disorganization of the self-structure. As a result, the individual is likely to experience psychological distress that will continue throughout life (Rogers, 1959/1989).
Discussion Question: Conditions of worth are typically first established in childhood, based on the relationship between a child and his or her parents. Think about your relationship with your own parents and, if you have children, think about how you treat them. Are most of the examples that come to mind unconditional positive regard, or conditional positive regard? How has that affected your relationship with your parents and/or your own children?
Figure \(1\)
Sometimes parents create conditions of worth by overemphasizing the importance of competition. Even a trip to the pumpkin patch can be a challenge to get the biggest, best pumpkin.
Another way in which Rogers approached the idea of congruence and incongruence was based on an individual’s dual concept of self. There is, of course, the actual self-structure, or real self. In addition, there is also an ideal self, much like the fictional finalism described by Adler or the idealized self-image described by Horney. Incongruence develops when the real self falls far short of the accomplishment expected of the ideal self, when experience does not match the expectations of the self-structure (Rogers, 1951, 1959/1989). Once again, the relationship between parents and their children plays an important role in this development. If parents expect too much, such as all A’s every marking period in school, but the child just isn’t academically talented, or if the parents expect their child to be the football team’s quarterback, but the child isn’t a good athlete, then the ideal self will remain out of reach. Perhaps even worse, is when a child is physically or emotionally abused. Such a child’s ideal self may remain at a relatively low standard, but the real self may be so utterly depressed that incongruence is still the result. An important aspect of therapy will be to provide a relationship in which a person in this unfortunate condition can experience the unconditional positive regard necessary to begin reintegrating the self-structure, such that the gap between the real self and the ideal self can begin to close, allowing the person to experience congruence in their life.
What about individuals who have developed congruence, having received unconditional positive regard throughout development or having experienced successful client-centered therapy? They become, according to Rogers (1961), a fully functioning person. He also said they lead a good life. The good life is a process, not a state of being, and a direction, not a destination. It requires psychological freedom, and is the natural consequence of being psychologically free to begin with. Whether or not it develops naturally, thanks to a healthy and supportive environment in the home, or comes about as a result of successful therapy, there are certain characteristics of this process. The fully functioning person is increasingly open to new experiences, they live fully in each moment, and they trust themselves more and more. They become more able and more willing to experience all of their feelings, they are creative, they trust human nature, and they experience the richness of life. The fully functioning person is not simply content, or happy, they are alive:
I believe it will become evident why, for me, adjectives such as happy, contented, blissful, enjoyable, do not seem quite appropriate to any general description of this process I have called the good life, even though the person in this process would experience each one of these feelings at appropriate times. But the adjectives which seem more generally fitting are adjectives such as enriching, exciting, rewarding, challenging, meaningful. This process…involves the courage to be. …the deeply exciting thing about human beings is that when the individual is inwardly free, he chooses as the good life this process of becoming. (pp. 195-196; Rogers, 1961)
Discussion Question: Rogers described self-actualized people as fully functioning persons who are living a good life. Do you know anyone who seems to be a fully functioning person? Are there aspects of their personality that you aspire to for yourself? Does it seem difficult to be fully functioning, or does it seem to make life both easier and more enjoyable?
connections across cultures
Self-Realization as the Path to Being a Fully Functioning Person
Rogers described an innate drive toward self-actualization, he talked about an ideal self, and he said that a fully functioning person lived a good life. But what does this actually mean? In the Western world we look for specific, tangible answers to such questions. We want to know what the self-actualization drive is, we want to know which ideals, or virtues, are best or right, and we want to define a “good life.” All too often, we define a good life in terms of money, power, and possessions. The Eastern world has, for thousands of years, emphasized a very different perspective. They believe there is a natural order to life, and it is important that we let go of our need to explain the universe, and it is especially important that we let go of our need to own pieces of the universe. In the Tao Te Ching, Lao Tsu (c. 600 B.C./1989) writes:
Something mysteriously formed,
Born before heaven and earth.
In the silence and the void,
Standing alone and unchanging,
Ever present and in motion.
Perhaps it is the mother of ten thousand things.
I do not know its name,
Call it Tao.
For lack of a better word, I call it great…
The greatest Virtue is to follow Tao and Tao alone…
Tao follows what is natural.
At about the same time, some 2,600 years ago, the Bhagavad Gita was also written down (Mitchell, 2000). In the second chapter one finds:
When a man gives up all desires
That emerge from the mind, and rests
Contented in the Self by the Self,
He is called a man of firm wisdom…
In the night of all beings, the wise man
Sees only the radiance of the Self;
But the sense-world where all beings wake,
For him is as dark as night.
In each of these sacred books, we are taught that there is something deeper than ourselves that permeates the universe, but it is beyond our comprehension. It is only when we stop attempting to explain it, our way of trying to control it, and be content to just be ourselves, that we can actually attain that goal. To achieve this goal seems to require the absence of conditions of worth. If someone has been given unconditional positive regard throughout their life, they will be content to live that life as it is. Rogers was well aware of this challenge, and he described the good life as a process, not something that you could actually get, but something that you had to “Be.” Still, is it possible that a fully functioning person might have the insight necessary to understand the essence of the universe? Not according to Swami Sri Yukteswar:
Man possesses eternal faith and believes intuitively in the existence of a Substance, of which the objects of sense - sound, touch, sight, taste, and smell, the component parts of this visible world - are but properties. As man identifies himself with his material body, composed of the aforesaid properties, he is able to comprehend by these imperfect organs these properties only, and not the Substance to which these properties belong. The eternal Father, God, the only Substance in the universe, is therefore not comprehensible by man of this material world, unless he becomes divine by lifting his self above this creation of Darkness or Maya. See Hebrews 11:1 and John 8:28.
“Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.”
“Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the son of man, then shall ye know that I am he.”
Jnanavatar Swami Sri Yukteswar Giri, 1894/1990
So whether we believe in God, Tao, an eternal Self, a mortal Self, or merely an actualizing tendency, for thousands of years there has been the belief, amongst many people, that our lives are about more than just being alive for a limited period of time. And it is in the recognition and acceptance, indeed the embracing, of that something more, even if we can’t conceive it in our conscious mind, that we find and live a good life. When Paramahansa Yogananda, a direct disciple of Swami Yukteswar, came to the United States in 1920 to establish a permanent Yoga society, it was suggested that he name his society God-Realization. However, since he believed life is about realizing (or actualizing, in psychological terms) our selves, he established his organization as the Self-Realization Fellowship (Yogananda, 1946).
Self-realization, in the context of Yoga, refers to becoming aware of one’s connection to the spark of divinity that exists within us, which may well be the source of our actualizing tendency. It is not the same as the sense of “I” or “me” that we normally think of. After all, are we our body or our mind? Consider the body. Is it the body we were born with, or the body we have now? Is our mind what we are thinking now, or what we were thinking 2 years ago? Both the body and the mind are transient, but the Self continues. It is that Self that Yogis, Buddhists, and Taoists seek to realize, and it may well be that Self which seeks its own actualization (separate from the consciousness created by the brain underlying our mind; see Feuerstein, 2003; Kabat-Zinn, 1994). This is also the Self of Being and transcendence, as described by Maslow.
Social Relationships and Marriage
Social and personal relationships were very important to Rogers, both in therapy and in everyday life. During each moment, we have our awareness (or consciousness), our experience (our perception of what is happening), and our communication (our relational behavior). For the fully functioning person, there is congruence between each of these phenomena. Unfortunately, we tend to be a poor judge of our own congruence. For example, if someone becomes angry with another person at a meeting or in a therapy group, they may remain unaware of their anger, even though it may be quite obvious to everyone else in the room. Thus, our relationship with others can reflect the true nature of our own personality, and the degree to which we are congruent. If others are congruent, and therefore are willing to talk to us openly and honestly, it will encourage us to become more congruent and, consequently, more psychologically healthy (Rogers, 1961, 1980). Curiously, the reason this became so important to Rogers was the lack of such meaningful relationships in his own life. Because his family followed strict, fundamentalist rules, they discouraged relationships with people outside their family. The consequences were rather disturbing for Rogers:
…the attitudes toward persons outside our large family can be summed up schematically in this way: “Other persons behave in dubious ways which we do not approve in our family. Many of them play cards, go to movies, smoke, dance, drink, and engage in other activities, some unmentionable. So the best thing to do is to be tolerant of them, since they may not know better, but to keep away from any close communication with them and to live your life within the family…”
I could sum up these boyhood years by saying that anything I would today regard as a close and communicative interpersonal relationship with another was completely lacking during that period…I was peculiar, a loner, with very little place or opportunity for a place in the world of persons. I was socially incompetent in any but superficial contacts. My fantasies during this period were definitely bizarre, and probably would be classed as schizoid by a diagnostician, but fortunately I never came in contact with a psychologist. (pp. 28-30; Rogers, 1980)
As noted above, the development of healthy relationships takes place whenever one person in the relationship is congruent. Their congruence encourages the other person to be more congruent, which supports the continued open communication on behalf of the first person. This interplay goes back and forth, encouraging continued and growing congruence in the relationship. As we will see below, this is basically the therapeutic situation, in which the therapist is expected to be congruent. However, it certainly does not require a trained therapist, since it occurs naturally in any situation in which one person is congruent from the beginning of the relationship.
One of the most important, and hopefully meaningful, relationships in anyone’s life is marriage. Rogers was married for 55 years, and as the end of his wife’s life approached he poured out his love to her with a depth that astonished him (Rogers, 1980). As relationships became more and more meaningful to him, he wanted to study the extraordinary relationships that become more than temporary. Although this is not necessarily synonymous with marriage, it most typically is. So he conducted a series of informal interviews with people who were, or had been, in lengthy relationships (at least 3 years). In comparing the relationships that seemed successful, as compared to those that were unhappy or had already come to an end, Rogers identified four factors that he believed were most important for long-term, healthy relationships: dedication or commitment, communication, the dissolution of roles, and becoming a separate self (Rogers, 1972).
Dedication, Commitment: Marriage is challenging: love seems to fade, vows are forgotten or set aside, religious rules are ignored (e.g., “What therefore God has joined together, let no man put asunder.”; Matthew 19:6; Holy Bible, 1962). Rogers believed that in order for a relationship to last, each person must be dedicated to their partnership. They must commit themselves to working together throughout the changing process of their relationship, which is enriching their love and their life.
Communication: Communication encompasses much of human behavior, and it can be both subtle and complex. Communication itself is not a good thing, since many negative and hurtful things can be communicated. However, Rogers believed that we need to communicate persistent feeling, whether positive or negative, so that they don’t overwhelm us and come out in inappropriate ways. It is always important to express such communication in terms of your own thoughts and feelings, rather than projecting those feelings onto others (especially in angry and/or accusatory ways). This process involves risk, but one must be willing to risk the end of a relationship in order to allow it to grow.
Dissolution of Roles: Culture provides many expectations for the nature of relationships, whether it be dating or something more permanent like marriage. According to Rogers, obeying the cultural rules seems to contradict the idea of a growing and maturing relationship, a relationship that is moving forward (toward actualization). However, when individuals make an intentional choice to fulfill cultural expectations, because they want to, then the relationship can certainly be actualizing for them.
Becoming a Separate Self: Rogers believed that “a living partnership is composed of two people, each of whom owns, respect, and develops his or her own selfhood” (pg. 206; Rogers, 1972). While it may seem contradictory that becoming an individual should enhance a relationship, as each person becomes more real and more open they can bring these qualities into the relationship. As a result, the relationship can contribute to the continued growth of each person.
Discussion Question: Consider Rogers’ criteria for a successful marriage, which begins with commitment to the marriage. Given the divorce rate (which studies now place at over 60%), and ongoing political debates about what marriage is or is not, what is your opinion of the status of marriage in society today?
Client-Centered and Person-Centered Therapy
Central to Rogers’ view of psychotherapy is the relationship between the therapist and the client, and we must again emphasize the distinction between a client and a patient. This involves shifting the emphasis in therapy from a psychologist/psychiatrist who can “fix” the patient to the client themselves, since only the client can truly understand their own experiential field. The therapist must provide a warm, safe environment in which the client feels free to express whatever attitude they experience in the same way that they perceive it. At the same time, the client experiences the therapist as someone temporarily divested of their own self, in their complete desire to understand the client. The therapist can then accurately and objectively reflect the thoughts, feelings, perceptions, confusions, ambivalences, etc., of the client back to the client. In this open, congruent, and supportive environment, the client is able to begin the process of reorganizing and reintegrating their self-structure, and living congruently within that self-structure (Rogers, 1951).
In 1957, Rogers published an article entitled The Necessary and Sufficient Conditions of Therapeutic Personality Change (Rogers, 1957/1989). The list is fairly short and straightforward:
1. The client and the therapist must be in psychological contact.
2. The client must be in a state of incongruence, being vulnerable or anxious.
3. The therapist must be congruent in the relationship.
4. The therapist must experience unconditional positive regard for the client.
5. The therapist must experience empathic understanding of the client’s frame of reference and endeavor to communicate this experience to the client.
6. The client must perceive, at least to a minimal degree, the therapist’s empathic understanding and unconditional positive regard.
According to Rogers, there is nothing else that is required; if these conditions are met over a period of time, there will be constructive personality change. What Rogers considered more remarkable are those factors that do not seem necessary for positive therapeutic change. For example, these conditions do not apply to one type of client, but to all clients, and they are not unique to client-centered therapy, but apply in all types of therapy. The relationship between the therapist and client is also not unique, these factors hold true in any interpersonal relationship. And most surprisingly, these conditions do not require any special training on the part of therapist, or even an accurate diagnosis of the client’s psychological problems! Any program designed for the purpose of encouraging constructive change in the personality structure and behavior of individuals, whether educational, military, correctional, or industrial, can benefit from these conditions and use them as a measure of the effectiveness of the program (Rogers, 1957).
Can any one of these conditions be considered more important than the others? Although they are all necessary, Rogers came to believe that the critical factor may be the therapist’s empathic understanding of the client (Rogers, 1980). The Dalai Lama (2001) has said that empathy is an essential first step toward a compassionate heart. It brings us closer to others, and allows us to recognize the depth of their pain. According to Rogers, empathy refers to entering the private world of the client, and moving about within it without making any judgments. It is essential to set aside one’s own views and values, so that the other person’s world may be entered without prejudice. Not just anyone can accomplish this successfully:
In some sense it means that you lay aside your self; this can only be done by persons who are secure enough in themselves that they know they will not get lost in what may turn out to be the strange or bizarre world of the other, and that they can comfortably return to their own world when they wish. (pg. 143; Rogers, 1980)
Finally, let us consider group therapy situations. Within a group, all of the factors described above hold true. Rogers, who late in his career was becoming more and more interested in the growth of all people, including those reasonably well-adjusted and mature to begin with, became particularly interested in T-groups and encounter groups. These groups were developed following the proposition by Kurt Lewin that modern society was overlooking the importance of training in human relations skills (the “T” in T-group stands for “training”). Encounter groups were quite similar to T-groups, except that there was a greater emphasis on personal growth and improved interpersonal communication through an experiential process. Each group has a leader, or facilitator, who fosters and encourages open communication. The group serves as a reflection of the congruence, or lack thereof, in the communication of whoever is currently expressing themselves. As a result, the group hopefully moves toward congruence, and the subsequent personal growth and actualization of the each individual (Rogers, 1970).
Given the usefulness of T-groups and encounter in a variety of settings, as well as the importance of continued personal growth and actualization for the well-adjusted as well as those suffering psychological distress, Rogers shifted his focus from simply client-centered therapy to a more universal person-centered approach, which encompasses client-centered therapy, student-centered teaching, and group-centered leadership (Rogers, 1980; see also Rogers & Roethlisberger, 1952/1993). Rogers believed that all people have within them vast resources for self-understanding and for changing their self-concepts, attitudes, and behaviors. In all relationships, whether therapist-client, parent-child, teacher-student, leader-group, employer-employee, etc., there are three elements that can foster personal growth: genuineness or congruence, acceptance or caring, and empathic understanding. When these elements are fostered in any setting, “there is greater freedom to be the true, whole person.” The implications go far beyond individual relationships. We live in what seems to be an increasingly dangerous world. Globalism has brought with it global tension and conflict. However, Rogers argued that a person-centered approach would help to ease intercultural tension, by helping each of us to learn to appreciate and understand others. Whether the cultural differences are political, racial, ethnic, economic, whatever, as more leaders become person-centered there is the possibility for future growth of intercultural understanding and cooperation (Rogers, 1977). | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/08%3A_Carl_Rogers_and_Abraham_Maslow/8.01%3A_Chapter_Introduction.txt |
Maslow stands alongside Rogers as one of the founders of humanistic psychology. Although he began his career working with two of the most famous experimental psychologists in America, he was profoundly influenced by the events that led into World War II. He became devoted to studying the more virtuous aspects of personality, and he may be viewed as one of the founders of positive psychology. Well-known primarily for his work on self-actualization, Maslow also had a significant impact on the field of management. His fame in both psychology and business makes him a candidate for being, perhaps, the best-known psychologist of all time (Freud is certainly more famous, but remember that he was a psychiatrist). According to Maslow, his holistic-dynamic theory of personality was a blend of theories that had come before his:
This theory is, I think, in the functionalist tradition of James and Dewey, and is fused with the holism of Wertheimer, Goldstein, and Gestalt psychology, and with the dynamicism of Freud, Fromm, Horney, Reich, Jung, and Adler. This integration or synthesis may be called a holistic-dynamic theory. (pg. 35; Maslow, 1970)
Brief Biography of Abraham Maslow
Abraham H. Maslow was born on April 1, 1908 in Brooklyn, New York, the first of seven children. His father, Samuel, had left Kiev, Russia at just 14 years old. When Samuel Maslow arrived in America he had no money and did not speak English. Samuel Maslow spent a few years in Philadelphia, doing odd jobs and learning the language, before moving to New York City, where he married his first cousin Rose and began a cooperage business (a cooper builds and repairs barrels). Samuel and Rose Maslow did not have a happy marriage, and Abraham Maslow was particularly sensitive to this fact. Maslow resented his father’s frequent absences, and apparently hated his mother. His mother was a superstitious woman, who severely punished Maslow for even minor misbehavior by threatening him with God’s wrath. Maslow developed an intense distrust of religion, and was proud to consider himself an atheist (Gabor, 2000; Hoffman, 1988; Maddi & Costa, 1972).
Maslow’s childhood was no better outside the home. Anti-Semitism was rampant in New York. Many teachers were cruel, and he overheard them say nasty things about him. He had no friends, and there were anti-Semitic gangs that would find and beat up Jewish children. At one point he decided to join a Jewish gang for protection, but he didn’t have the “right” attitude:
I wanted to be a member of the gang, but I couldn’t: they rejected me because I couldn’t kill cats…We’d stake out a cat on a [clothesline] and stand back so many paces and throw rocks at it and kill it.
And the other thing was to throw rocks at the girls on the corner. Now I knew that the girls liked it, and yet I couldn’t throw rocks at girls and I couldn’t kill cats, so I was ruled out of the gang, and I could never be the gangster that I wanted to become. (pg. 4; Maslow, cited in Hoffman, 1988)
With six more children joining the family, one every couple of years, the family was constantly moving and, following the troubling death of one of his little sisters (Maslow blamed her illness, in part, on their mother’s neglect), Maslow became a very unhappy and shy child. He also thought he was terribly ugly, something his father said openly at a large family gathering! Perhaps worst of all, he felt profoundly strange and different than other children, largely because he was so intellectual. Maslow reconciled with his father later in life. During the depression, Samuel Maslow lost his business. By that time he had divorced Maslow’s mother, Rose, and he moved in with his son. The two became close, and after Samuel Maslow died, his son remembered him fondly. Maslow never forgave his mother, however. Some of the childhood stories he related were shockingly cruel. Once, he had searched through second-hand record shops for some special 78-RPM records. When he failed to put them away soon after returning home, his mother stomped them into pieces on the living room floor. Another time, Maslow brought home two abandoned kittens he had found. When his mother caught him feeding them a saucer of milk, she grabbed the kittens and smashed their heads against a wall until they were dead! Later in life, he refused to even attend her funeral.
What I had reacted to and totally hated and rejected was not only her physical appearance, but also her values and world view…I’ve always wondered where my utopianism, ethical stress, humanism, stress on kindness, love, friendship, and all the rest came from. I knew certainly of the direct consequences of having no mother-love. But the whole thrust of my life-philosophy and all my research and theorizing also has its roots in a hatred for and revulsion against everything she stood for. (pg. 9; Maslow cited in Hoffman, 1988)
Maslow spent much of his childhood reading, and despite the treatment he received from many of his prejudiced teachers, he loved to learn. After high school Maslow won a scholarship to Cornell University, but encountered pervasive anti-Semitism throughout his first year. So he transferred to City College, where he first studied the work of behavioral scientists like John B. Watson. He was impressed by Watson’s desire to use the newly created science of behaviorism to fight social problems, such as racial and ethnic discrimination. At the same time, however, Maslow had fallen in love with his first cousin Bertha Goodman, a relationship his parents strongly opposed. So Maslow left for the University of Wisconsin (Gabor, 2000; Hoffman, 1988; Maddi & Costa, 1972). Bertha Goodman followed, and they were soon married. Marriage boosted Maslow’s self-esteem, and provided him with a sense of purpose in life. He later said that “life didn’t really start for me until I got married and went to Wisconsin” (pg. 128; cited in Maddi & Costa, 1972).
In Wisconsin, Maslow studied the behavior of primates under the supervision of the renowned Harry Harlow (most famous for his studies on contact comfort). One day, while watching some monkeys seemingly enjoy munching on peanuts and other treats, Maslow recognized that appetite and hunger are two different things. Thus, motivation must be comprised of separate elements as well. In another study, Maslow tried to address the different aspects of Freud and Adler’s psychodynamic perspectives by observing dominance behavior amongst the monkeys. His colleagues and professors, however, had little interest in the psychoanalytic science that they considered to be a European endeavor. Maslow completed his Ph.D. at Wisconsin in 1934, and then returned to New York. He earned a position at Columbia University with the renowned Edward Thorndike, and began studying the relative contributions of heredity and environment on social behavior, as part of a project to study factors involved in poverty, illiteracy, and crime. As a curious side note, Thorndike had also developed an IQ test; Maslow scored 195 on this test, one of the highest scores ever recorded. During this time at Columbia University, Maslow also began relationships with many of the psychologists, sociologists, and anthropologists who had fled Nazi Germany. He was very impressed with Max Wertheimer, one of the founders of Gestalt psychology, and who helped to lay the foundation for positive psychology:
“Are there not tendencies in men and in children to be kind, to deal sincerely [and] justly with the other fellow? Are these nothing but internalized rules on the basis of compulsion and fear?” he asked rhetorically. (pg. 159; Wertheimer, cited in Gabor, 2000)
Maslow was one of the first students to study with Alfred Adler in America, being particularly impressed with Adler’s work helping academically-challenged children to succeed despite their low IQ scores. Maslow also studied with Erich Fromm, Karen Horney, and Ruth Benedict. Benedict was an anthropologist who encouraged Maslow to gain some field experience. She sponsored a grant application that Maslow received to study the Blackfoot Indians. During the summer of 1938, Maslow examined the dominance and emotional security of the Blackfoot Indians. He was impressed by their culture, and recognized what he believed was an innate need to experience a sense of purpose in life, a sense of meaning. A few years later, shortly after the beginning of World War II, Maslow had an epiphany regarding psychology’s failure to understand the true nature of people. He devoted the rest of his life to the study of a hopeful psychology (Gabor, 2000; Hoffman, 1988; Maddi & Costa, 1972).
Maslow taught for a few years at Brooklyn College, and also served as the plant manager for the Maslow Cooperage Corporation (from 1947-1949). In 1951 he was appointed Professor and Chair of the Department of Psychology at Brandeis University, where he conducted the research and wrote the books for which he is most famous. By the late 1960s, Maslow had become disillusioned with academic life. He had suffered a heart attack in 1966, and seemed somewhat disconnected from the very department he had helped to form. In 1969, however, he accepted a four year grant from the Laughlin Foundation, primarily to study the philosophy of democracy, economics, and ethics as influenced by humanistic psychology. He had been troubled by what he viewed as a loss of faith in American values, and he was greatly enjoying his time working in California. He also attended management seminars at the Saga Corporation, urging the participants to commit themselves to humanistic management. One day in June, 1970, he was jogging slowly when he suffered a massive heart attack. He was already dead by the time his wife rushed over to him (Gabor, 2000; Hoffman, 1988; Maddi & Costa, 1972). He was only 62 years old. Shortly after his death, the International Study Project of Menlo Park, CA published a memorial volume in tribute to Abraham Maslow (International Study Project, 1972).
Placing Maslow in Context: Beyond Humanistic Psychology
Whereas Carl Rogers is often thought of as the founder of humanistic psychology, in large part because of his emphasis on psychotherapy, it was Maslow who studied in great detail the most significant theoretical aspect of it: self-actualization. In addition to studying self-actualization, he applied it both in psychology and beyond. His application of self-actualization to management continued the classic relationship between psychology and business (which began with John B. Watson and his application of psychological principles to advertising). Unfortunately, Maslow died just as he was beginning to study his proposed fourth force: transpersonal psychology. Transpersonal psychology offered a connection between psychology and many of the Eastern philosophies associated with Yoga and Buddhism, and also provided a foundation for the study of positive psychology.
Maslow’s interest in business and management has quite possibly led to his being the most famous psychologist of all time, since he is well-known in both psychology and business. If he had continued being a vocal advocate for transpersonal psychology (if not for his untimely death at an early age), given today’s growing interest in Eastern philosophy and psychology and the establishment of positive psychology as a goal for the field of psychology by former APA President Martin Seligman, Maslow may well have become even more famous. It is interesting to note that someone so truly visionary seems to have become that way as a result of studying people whom he felt were themselves self-actualized. If positive psychology, the psychology of virtue and values, becomes the heir of Maslow’s goal, it should become a significant force in the field of psychology. That will be Maslow’s true legacy.
The Importance of Values in the Science of Psychology
A common criticism leveled against many personality theorists is that they have not confirmed their theories in a strict, scientific manner. When one goes so far as to consider values, which are typically associated with religious morality, there is even greater resistance on the part of those who would have psychology become “truly” scientific to consider such matters worthy of examination. However, Maslow felt that:
Both orthodox science and orthodox religion have been institutionalized and frozen into a mutually excluding dichotomy…One consequence is that they are both pathologized, split into sickness, ripped apart into a crippled half-science and a crippled half-religion…As a result…the student who becomes a scientist automatically gives up a great deal of life, especially its richest portions. (pg. 119; Maslow, 1966)
Consequently, Maslow urged that we need to be fully aware of our values at all times, and aware of how our values influence us in our study of psychology. Although people approach the world in common ways, they also pay selective attention to what is happening, and they reshuffle the events occurring around them according to their own interests, needs, desires, fears, etc. Consequently, Maslow believed that paying attention to human values, particularly to an individual’s values, actually helps the psychological scientist achieve the goal of clearly understanding human behavior (Maslow, 1970). In a similar vein, when Maslow co-authored an abnormal psychology text early in his career, he included a chapter on normal psychology. His description of the characteristics of a healthy, normal personality provides an interesting foreshadowing of his research on self-actualization (Maslow & Mittelmann, 1941).
Maslow felt so strongly about the loss of values in our society that he helped to organize a conference and then served as editor for a book entitled New Knowledge in Human Values (Maslow, 1959). In the preface, Maslow laments that “…the ultimate disease of our time is valuelessness…this state is more crucially dangerous than ever before in history…” (pg. vii; Maslow, 1959). Maslow does suggest, however, that something can be done about this loss of values, if only people will try. In the book, he brought together an interesting variety of individuals, including: Kurt Goldstein, a well-known neurophysiologist who studied the holistic function of healthy vs. brain-damaged patients and who coined the term self-actualization; D. T. Suzuki, a renowned Zen Buddhist scholar; and Paul Tillich, a highly respected existential theologian (who had a direct and significant influence on the career of Rollo May). There are also chapters by Gordon Allport and Erich Fromm. In his own chapter, Maslow concludes:
If we wish to help humans to become more fully human, we must realize not only that they try to realize themselves but that they are also reluctant or afraid or unable to do so. Only by fully appreciating this dialectic between sickness and health can we help to tip the balance in favor of health. (pg. 135; Maslow, 1959)
Discussion Question: Maslow believed that values are very important, not only in the study of psychology, but in society as well. Do you agree? When politicians or religious leaders talk about values, do you think they represent meaningful, true values, or do they just support the values that are an advantage to their own goal or the goals of their political party or church?
The Hierarchy of Needs
Maslow’s is undoubtedly best known for his hierarchy of needs. Developed within the context of a theory of human motivation, Maslow believed that human behavior is driven and guided by a set of basic needs: physiological needs, safety needs, belongingness and love needs, esteem needs, and the need for self-actualization. It is generally accepted that individuals must move through the hierarchy in order, satisfying the needs at each level before one can move on to a higher level. The reason for this is that lower needs tend to occupy the mind if they remain unsatisfied. How easy is it to work or study when you are really hungry or thirsty? But Maslow did not consider the hierarchy to be rigid. For example, he encountered some people for whom self-esteem was more important than love, individuals suffering from antisocial personality disorder seem to have a permanent loss of the need for love, or if a need has been satisfied for a long time it may become less important. As lower needs are becoming satisfied, though not yet fully satisfied, higher needs may begin to present themselves. And of course there are sometimes multiple determinants of behavior, making the relationship between a given behavior and a basic need difficult to identify (Maslow, 1943/1973; Maslow, 1970).
The physiological needs are based, in part, on the concept of homeostasis, the natural tendency of the body to maintain critical biological levels of essential elements or conditions, such as water, salt, energy, and body temperature. Sexual activity, though not essential for the individual, is biologically necessary for the human species to survive. Maslow described the physiological needs as the most prepotent. In other words, if a person is lacking everything in life, having failed to satisfy physiological, safety, belongingness and love, and esteem needs, their consciousness will most like be consumed with their desire for food and water. As the lowest and most clearly biological of the needs, these are also the most animal-like of our behavior. In Western culture, however, it is rare to find someone who is actually starving. So when we talk about being hungry, we are really talking about an appetite, rather than real hunger (Maslow, 1943/1973; Maslow, 1970). Many Americans are fascinated by stories such as those of the ill-fated Donner party, trapped in the Sierra Nevada mountains during the winter of 1846-1847, and the Uruguayan soccer team whose plane crashed in the Andes mountains in 1972. In each case, either some or all of the survivors were forced to cannibalize those who had died. As shocking as such stories are, they demonstrate just how powerful our physiological needs can be.
The safety needs can easily be seen in young children. They are easily startled or frightened by loud noises, flashing lights, and rough handling. They can become quite upset when other family members are fighting, since it disrupts the feeling of safety usually associated with the home. According to Maslow, many adult neurotics are like children who do not feel safe. From another perspective, that of Erik Erikson, children and adults raised in such an environment do not trust the environment to provide for their needs. Although it can be argued that few people in America seriously suffer from a lack of satisfying physiological needs, there are many people who live unsafe lives. For example, inner city crime, abusive spouses and parents, incurable diseases like HIV/AIDS, all present life threatening dangers to many people on a daily basis.
One place where we expect our children to be safe is in school. However, as we saw in the last chapter (in the section on the martial arts), 160,000 children each day are too frightened to attend school (Nathan, 2005). Juvonen et al. (2006) looked at the effects of ethnic diversity on children’s perception of safety in urban middle schools (Grade 6). They surveyed approximately 2,000 students in 99 classrooms in the greater Los Angeles area. The ethnicity of the students in this study was 46 percent Latino (primarily of Mexican origin), 29 percent African American, 9 percent Asian (primarily East Asian), 9 percent Caucasian, and 7 percent multiracial. When a given classroom, or a given school, is more ethnically diverse, both African American and Latino students felt safer, were harassed less by peers, felt less lonely, and they had higher levels of self-worth (even when the authors controlled for differences in academic engagement). Thus, it appears that ethnic diversity in schools leads toward satisfaction of the need for safety, at least in one important area of a child’s life. Unfortunately, most minority students continue to be educated in schools that are largely ethnically segregated (Juvonen, et al., 2006).
Throughout the evolution of the human species we found safety primarily within our family, tribal group, or our community. It was within those groups that we shared the hunting and gathering that provided food. Once the physiological and safety needs have been fairly well satisfied, according to Maslow, “the person will feel keenly, as never before, the absence of friends, or a sweetheart, or a wife, or children” (Maslow, 1970). Although there is little scientific confirmation of the belongingness and love needs, many therapists attribute much of human suffering to society’s thwarting of the need for love and affection. Most notable among personality theorists who addressed this issue was Wilhelm Reich. An important aspect of love and affection is sex. Although sex is often considered a physiological need, given its role in procreation, sex is what Maslow referred to as a multidetermined behavior. In other words, it serves both a physiological role (procreation) and a belongingness/love role (the tenderness and/or passion of the physical side of love). Maslow was also careful to point out that love needs involve both giving and receiving love in order for them to be fully satisfied (Maslow, 1943/1973; Maslow, 1970).
Maslow believed that all people desire a stable and firmly based high evaluation of themselves and others (at least the others who comprise their close relationships). This need for self-esteem, or self-respect, involves two components. First is the desire to feel competent, strong, and successful (similar to Bandura’s self-efficacy). Second is the need for prestige or status, which can range from simple recognition to fame and glory. Maslow credited Adler for addressing this human need, but felt that Freud had neglected it. Maslow also believed that the need for self-esteem was becoming a central issue in therapy for many psychotherapists. However, as we saw in Chapter 12, Albert Ellis considers self-esteem to be a sickness. Ellis’ concern is that self-esteem, including efforts to boost self-esteem in therapy, requires that people rate themselves, something that Ellis felt will eventually lead to a negative evaluation (no one is perfect!). Maslow did acknowledge that the healthiest self-esteem is based on well-earned and deserved respect from others, rather than fleeting fame or celebrity status (Maslow, 1943/1973; Maslow, 1970).
When all of these lower needs (physiological, safety, belongingness and love, and esteem) have been largely satisfied, we may still feel restless and discontented unless we are doing what is right for ourselves. “What a man can be, he must be” (pg. 46; Maslow, 1970). Thus, the need for self-actualization, which Maslow described as the highest of the basic needs, can also be referred to as a Being-need, as opposed to the lower deficiency-needs (Maslow, 1968). We will examine self-actualization in more detail in the following section.
Figure \(1\)
Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is based on a theory of motivation. Individuals must essentially satisfy the lower deficiency needs before they become focused on satisfying the higher Being needs. Beyond even the Being needs there is something more, a state of transcendence that ties all people and the whole of creation together.
Although Maslow recognized that humans no longer have instincts in the technical sense, we nonetheless share basic drives with other animals. We get hungry, even though how and what we eat is determined culturally. We need to be safe, like any other animal, but again we seek and maintain our safety in different ways (such as having a police force to provide safety for us). Given our fundamental similarity to other animals, therefore, Maslow referred to the basic needs as instinctoid. The lower the need the more animal-like it is, the higher the need, the more human it is, and self-actualization was, in Maslow’s opinion, uniquely human (Maslow, 1970).
In addition to the basic needs, Maslow referred to cognitive needs and aesthetic needs. Little is known about cognitive needs, since they are seldom an important focus in clinic settings. However, he felt there were ample grounds for proposing that there are positive impulses to know, to satisfy curiosity, to understand, and to explain. The eight-fold path described by the Buddha, some 2,600 years ago, begins with right knowledge. The importance of mental stimulation for some people is described quite vividly by Maslow:
I have seen a few cases in which it seemed clear to me that the pathology (boredom, loss of zest in life, self-dislike, general depression of the bodily functions, steady deterioration of the intellectual life, of tastes, etc.) were produced in intelligent people leading stupid lives in stupid jobs. I have at least one case in which the appropriate cognitive therapy (resuming part-time studies, getting a position that was more intellectually demanding, insight) removed the symptoms.
I have seen many women, intelligent, prosperous, and unoccupied, slowly develop these same symptoms of intellectual inanition. Those who followed my recommendation to immerse themselves in something worthy of them showed improvement or cure often enough to impress me with the reality of the cognitive needs. (pg. 49; Maslow, 1970)
There are also classic studies on the importance of environmental enrichment on the structural development of the brain itself (Diamond et al., 1975; Globus, et al., 1973; Greenough & Volkmar, 1973; Rosenzweig, 1984; Spinelli & Jensen, 1979; Spinelli, Jensen, & DiPrisco, 1980). Even less is known about the aesthetic needs, but Maslow was convinced that some people need to experience, indeed they crave, beauty in their world. Ancient cave drawings have been found that seem to serve no other purpose than being art. The cognitive and aesthetic needs may very well have been fundamental to our evolution as modern humans.
Self-Actualization
Maslow began his studies on self-actualization in order to satisfy his own curiosity about people who seemed to be fulfilling their unique potential as individuals. He did not intend to undertake a formal research project, but he was so impressed by his results that he felt compelled to report his findings. Amongst people he knew personally and public and historical figures, he looked for individuals who appeared to have made full use of their talents, capacities, and potentialities. In other words, “people who have developed or are developing to the full stature of which they are capable” (Maslow, 1970). His list of those who clearly seemed self-actualized included Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson, Albert Einstein, Eleanor Roosevelt, Jane Addams, William James, Albert Schweitzer, Aldous Huxley, and Baruch Spinoza. His list of individuals who were most-likely self-actualized included Goethe (possibly the great-grandfather of Carl Jung), George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Harriet Tubman (born into slavery, she became a conductor on the Underground Railroad prior to the Civil War), and George Washington Carver (born into slavery at the end of the Civil War, he became an agricultural chemist and prolific inventor). In addition to the positive attributes listed above, Maslow also considered it very important that there be no evidence of psychopathology in those he chose to study. After comparing the seemingly self-actualized individuals to people who did not seem to have fulfilled their lives, Maslow identified fourteen characteristics of self-actualizing people (Maslow, 1950/1973, 1970), as follows:
More Efficient Perception of Reality and More Comfortable Relations with It: Self-actualizing people have an ability to recognize fakers, those who present a false persona. More than that, however, Maslow believed they could recognize hidden or confused realities in all aspects of life: science, politics, values and ethics, etc. They are not afraid of the unknown or people who are different, they find such differences to be a pleasant challenge. Although a high IQ may be associated with this characteristic, it is not uncommon to find those who are seemingly intelligent yet unable to be creative in their efforts to discover new phenomena. Thus, the perception of reality is not simply the same as being smart.
Acceptance (Self, Others, Nature): Similar to the approach Albert Ellis took with REBT (and his hypothesized dangers inherent in self-esteem), Maslow believed that self-actualizing people accept themselves as they are, including their faults and the differences between their personal reality and their ideal image of themselves. This is not to say that they are without guilt. They are concerned about personal faults that can be improved, any remaining habits or psychological issues that are unhealthy (e.g., prejudice, jealousy, etc.), and the shortcomings of their community and/or culture.
Spontaneity: The lives of self-actualizing people are marked by simplicity and a natural ease as they pursue their goals. Their outward behavior is relatively spontaneous, and their inner life (thoughts, drives, etc.) is particularly so. In spite of this spontaneity, they are not always unconventional, because they can easily accept the constraints of society and find their own way to fit in without being untrue to their own sense of self.
Problem-Centering: Self-actualizing individuals are highly problem-centered, not ego-centered. The problems they focus on are typically not their own, however. They focus on problems outside themselves, on important causes they would describe as necessary. Solving such problems is taken as their duty or responsibility, rather than as something they want to do for themselves.
The Quality of Detachment; the Need for Privacy: Whereas social withdrawal is often seen as psychologically unhealthy, self-actualizing people enjoy their privacy. They can remain calm as they separate themselves from problematic situations, remaining above the fray. In accordance with this healthy form of detachment, they are active, responsible, self-disciplined individuals in charge of their own lives. Maslow believed that they have more free will than the average person.
Figure \(2\)
Self-actualized individuals need their privacy. This may help them put life in perspective and prepare for each day.
Autonomy, Independence of Culture and Environment: As an extension of the preceding characteristics, self-actualizing individuals are growth-motivated as opposed to being deficiency-motivated. They do not need the presence, companionship, or approval of others. Indeed, they may be hampered by others. The love, honor, esteem, etc., that can be bestowed by others has become less important to someone who is self-actualizing than self-development and inner growth.
Continued Freshness of Appreciation: Self-actualizing people are able to appreciate the wonders, as well as the common aspects, of life again and again. Such feelings may not occur all the time, but they can occur in the most unexpected ways and at unexpected times. Maslow offered a surprising evaluation of the importance of this characteristic of self-actualization:
I have also become convinced that getting used to our blessings is one of the most important nonevil generators of human evil, tragedy, and suffering. What we take for granted we undervalue, and we are therefore too apt to sell a valuable birthright for a mess of pottage, leaving behind regret, remorse, and a lowering of self-esteem. Wives, husbands, children, friends are unfortunately more apt to be loved and appreciated after they have died than while they are still available. Something similar is true for physical health, for political freedoms, for economic well-being; we learn their true value after we have lost them. (pp. 163-164; Maslow, 1970)
The “Mystic Experience” or “Oceanic Feeling;” Peak Experiences: The difference between a mystic experience (also known as an oceanic feeling) and a peak experience is a matter of definition. Mystic experiences are viewed as gifts from God, something reserved for special or deserving (i.e., faithful) servants. Maslow, however, believed that this was a natural occurrence that could happen for anyone, and to some extent probably did. He assigned the psychological term of peak experiences. Such experiences tend to be sudden feelings of limitless horizons opening up to one’s vision, simultaneous feelings of great power and great vulnerability, feelings of ecstasy, wonder and awe, a loss of the sense of time and place, and the feeling that something extraordinary and transformative has happened. Self-actualizers who do not typically experience these peaks, the so-called “non-peakers,” are more likely to become direct agents of social change, the reformers, politicians, crusaders, and so on. The more transcendent “peakers,” in contrast, become the poets, musicians, philosophers, and theologians.
Maslow devoted a great deal of attention to peak experiences, including their relationship to religion. At the core of religion, according to Maslow, is the private illumination or revelation of spiritual leaders. Such experiences seem to be very similar to peak experiences, and Maslow suggests that throughout history these peak experiences may have been mistaken for revelations from God. In his own studies, Maslow found that people who were spiritual, but not religious (i.e., not hindered by the doctrine of a specific faith or church), actually had more peak experiences than other people. Part of the explanation for this, according to Maslow, is that such people need to be more serious about their ethics, values, and philosophy of life, since their guidance and motivation must come from within. Individuals who seek such an appreciation of life may help themselves to experience an extended form of peak experience that Maslow called the plateau experience. Plateau experiences always have both noetic and cognitive elements, whereas peak experiences can be entirely emotional (Maslow, 1964). Put another way, plateau experiences involve serene and contemplative Being-cognition, as opposed to the more climactic peak experiences (Maslow, 1971).
Gemeinschaftsgefuhl: A word invented by Alfred Adler, gemeinschatfsgefuhl refers to the profound feelings of identification, sympathy, and affection for other people that are common in self-actualization individuals. Although self-actualizers may often feel apart from others, like a stranger in a strange land, becoming upset by the shortcomings of the average person, they nonetheless feel a sense of kinship with others. These feelings lead to a sincere desire to help the human race.
Interpersonal Relations: Maslow believed that self-actualizers have deeper and more profound personal relationships than other people. They tend to be kind to everyone, and are especially fond of children. Maslow described this characteristic as “compassion for all mankind,” a perspective that would fit well with Buddhist and Christian philosophies.
The Democratic Character Structure: Self-actualizing people are typically friendly with anyone, regardless of class, race, political beliefs, or education. They can learn from anyone who has something to teach them. They respect all people, simply because they are people. They are not, however, undiscriminating:
The careful distinction must be made between this democratic feeling and a lack of discrimination in taste, of an undiscriminating equalizing of any one human being with any other. These individuals, themselves elite, select for their friends elite, but this is an elite of character, capacity, and talent, rather than of birth, race, blood, name, family, age, youth, fame, or power. (pg. 168; Maslow, 1970)
Discrimination Between Means and Ends, Between Good and Evil: Self-actualizers know the difference between right and wrong. They are ethical, have high moral standards, and they do good things while avoiding doing bad things. They do not experience the average person’s confusion or inconsistency in making ethical choices. They tend to focus on ends, rather than means, although they sometimes become absorbed in the means themselves, viewing the process itself as a series of ends.
Philosophical, Unhostile Sense of Humor: The sense of humor shared by self-actualizers is not typical. They do not laugh at hostile, superior, or rebellious humor. They do not tell jokes that make fun of other people. Instead, they poke fun at people in general for being foolish, or trying to claim a place in the universe that is beyond us. Such humor often takes the form of poking fun at oneself, but not in a clown-like way. Although such humor can be found in nearly every aspect of life, to non-self-actualizing people the self-actualizers seem to be somewhat sober and serious.
Creativeness: According to Maslow, self-actualizing people are universally creative. This is not the creativity associated with genius, such as that of Mozart or Thomas Edison, but rather the fresh and naive creativity of an unspoiled child. Maslow believed that this creativity was a natural potential given to all humans at their birth, but that the constraints on behavior inherent in most cultures lead to its suppression.
As desirable as self-actualization may seem, self-actualizing individuals still face problems in their lives. According to Maslow, they are typically not well adjusted. This is because they resist being enculturated. They do not stand out in grossly abnormal ways, but there is a certain inner detachment from the culture in which they live. They are not viewed as rebels in the adolescent sense, though they may be rebels while growing up, but rather they work steadily toward social change and/or the accomplishment of their goals. As a result of their immersion in some personal goal, they may lose interest in or patience with common people and common social practices. Thus, they may seem detached, insulting, absent-minded, or humorless. They can seem boring, stubborn, or irritating, particularly because they are often superficially vain and proud only of their own accomplishments and their own family, friends, and work. According to Maslow, outbursts of temper are not rare. Maslow argued that there are, in fact, people who become saints, movers and shakers, creators, and sages. However, these same people can be irritating, selfish, angry, or depressed. No one is perfect, not even those who are self-actualizing (Maslow, 1950/1973, 1970).
Discussion Question: Consider Maslow’s characteristics of self-actualizing people. Which of those characteristics do you think are part of your personality? Are there any characteristics that you think may be particularly difficult for you to achieve?
Obstacles to Self-Actualization
In The Farther Reaches of Human Nature (Maslow, 1971), which was completed by Maslow’s wife and one of his colleagues shortly after Maslow’s death, Maslow described self-actualization as something that one does not obtain or fulfill at a specific point in time. Rather, it is an ongoing process of self-actualizing, characterized for some by brief periods of self-actualization (the peak experiences, for example). Maslow also described two major obstacles to achieving self-actualization: desacralizing and the Jonah complex. The Jonah complex, a name suggested by Maslow’s friend Professor Frank Manuel, refers to being afraid of one’s own greatness, or evading one’s destiny or calling in life. Maslow specifically described this as a non-Freudian defense mechanism in which a person is as afraid of the best aspects of their psyche as they are afraid of the worst aspects of their psyche (i.e., the socially unacceptable id impulses). He described the process of this fear as a recognition, despite how much we enjoy the godlike possibilities revealed by our finest accomplishments, of the weakness, awe, and fear we experience when we achieve those accomplishments. According to Maslow, “great emotions after all can in fact overwhelm us” (Maslow, 1971). Nonetheless, he encouraged people to strive for greatness, within a reasonable sense of their own limitations.
A very important defense mechanism, which affects young people in particular, is what Maslow called desacralizing. The source of this problem is usually found within the family:
These youngsters mistrust the possibility of values and virtues. They feel themselves swindled or thwarted in their lives. Most of them have, in fact, dopey parents whom they don’t respect very much, parents who are quite confused themselves about values and who, frequently, are simply terrified of their children and never punish them or stop them from doing things that are wrong. So you have a situation where the youngsters simply despise their elders - often for good and sufficient reason. (pg. 49; Maslow, 1971)
As a result, children grow up without respect for their elders, or for anything their elders consider important. The values of the culture itself can be called into question. While such a situation may sometimes be important for changing social conventions that unfairly discriminate against some people, can we really afford to live in a society in which nothing is sacred? Indeed, can such a society or culture continue to exist? Thus, Maslow emphasized a need for resacralizing. Maslow noted that he had to make up the words desacralizing and resacralizing “because the English language is rotten for good people. It has no decent vocabulary for the virtues” (Maslow, 1971). Resacralizing means being willing to see the sacred, the eternal, the symbolic. As an example, Maslow suggested considering a medical student dissecting a human brain. Would such a student see the brain simply as a biological organ, or would they be awed by it, also seeing the brain as a sacred object, including even its poetic aspects? This concept is particularly important for counselors working with the aged, people approaching the end of their lives, and may be critical for helping them move toward self-actualization. According to Maslow, when someone asks a counselor for help with the self-actualizing process, the counselor had better have an answer for them, “or we’re not doing what it is our job to do” (Maslow, 1971).
Discussion Question: Maslow believed that desacralizing was particularly challenging for young people. Do you think our society has lost its way, have we lost sight of meaningful values? Is nothing sacred anymore? Is there anything that you do in your life to recognize something as sacred in a way that has real meaning for your community?
Maslow had something else interesting to say about self-actualization in The Farther Reaches of Human Nature: "What does self-actualization mean in moment-to-moment terms? What does it mean on Tuesday at four o'clock?" (pg. 41). Consequently, he offered a preliminary suggestion for an operational definition of the process by which self-actualization occurs. In other words, what are the behaviors exhibited by people on the path toward fulfilling or achieving the fourteen characteristics of self-actualized people described above? Sadly, this could only remain a preliminary description, i.e., they are "ideas that are in midstream rather than ready for formulation into a final version," because this book was published after Maslow's death (having been put together before his sudden and unexpected heart attack).
What does one do when he self-actualizes? Does he grit his teeth and squeeze? What does self-actualization mean in terms of actual behavior, actual procedure? I shall describe eight ways in which one self-actualizes. (pg. 45; Maslow, 1971)
• They experience full, vivid, and selfless concentration and total absorption.
• Within the ongoing process of self-actualization, they make growth choices (rather than fear choices; progressive choices rather than regressive choices).
• They are aware that there is a self to be actualized.
• When in doubt, they choose to be honest rather than dishonest.
• They trust their own judgment even if it means being different or unpopular (being courageous is another version of this behavior).
• They put in the effort necessary to improve themselves, working regularly toward self-development no matter how arduous or demanding .
• They embrace the occurrence of peak experiences, doing what they can to facilitate and enjoy more of them (as opposed to denying these experiences as many people do).
• They identify and set aside their ego defenses (they have "the courage to give them up"). Although this requires that they face up to painful experiences, it is more beneficial than the consequences of defenses such as repression.
Being and Transcendence
Maslow had great hope and optimism for the human race. Although self-actualization might seem to be the pinnacle of personal human achievement, he viewed Humanistic Psychology, or Third Force Psychology, as just another step in our progression:
I should say also that I consider Humanistic, Third Force Psychology to be transitional, a preparation for a still “higher” Fourth Psychology, transpersonal, transhuman, centered in the cosmos rather than in human needs and interest, going beyond humanness, identity, self-actualization, and the like…These new developments may very well offer a tangible, usable, effective satisfaction of the “frustrated idealism” of many quietly desperate people, especially young people. These psychologies give promise of developing into the life-philosophy, the religion-surrogate, the value-system, the life-program that these people have been missing. Without the transcendent and the transpersonal, we get sick, violent, and nihilistic, or else hopeless and apathetic. We need something “bigger than we are” to be awed by and to commit ourselves to in a new, naturalistic, empirical, non-churchly sense, perhaps as Thoreau and Whitman, William James and John Dewey did. (pp. iii-iv; Maslow, 1968)
Although Maslow wrote about this need for a Fourth Force Psychology in 1968, it was not until the year 1998 that APA President Martin Seligman issued his call for the pursuit of positive psychology as an active force in the field of psychology. Maslow believed that all self-actualizing people were involved in some calling or vocation, a cause outside of themselves, something that fate has called them to and that they love doing. In so doing, they devote themselves to the search for Being-values (or B-values; Maslow, 1964, 1967/2008, 1968). The desire to attain self-actualization results in the B-values acting like needs. Since they are higher than the basic needs, Maslow called them metaneeds. When individuals are unable to attain these goals, the result can be metapathology, a sickness of the soul. Whereas counselors may be able to help the average person with their average problems, metapathologies may require the help of a metacounselor, a counselor trained in philosophical and spiritual matters that go far beyond the more instinctoid training of the traditional psychoanalyst (Maslow, 1967/2008). The B-values identified by Maslow (1964) are an interesting blend of the characteristics of self-actualizing individuals and the human needs described by Henry Murray: truth, goodness, beauty, wholeness, dichotomy-transcendence, aliveness, uniqueness, perfection, necessity, completion, justice, order, simplicity, richness, effortlessness, playfulness, self-sufficiency.
Transcendence is typically associated with people who are religious, spiritual, or artistic, but Maslow said that he found transcendent individuals amongst creative people in a wide variety of vocations (including business, managers, educators, and politicians), though there are not many of them in any field. Transcendence, according to Maslow, is the very highest and most holistic level of human consciousness, which involves relating to oneself, to all others, to all species, to nature, and to the cosmos as an end rather than as a means (Maslow, 1971). It is essential that individuals not be reduced to the role they play in relation to others, transcendence can only be found within oneself (Maslow, 1964, 1968). Maslow’s idea is certainly not new. Ancient teachings in Yoga tell us that there is a single universal spirit that connects us all, and Buddhists describe this connection as interbeing. The Abrahamic religions teach us that the entire universe was created by, and therefore is connected through, one god. It was Maslow’s hope that a transcendent Fourth Force in psychology would help all people to become self-actualizing. In Buddhist terms, Maslow was advocating the intentional creation of psychological Bodhisattvas. Perhaps this is what Maslow meant by the term metacounselor.
connections Across Cultures:
Is Nothing Sacred?
Maslow described some lofty ambitions for humanity in Toward a Psychology of Being (1968) and The Farther Reaches of Human Nature (1971), as well as some challenges we face along the way. Transcendence, according to Maslow, is a loss of our sense of Self, as we begin to feel an intimate connection with the world around us and all other people. But transcendence is exceedingly difficult when we are hindered by the defense mechanism of desacralization. What exactly does the word “sacred” mean? It is not easily found in psychological works. William James often wrote about spiritual matters, but not about what is or is not sacred. Sigmund Freud mentioned sacred prohibitions in his final book, Moses and Monotheism (Freud, 1939/1967), but he felt that anything sacred was simply a cultural adaptation of all children’s fear of challenging their father’s will (and God was created as a symbol of the mythological father). A dictionary definition of sacred says that it is “connected with God (or the gods) or dedicated to a religious purpose and so deserving veneration.” However, there is another definition that does not require a religious context: “regarded with great respect and reverence by a particular religion, group, or individual” (The Oxford American College Dictionary, 2002). Maslow described desacralization as a rejection of the values and virtues of one’s parents. As a result, people grow up without the ability to see anything as sacred, eternal, or symbolic. In other words, they grow up without meaning in their lives.
The process of resacralization, which Maslow considered an essential task of therapists working with clients who seek help in this critical area of their life, requires that we have some concept of what is sacred. So, what is sacred? Many answers can be found, but there does seem to be at least one common thread.
Christians have long believed that forgiveness lies at the heart of faith. Psychologists have recently found that forgiveness may also lie at the heart of emotional and physical well-being.
David Myers & Malcolm Jeeves (2003)
…Compassion is the wish that others be free of suffering. It is by means of compassion that we aspire to attain enlightenment. It is compassion that inspires us to engage in the virtuous practices that lead to Buddhahood. We must therefore devote ourselves to developing compassion.
The Dalai Lama (2001)
I have been engaged in peace work for more than thirty years: combating poverty, ignorance, and disease; going to sea to help rescue boat people; evacuating the wounded from combat zones; resettling refugees; helping hungry children and orphans; opposing wars; producing and disseminating peace literature; training peace and social workers; and rebuilding villages destroyed by bombs. It is because of the practice of meditation - stopping, calming, and looking deeply - that I have been able to nourish and protect the sources of my spiritual energy and continue this work.
Thich Nhat Hanh (1995)
…Our progress is the penetrating of the present moment, living life with our feet on the ground, living in compassionate, active relationship with others, and yet living in the awareness that life has been penetrated by the eternal moment of God and unfolds in the power of that moment.
Fr. Laurence Freeman (1986)
Keep your hands busy with your duties in this world, and your heart busy with God.
Sheikh Muzaffer (cited in Essential Sufism by Fadiman & Frager, 1997)
Forgiveness is a letting go of past suffering and betrayal, a release of the burden of pain and hate that we carry.
Forgiveness honors the heart’s greatest dignity. Whenever we are lost, it brings us back to the ground of love.
Jack Kornfield (2002)
And he said to him, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. And a second is like it, You shall love your neighbor as yourself…”
Jesus Christ (The Holy Bible, 1962)
In examining self-actualizing people directly, I find that in all cases, at least in our culture, they are dedicated people, devoted to some task “outside themselves,” some vocation, or duty, or beloved job. Generally the devotion and dedication is so marked that one can fairly use the old words vocation, calling, or mission to describe their passionate, selfless, and profound feeling for their “work.”
The spiritual life is then part of the human essence. It is a defining-characteristic of human nature, without which human nature is not full human nature. It is part of the Real Self, of one’s identity, of one’s inner core, of one’s specieshood, of full humanness.
Abraham Maslow (1971)
Christians, Buddhists, Muslims, as well as members of other religions and humanists, all have some variation of what has been called The Golden Rule: treating others as you would like to be treated. If that is sacred, then even amongst atheists, young people can evaluate the values and virtues of their parents, community, and culture, and then decide whether those values are right or wrong, whether they want to perpetuate an aspect of that society based on their own thoughts and feelings about how they, themselves, may be treated someday by others. This resacralization need not be religious or spiritual, but it commonly is, and some psychologists are comfortable embracing spirituality as such.
Kenneth Pargament and Annette Mahoney (2005) wrote a chapter entitled Spirituality: Discovering and Conserving the Sacred, which was included in the Handbook of Positive Psychology (Snyder & Lopez, 2005). First, they point out that religion is an undeniable fact in American society. Some 95 percent of Americans believe in God, and 86 percent believe that He can be reached through prayer and that He is important or very important to them. Spirituality, according to Pargament and Mahoney, is the process in which individuals seek both to discover and to conserve that which is sacred. It is interesting to note that Maslow and Rogers consider self-actualization and transcendence to be a process as well, not something that one can get and keep permanently. An important aspect of defining what is sacred is that it is imbued with divinity. God may be seen as manifest in marriage, work can be seen as a vocation to which the person is called, the environment can been seen as God’s creation. In each of these situations, and in others, what is viewed as sacred has been sanctified by those who consider it sacred. Unfortunately, this can have negative results as well, such as when the Heaven’s Gate cult followed their sanctified leader to their deaths. Thus, spirituality is not necessarily synonymous with a good and healthy lifestyle.
Still, there is research that has shown that couples who sanctify their marriage experience greater marital satisfaction, less marital conflict, and more effective marital problem-solving strategies. Likewise, mothers and fathers who sanctify the role of parenting report less aggression and more consistent discipline in raising their children. For college students, spiritual striving was more highly correlated with well-being than any other form of goal-setting (see Pargament & Mahoney, 2005). So there appear to be real psychological advantages to spiritual pursuits. This may be particularly true during challenging times in our lives:
…there are aspects of our lives that are beyond our control. Birth, developmental transitions, accidents, illnesses, and death are immutable elements of existence. Try as we might to affect these elements, a significant portion of our lives remains beyond our immediate control. In spirituality, however, we can find ways to understand and deal with our fundamental human insufficiency, the fact that there are limits to our control… (pg. 655; Pargament & Mahoney, 2005)
Eupsychian Management and Theory Z
It is not merely a coincidence that Maslow is well-known in the field of business. He spent 3 years as the plant manager for the Maslow Cooperage Corporation, and later he spent a summer studying at an electronics firm in California (Non-Linear Systems, Inc.) at the invitation of the company’s president. He became very interested in industrial and managerial psychology, and the journal he kept in California was published as Eupsychian Management (Maslow, 1965). Eupsychia refers to real possibility and improvability, and a movement toward psychological health, as opposed to the vague fantasies of proposed Utopian societies. More precisely, though this is something of a fantasy itself, Maslow described Eupsychia as the culture that would arise if 1,000 self-actualizing people were allowed to live their own lives on a sheltered island somewhere. Maslow applied his psychological theories, including both the hierarchy of needs and self-actualization, to a management style that takes advantage of this knowledge to maximize the potential of the employees in a company (also see the collection of Maslow’s unpublished papers by Hoffman, 1996).
Maslow introduced a variety of terms related to his theories on management, one of the most interesting being synergy. Having borrowed the term from Ruth Benedict, synergy refers to a situation in which a person pursuing their own, selfish goals is automatically helping others, and a person unselfishly helping others is, at the same time, helping themselves. According to Maslow, when selfishness and unselfishness are mutually exclusive, it is a sign of mild psychopathology. Self-actualizing individuals are above the distinction between selfishness and unselfishness; they enjoy seeing others experience pleasure. Maslow offered the personal example of feeding strawberries to his little daughter. As the child smacked her lips and thoroughly loved the strawberries, an experience that thrilled Maslow, what was he actually giving up by letting her eat the strawberries instead of eating them himself? In his experience with the Blackfoot tribe, a member named Teddy was able to buy a car. He was the only one who had one, but tradition allowed anyone in the tribe to borrow it. Teddy used his car no more often than anyone else, but he had to pay the bills, including the gas bill. And yet, everyone in the tribe was so proud of him that he was greatly admired and they elected him chief. So, he benefited in other ways by following tradition and letting everyone use his car (Maslow, 1965). In the business field, when managers encourage cooperation and communication, everyone benefits from the healthy growth and continuous improvement of the company. And this leads us to Theory Z (which is Eupsychian management).
Douglas McGregor, a professor of industrial relations at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, was greatly impressed with Maslow’s work, and McGregor had used Motivation and Personality as a textbook in his business classes. Based on Maslow’s theories, McGregor published a book in 1960 in which he outlined two managerial models, Theory X and Theory Y (Gabor, 2000; Hoffman, 1996). Maslow described the two theories as follows:
…To put it succinctly, Theory Y assumes that if you give people responsibilities and freedom, then they will like to work and will do a better job. Theory Y also assumes that workers basically like excellence, efficiency, perfection, and the like.
Theory X, which still dominates most of the world’s workplace, has a contrasting view. It assumes that people are basically stupid, lazy, hurtful, and untrustworthy and, therefore, that you have got to check everything constantly because workers will steal you blind if you don’t. (pg. 187; Maslow, 1996a)
The Theory X/Theory Y strategy was intentionally put into practice at Non-Linear Systems, hence Maslow’s invitation to study there. Maslow concluded, however, that even Theory Y did not go far enough in maximizing people’s potential. People have metaneeds(the need for B-values), needs that go beyond simply offering higher salaries. When employees have their basic needs met, but recognize inefficiency and mismanagement in the company, they will still complain, but these higher level complaints can now be described as metagrumbles (as opposed to the lower level grumbles about lower level needs). Theory Z attempts to transcend Theory Y and actively facilitate the growth of a company’s employees toward self-actualization (Hoffman, 1996; Maslow, 1971; Maslow 1996b).
Discussion Question: How’s your job (or any job you have had)? Would you describe your supervisor or boss as someone who uses Eupsychian or Theory Z management? Does the workplace foster synergy amongst the employees? If not, can you imagine how the job would be different if they did? | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/08%3A_Carl_Rogers_and_Abraham_Maslow/8.03%3A_Abraham_Maslow_and_Holistic-Dynamic_Psychology.txt |
Henry Murray was primarily psychodynamic in his orientation. However, the fundamental aspect of his theory is the presence of needs in our lives, and there was a distinctly humanistic aspect to his theories as well (Maddi & Costa, 1972). Thus, it seems appropriate to include Murray alongside Maslow’s discussion of human needs. In addition, Murray developed a practical application of his famous test, the Thematic Apperception Test (or TAT), for screening candidates for special work assignments. Once again, this is similar to Maslow’s forays into the field of industrial/organizational psychology. Although it is common to present different fields as fundamentally opposed, such as humanistic psychology vs. psychodynamic psychology, Murray and Maslow provide an ideal opportunity to see the commonalities that often exist between different areas in psychology. It must also be remembered that Murray was no strict adherent to the dogmatic view of psychoanalysis presented by Freud:
…psychoanalysis stands for a conceptual system which explains, it seems to me, as much as any other. But this is no reason for going in blind and swallowing the whole indigestible bolus, cannibalistically devouring the totem father in the hope of acquiring his genius, his authoritative dominance, and thus rising to power in the psychoanalytic society, that battle-ground of Little Corporals. No; I, for one, prefer to take what I please, suspend judgment, reject what I please, speak freely. (pg. 31; Murray, 1940/2008).
Brief Biography of Henry Murray
Henry Alexander Murray, Jr. was born in 1893 in New York City. He had many nicknames, and typically asked his friends to call him Harry. His family was quite wealthy, and had a noble history. He was a descendant of John Murray, the fourth Earl of Dunmore, the last Royal Governor of Virginia, and his mother’s great-grandfather, Colonel Harry Babcock, had served on General George Washington’s staff during the Revolutionary War. Murray lived a life of luxury, spending the summers on Long Island and often traveling throughout Europe. He was educated at exclusive private schools. However, his childhood was not without challenges. He felt abandoned by his mother, who suffered from depression much of her life, when Murray was quite young. He stuttered, and was cross-eyed. The operation to help cure his internal strabismus accidentally left him with an external strabismus. This created problems for Murray when it came to competing in athletics, but Murray worked hard to overcome his difficulties and he excelled at sports. He became the quarterback of his football team and won a featherweight boxing championship at school. In college, he made the rowing team at Harvard University (Maddi & Costa, 1972; Robinson, 1992).
In spite of his athletic success at Harvard, or perhaps because of it, he did not do well academically, receiving below average grades. Nonetheless, he earned a degree in history in 1915. While at Harvard he also married Josephine Rantoul, after a lengthy courtship. Despite his mediocre grades at Harvard, Murray was accepted into the Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons, and graduated first in his class in 1919. He then completed a surgical internship at Presbyterian Hospital in New York, where he once treated the future president Franklin D. Roosevelt, followed by a period of research at the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research and Cambridge University, which culminated in a Ph.D. in biochemistry in 1927. He then accepted a position as assistant to Morton Prince, and became the director of Harvard University’s psychology clinic. Murray had never taken a psychology course, but he had some interesting experience (Maddi & Costa, 1972; Robinson, 1992).
Murray had a psychiatry course in medical school, and had read Freud’s Interpretation of Dreams. He also had a research assistant from Vienna, Alma Rosenthal, who had been a long-time friend of Anna Freud. While both working together and having an intimate love affair, Rosenthal introduced Murray to the deeper dimensions of the unconscious mind. However, it was Murray’s lifelong mistress, Christiana Morgan, who introduced him to Jung’s book Psychology Types. Murray was deeply impressed by Jung’s book, but even more by Jung himself. Murray was troubled by the intense love affair he had developed with Morgan, so he went to Zurich in order to be psychoanalyzed by Jung. Jung managed to help Murray understand his stuttering and accept having his affair with Morgan. After all, Jung had maintained a mistress of his own for many years. Jung also managed to convince Murray’s wife and Morgan’s husband to accept the affair as well, and Christiana Morgan remained a very important colleague throughout Murray’s life. It has been suggested that she played a far more important role in his theories, and in the development of the TAT, than she has been given credit for (Maddi & Costa, 1972; Robinson, 1992). Partly because Jung had directly helped him with a psychological problem, and partly because of the extraordinary range of ideas that Jung was open to, Murray always spoke highly of Jung (though he believed that Jung tended toward being psychotic, just as Freud tended toward being neurotic; see Brian, 1995).
Initially, Murray’s reappointment as clinic director was challenged by the experimental psychologists Edwin Boring and Karl Lashley, but he was supported by the clinical psychologists, who were led by Gordon Allport (Stagner, 1988). As his work continued he was quite productive (it was during this time that he developed the TAT), and many important clinicians passed through the clinic. Included among them was Erik Erikson, who came to the clinic after having been psychoanalyzed by Anna Freud in Vienna. Murray also spent a great deal of time traveling and studying in Europe, and enjoyed a memorable evening with Sigmund and Anna Freud. As he was preparing to return to the clinic, World War II began. Murray joined the Army Medical Corps, and eventually worked for the Office of Strategic Services (OSS). Of particular interest was his use of the TAT to screen OSS agents for sensitive missions (the OSS was the precursor to the CIA, so in peacetime these agents would be called spies). He was in China studying errors they had made in their assessments when the atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima. Murray was shocked, and devoted the rest of his life to seeking alternatives to war (Maddi & Costa, 1972; Robinson, 1992).
As his career and life approached their ends, Murray received the Distinguished Scientific Contribution Award from the American Psychological Association, and the Gold Medal Award from the American Psychological Foundation. He received numerous honorary degrees, and collections of papers have been published in his honor (e.g., White, 1963; Zucker, Rabin, Aronoff, & Frank, 1992). In June, 1988, Murray told his nurse that he was dead. She disagreed with him, and pinched him gently on the cheek to prove her point. He curtly disagreed with her, declaring that he was the doctor, she was the nurse, and he was dead. A few days later he was right (Robinson, 1992).
Placing Murray in Context: A Challenging Task
There does not seem to be a consensus on where Murray fits within the field of personality theory. Trained as a Freudian psychoanalyst, he is often grouped with the neo-Freudians. However, he has also been placed with the trait theorists, and he was a colleague of Gordon Allport. However, many personality theory textbooks don’t consider Murray worthy of significant attention. He is included alongside Maslow in this textbook because his work focused primarily on needs. In addition, the practical application of his Thematic Apperception Test in screening candidates for OSS assignments was similar to Maslow’s application of psychological principles in the business field.
The Thematic Apperception Test is certainly Murray’s claim to fame. It remains one of the best-known tests in psychology, having been applied in research, business, and therapeutic settings. Since Murray used the TAT in combination with the Rorschach Inkblot Test, he maintained his ties to traditional psychoanalysis and helped to advance the fame of the other renowned projective test. As such, his practical contributions to psychology seem to outweigh his theoretical contributions.
It has been said that the value of a theory can be measured by the research that follows. David McClelland’s use of the TAT to study the need for achievement is a common topic in introductory psychology textbooks. Thus, Murray’s contributions have inspired classic research in psychology. That alone should ensure a place of significance for Murray in the history of personality theory.
Human Needs
In Explorations in Personality (Murray, 1938), Murray describes people as “today’s great problem”. What can we know about someone, and how can we describe it in a way that has clear meaning? Nothing is more important in the field of psychology:
The point of view adopted in this book is that personalities constitute the subject matter of psychology, the life history of a single man being a unit with which this discipline has to deal… Our guiding thought was that personality is a temporal whole and to understand a part of it one must have sense, though vague, of the totality. (pgs. 3-4; Murray, 1938)
Thus, Murray and his colleagues sought to understand the nature of personality, in order to help them understand individuals. He referred to this direct study of personality as personology, simply because he considered it clumsy to refer to “the psychology of personality” instead.
Murray described the very elegant process by which the Harvard Clinic group systematically approached their studies, and then presented a lengthy series of propositions regarding a theory of personality. The primary focus of these propositions came down to what Murray called a press-need combination. A need, according to Murray, is a hypothetical process that is imagined to occur in order to account for certain objective and subjective facts. In other words, when an organism reliably acts in a certain way to obtain some goal, we can determine that the organism had a need to achieve that goal. Needs are often recognized only after the fact, the behavior that satisfies the need may be a blind impulse, but it still leads toward satisfying the needed goal. Press is the term Murray applied to environmental objects or situations that designate directional tendencies, or that guide our needs. Anything in the environment, either harmful or beneficial to the organism, exerts press. Thus, our current needs, in the context of current environmental press, determine our ongoing behavior (Murray, 1938).
Like Maslow, Murray separated needs into biological and psychology factors based on how essential they were to one’s survival. The primary, or viscerogenic needs, include air, water, food, sex, harm-avoidance, etc. The secondary or psychogenic needs, which are presumed to derive from the primary needs, are common reaction systems and wishes. Although Murray organizes the psychogenic needs into groups, they are not rank-ordered as was Maslow’s hierarchy, so we will not consider the groups any further. Individually, there are a total of twenty-eight human needs (Murray, 1938). A partial list, with definitions, includes the following:
• Acquisition: the need to gain possessions and property
• Retention: the need to retain possession of things, to refuse to give or lend
• Order: the need to arrange, organize, put away objects, to be tidy and clean
• Construction: the need to build things
• Achievement: the need to overcome obstacles, to exercise power, to strive to do something difficult as well and as quickly as possible
• Recognition: the need to excite praise and commendation, to demand respect
• Exhibition: the need to attract attention to oneself
• Defendance: the need to defend oneself against blame or belittlement
• Counteraction: the need to proudly overcome defeat by restriving and retaliating, to defend one’s honor
• Dominance: the need to influence or control others
• Deference: the need to admire and willingly follow a superior
• Aggression: the need to assault or injure another, to harm, blame, accuse, or ridicule a person
• Abasement: the need to surrender, to comply and accept punishment
• Affiliation: the need to form friendships and associations, to greet, join, and live with others, to love
• Rejection: the need to snub, ignore, or exclude others
• Play: the need to relax, amuse oneself, seek diversion and entertainment
• Cognizance: the need to explore, to ask questions, to satisfy curiosity
According the Murray, in the course of daily life these needs are often interrelated. When a single action can satisfy more than one need, we can say that the needs are fused. However, needs can also come into conflict. For example, an individual’s need for dominance may make it difficult to satisfy their need for affiliation, unless they can find someone with a powerful need for abasement. Such a situation is one of the ways in which psychologists have tried to understand abusive relationships. In other words, when someone with a strong need for affiliation and debasement becomes involved with someone with a strong need for affiliation and dominance (particularly in a pathological sense), the results can be very unfortunate.
Figure \(1\)
Anyone who has children is often reminded of their need for playing, and most any setting can provide an opportunity for play. Here, the author’s children are playing cards.
Any object, or person, that evokes a need is said to “be cathected” by the person being studied. In other words, they have invested some of their limited psychic energy (libido) into that object. Murray believed that an individual’s personality is revealed by the objects to which that person is attached by the cathexis of libido, especially if you can recognize the intensity, endurance, and rigidity of the cathexis. This process not only applies to individuals, but institutions and cultures also have predictable patterns in terms of their cathected objects. Put more simply, we can strive to understand individuals, including doing so from a cross-cultural perspective, by examining the nature and pattern of needs they seek to satisfy in their daily lives (Murray, 1938).
Morris Stein, who worked with Murray in the OSS and then earned a Ph.D. at the Harvard Clinic, combined Murray’s work on identifying human needs and Jung’s concept of psychological types. By looking at patterns in the rank-order of needs among industrial chemists and Peace Corps volunteers, Stein was able to divide each group into separate psychological types (Stein, 1963). For example, there were five basic types of industrial chemists: Type A was achievement oriented but still worked well with others; Type B focused on pleasing others, often at the expense of their own ideas; Type C was achievement oriented, but more driven and hostile than Type A; Type D was motivated by achievement and affiliation, but with an emphasis on order that protected them from criticism or blame; and Type E was particularly focused on relationships marked by cooperation and trust. As interesting as these types may be, they are quite different than the personality types identified amongst the Peace Corps volunteers (Stein, 1963). Thus, although Stein’s investigation suggests that personality types can be identified based on patterns of need, this approach probably would not provide a general theory of personology that could be applied to anyone.
The TAT and the OSS
Murray is typically credited with the development the TAT. However, the original article has Christiana Morgan as the first author (Morgan & Murray, 1935), and in Explorations in Personality most of the TAT work is described by Morgan (Murray, 1938). Apparently, when the test was revised and republished in 1943, Murray did most of the revision, partly because Morgan was quite ill at the time. The TAT consists of a series of pictures depicting potentially dramatic events (although the pictures are actually rather vague). The person taking the test is asked to provide a story that relates events preceding the picture to some final outcome of the situation. It is expected that the subject will project their own thoughts and feelings into the picture as they create their story. In order for this to be possible, Morgan and Murray made sure that in most pictures there was at least one person with whom the subject could easily empathize and identify themselves. The TAT became one of the most popular projective tests ever developed, and continues to be widely used today.
The TAT has been used in two particularly interesting settings outside of clinical psychology: to study the need for achievement (see the next section), and to screen agents for the Office of Strategic Services during World War II. Murray used the TAT as part of a program to help select members of the OSS for critical, dangerous missions. Even before joining the OSS, Murray worked for the government in support of the war effort. In conjunction with Gordon Allport, he provided an analysis of the personality of Adolf Hitler, along with predictions as to how Hitler might react after Germany was defeated. He also helped to develop a series of questions for the crew of a captured German U-boat. The OSS program involved assessing candidate’s responses to highly stressful situations. In addition to psychological testing, using instruments such as the TAT, the candidates were put into highly stressful situations. For example, they were told to pick two men to help them put together a five-foot cube with wooden poles, blocks, and pegs. However, the available men were all secretly on Murray’s staff. One of them would act helpless and passive, whereas the other made stupid suggestions and constantly criticized the recruit. The task was, of course, never completed, but it provided Murray with the information he needed on how the candidate performed under stress (Brian, 1995; Robinson, 1992).
In the next chapter we will see that the existential psychologist Rollo May talked about our need for myths, in order to make sense out of our often senseless world. Although this was not a need included by Murray, he did have an interest in mythology. The imagination that is necessary to create a story around a picture in the TAT often involves symbolism that arises from the depths of the whole self (Murray, 1960). In this regard, Murray sounds quite similar to Jung and his theory of archetypes, and Murray discussed some classic images from our historical mythology. Of particular interest to Murray, however, is whether or not we will establish new myths in the future. There are older myths that remain oriented to our future, such as the apocalyptic myths or the myth of the Promised Land (Murray, 1960). The existential philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre lamented the demythologizing of the universe by science, and he advocated a remythologizing of the self (see McAdams, 1992). Given that Murray did include a need for cognizance, the need to explore, to ask questions, and to satisfy curiosity, perhaps there will be new myths created in our future. If so, psychologists will need to keep current with the cultural phenomena that influence people’s unconscious projections onto the TAT and other projective tests.
David McClelland and the Need for Achievement
David McClelland, who joined the faculty of Harvard University a few years before Murray retired, conducted some well-known research utilizing the TAT to examine the need for achievement. The research began shortly after World War II, and was supported by the Office of Naval Research. McClelland and his colleagues made an interesting point, in the preface to their book The Achievement Motive (McClelland, Atkinson, Clark, & Lowell, 1953), about studying just one of Murray’s needs: “concentration on a limited research problem is not necessarily narrowing; it may lead ultimately into the whole of psychology.” Indeed, they felt that they learned a great deal about personality by studying one of the most important of human needs.
McClelland and his colleagues used the TAT and borrowed heavily from Murray’s procedures and scoring system. However, they made a number of modifications. They used additional pictures of their own, they often presented the pictures on a screen to a group of subjects, those subjects were all male college students, and some of their experimental conditions were designed to evoke achievement-oriented responses, or responses based on success or failure. An important aspect of this study was that the TAT (and similar pictures developed by McClelland) requires writing imaginative stories of what the subject projects onto the picture. Therefore, situations that stimulate achievement-oriented imagination can result in higher scores on the need for achievement, something that McClelland and his colleagues confirmed in Navaho children during the course of their research (suggesting it is a universal phenomenon). Overall, they found that individuals who are high in their need for achievement perform more tasks during timed tests, improve more quickly in their ability to perform those tasks, set higher levels of aspirations, remember more of the tasks they failed to perform, and they are more future-oriented and recognize achievement-oriented situations (McClelland et al., 1953). In addition, they found a positive correlation between the need for achievement and cultures and families in which there is an emphasis on the individual development of children, with early childhood being of particular importance. After examining eight Native American cultures (Navaho, Ciricahua-Apache, Western Apache, Hopi, Comanche, Sanpoil, Paiute, and Flatheads), McClelland and his colleagues determined that the need for achievement in each culture (measured from classic legends involving the archetypal trickster “coyote”) correlates highly with both an early age onset and the severity of independence training (McClelland et al., 1953). In summary, the need for achievement is a motivational force that develops in early childhood, and which pushes individuals toward accomplishing life’s tasks.
An excellent essay on the need for achievement, which addresses some of the criticism this concept has endured, was written by McClelland in a new introduction for the second printing of his book The Achieving Society (McClelland, 1976). This book also adds to the cross-cultural reach of McClelland’s work, since as he extends his theory on the need for achievement to the societies in which individuals live he also extends his theory to other societies around the world. First, the concept itself has typically been misunderstood:
…the word “achievement” cues all sorts of surplus meanings that the technically defined n Achievement variable does not have. It refers specifically to the desire to do something better, faster, more efficiently, with less effort. It is not a generalized desire to succeed… (pg. A; McClelland, 1976)
In studying the role of need for achievement within societies, McClelland focused on business and economic development as one of the most easily compared aspects of different cultures. He believed that nations possess something like a “group mind,” which can lead the nation in certain directions. Again using literary sources as examples of cultural perspectives on the need for achievement, McClelland found support for his theory that high need for achievement preceded dramatic societal development in ancient Greece, pre-Incan Peru, Spain in the late middle ages, England leading up to the industrial revolution, and during the development of the United States (particularly in the 1800s). Once again, McClelland cautions against over-generalizing the meaning of need for achievement:
It is a very specific, rather rare, drive which focuses on the goal of efficiency and which expresses itself in activities available in the culture which permit or encourage one to be more efficient; and across cultures the most common form such activity takes is business. (pg. B; McClelland, 1976)
The question of where the need for achievement comes from continued to perplex McClelland. Although early childhood appears to be when a lasting need for achievement develops, the need for achievement can be enhanced in adults through training seminars. More importantly, however, is the question of where need for achievement comes from in the first place, how does it develop within a society? When McClelland was working in Ethiopia with the Peace Corps, he studied the Gurage. This small tribal group was treated with disdain by both the dominant Christian Amhara and the Muslim Galla tribes. And yet the Gurage were recognized for their clever business strategies, and their children wrote stories filled with imagery indicative of a high need for achievement. Since the Gurage had developed without contact with Western Christian, Muslim, or Greco-Roman cultures, they seemed to have developed their own need for achievement. Unfortunately, so little is known about their history, that McClelland was unable to identify the source of their motivation (McClelland, 1976).
In support of the contention that studying the need for achievement could provide insights into many aspects of personality, McClelland pursued a number of interesting topics throughout his career, including how societies can motivate economic growth and identify talent (McClelland, Baldwin, Bronfenbrenner, & Strodtbeck, 1958; McClelland & Winter, 1969), the power motive (McClelland, 1975), the development of social maturity and values (McClelland, 1982a; McClelland, 1982b), and a cross-cultural study on the role of alcohol in society (McClelland, Davis, Kalin, & Wanner, 1972). Moving in a quite different direction, McClelland also wrote a book entitled The Roots of Consciousness (McClelland, 1964), in which he argues that Sigmund Freud’s psychoanalysis is really an expression of Jewish spiritual mysticism known as Kabbalah. We will examine Kabbalah, as well as Christian and Islamic mysticism, as a positive approach to one’s lifestyle in Chapter 18.
Discussion Question
McClelland found support for his ideas on the development of the need for achievement amongst Native Americans, but he did not find that same support among the Gurage tribe in Ethiopia (they had a strong need for achievement, but the source was unclear). How important do you think it is for us to re-examine psychological theories in multiple cultures, and what would it mean for psychology if we often find contradictions? | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/08%3A_Carl_Rogers_and_Abraham_Maslow/8.04%3A_Henry_Murray_and_Personology.txt |
In this chapter we have examined the humanistic theories of Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow. In the next chapter we will examine the existential theories of Viktor Frankl and Rollo May. What really is the difference? The distinction is subtle, based on definition, and may seem nonexistent at first glance. Indeed, both the humanistic and existential theorists have been influenced by the likes of Adler, Horney, Fromm, and Otto Rank, and Rogers in particular often writes about existential choices in his books. Even the cognitive therapist Albert Ellis, himself profoundly influenced by Adler, considered Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy to be distinctly humanistic (see Humanistic Psychotherapy; Ellis, 1973). In 1986, the Saybrook Institute republished a series of essays, which had appeared in the Journal of Humanistic Psychology, under the title Politics and Innocence: A Humanistic Debate (May, Rogers, Maslow, et al., 1986). In this volume, Rogers refers to May as “the leading scholar of humanistic psychology.” May, for his part, concluded an open letter to Rogers in which he expressed “profound respect for you and your contribution in the past to all of us.” May also maintained a friendship and correspondence with Maslow (May, 1991). Clearly, the humanistic and existential psychologists have much in common, and the important figures here in America communicated actively and with respect for the contributions of each other.
8.06: Personality Theory in Real Life
Seeking Self-Actualization
Carl Rogers described the actualizing tendency as something that exists within every living organism. It is a tendency to grow, develop, and realize one’s full potential. It can be thwarted, but it cannot be destroyed without destroying the organism itself. His person-centered approach was based on this belief, and the resulting trust that one can place in each person. In other words, we can trust that each person is driven forward by this actualizing tendency, and that under the right conditions it will flourish (Rogers, 1977, 1986/1989).
According to Abraham Maslow, life is a process of choices. At each point, we must choose between a progression choice and a regression choice. Although many people make safe, defensive choices, self-actualizing people regularly make growth choices(Maslow, 1971). Each growth choice moves the person closer to self-actualization, and the process continues throughout life.
So, consider your own life. Do you feel the actualizing tendency within you? Do you aspire to accomplish something great, or simply to be a good person in whatever path you choose? Think about your educational and/or career plans. Think about your life plans, and whether they include a family or special friends. Do you feel a calling that is pulling in one direction or another? The drive to accomplish, to make a contribution to your community or society, the belief that you are meant for great things, or simply that you are meant to be a source of support for others, all of these might be aspects of your actualizing tendency. Or are you moving through life without a plan, without goals? Do you skate along from day to day, with no destination in mind?
If you do feel your actualizing tendency, consider how you are living your life. Are you pursuing the steps necessary to accomplish your goals? Have you made choices, perhaps difficult choices, which have moved you forward toward those goals?
Basically, do you feel that you are on a path toward self-actualization, and do you think you should be? Is it reasonable to expect, or hope, that everyone might become self-actualized?
What might it be like to live a fully transcendent, self-actualized life? Although there are many different, and individual, answers to that question, we can find one example in the remarkable life of Peace Pilgrim (Friends of Peace Pilgrim, 1982). No one knows her original name, or exactly where or when she was born (other than it was on a small farm in the Eastern United States in the early 1900s). Her family was poor, but happy, and she enjoyed her childhood. Her life was fruitful, but eventually she found the world’s focus on self-centeredness and material goods to be unfulfilling. In 1953, she chose to leave her life behind. She adopted the name Peace Pilgrim, and began walking across America as a prayer for peace.
A pilgrim is a wanderer with a purpose…Mine is for peace, and that is why I am a Peace Pilgrim…My pilgrimage covers the entire peace picture: peace among nations, peace among groups, peace within our environment, peace among individuals, and the very, very important inner peace - which I talk about most often because that is where peace begins…I have no money. I do not accept any money on my pilgrimage. I belong to no organization…I own only what I wear and carry. There is nothing to tie me down. I am as free as a bird soaring in the sky.
I walk until given shelter, fast until given food. I don’t ask - it’s given without asking. Aren’t people good! There is a spark of good in everybody, no matter how deeply it may be buried, it is there. It’s waiting to govern your life gloriously. (pg. 25; Peace Pilgrim cited in Friends of Peace Pilgrim, 1982)
Between 1953 and her death in 1981, she walked, and walked, and walked. By 1964, she had walked 25,000 miles, including walking across the United States twice and through every Canadian province. After that, she no longer kept track of her mileage, but she completed at least four more pilgrimages, including Alaska, Hawaii, and a pilgrimage in Mexico. Among the many friends and admirers she met along the way, there are two notable people (whom psychology students should be familiar with) who provided comments for the cover of her book: Elisabeth Kubler-Ross called her “a wonderful lady,” and the popular author/counselor Wayne Dyer said “she is my hero.” As for your own life, Peace Pilgrim has some simple advice:
There is no glimpse of the light without walking the path. You can’t get it from anyone else, nor can you give it to anyone. Just take whatever steps seem easiest for you, and as you take a few steps it will be easier for you to take a few more. (pg. 91; Peace Pilgrim cited in Friends of Peace Pilgrim, 1982).
8.S: Chapter Summary
Review of Key Points
• Rogers believed that each person exists in their own, unique experiential field. Only they can see that field clearly, although even they may not perceive it accurately (incongruence).
• The self is that portion of the experiential field that is recognized as “I” or “me.” It is organized into a self-structure.
• In order for a person to grow, they must fulfill a need for positive regard. This can only come from receiving unconditional positive regard from important family members and friends (typically beginning with the parents).
• When an individual’s self-regard and positive regard are closely related, the person is said to be congruent. If not, they are said to be incongruent.
• Rogers described individuals who are congruent and continuing to grow as fully functioning persons.
• Successful marriages, according to Rogers, seem to be based on dedication/commitment, communication, dissolution of roles, and maintaining each person’s separate self.
• Rogers extended his study of clinical psychology into other groups designed to help all people grow and self-actualize, such as T-groups and encounter groups. He described his shift from purely clinical work to fostering growth in all people as a person-centered approach.
• Values were very important to Maslow in his approach to psychology. He did not, however, advocate his own values. He reached beyond humanistic psychology to include areas of study such as existential psychology, existential theology, and Zen Buddhism.
• The lower needs can be described as deficiency-needs, whereas self-actualization is a Being-need.
• Maslow described fourteen characteristics of self-actualizing people. He developed his list by studying both contemporary and historical people who seemed to him to be self-actualizing.
• Maslow described two defense mechanisms that interfere with the process of self-actualizing: desacralizing and the Jonah complex.
• Some individuals experience profound peak experiences, which Maslow described as transcendent. His concept of transcendence seems very close to the Buddhist perspective of interbeing.
• When Eupsychian management does support self-actualization, the actualization of each person benefits the others around them. The process is known as synergy.
• Murray based “personology” on the study of needs. He distinguished between viscerogenic needs and psychogenic needs.
• Murray believed that a person’s ability to create a story around a picture in the TAT was based in large part on their personal mythology. He shared this interest in myth, and its role in psychology, with Carl Jung and Rollo May.
• The distinction between humanistic psychology and existential psychology is not clear, and there is significant overlap in the thinking of representatives from both fields. In addition, there is a distinct humanistic element in the psychodynamic theories of Adler, Horney, Fromm, Murray, and others
Discussion Question: Consider Murray’s list of psychogenic needs. Which needs are the ones that affect you the most? Are you able to fulfill those needs? | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/08%3A_Carl_Rogers_and_Abraham_Maslow/8.05%3A_A_Final_Note-_Humanistic_or_Existential.txt |
Man is nothing else but what he makes of himself. Such is the first principle of Existentialism…For we mean that man first exists, that is, that man first of all is the being who hurls himself toward a future and who is conscious of imagining himself as being in the future…Thus, Existentialism’s first move is to make every man aware of what he is and to make the full responsibility of his existence rest on him. (pg. 456; Jean-Paul Sartre, 1947/1996)
Existential psychology is the area within psychology most closely linked to the field of philosophy. Curiously, this provides one of the most common complaints against existential psychology. Many historians identify the establishment of Wilhelm Wundt’s experimental laboratory in Germany in 1879 as the official date of the founding of psychology. Sigmund Freud, with his strong background in biomedical research, also sought to bring scientific methodology to the study of the mind and mental processes, including psychological disorders and psychotherapy. Shortly thereafter, Americans such as Edward Thorndike and John Watson were establishing behaviorism, and its rigorous methodology, as the most influential field in American psychology. So, as existential psychology arose in the 1940s and 1950s it was viewed as something of a throwback to an earlier time when psychology was not distinguished from philosophy (Lundin, 1979).
However, as with those who identify themselves as humanistic psychologists, existential psychologists are deeply concerned with individuals and the conditions of each unique human life. The detachment that seems so essential to experimental psychologists is unacceptable to existential psychologists. The difference can easily be seen in the titles of two influential books written by the leading existential psychologists: Man’s Search for Meaning by Viktor Frankl (1946/1992) and Man’s Search for Himself by Rollo May (1953). Existential psychology differs significantly from humanistic psychology, however, in focusing on present existence and the fear, anguish, and sorrow that are so often associated with the circumstances of our lives (Lundin, 1979).
9.02: Understanding the Philosophy of Existentialism
The roots of existentialism as a philosophy began with the Danish philosopher Søren Kierkegaard (1813-1855). Kierkegaard was intensely interested in man’s relationship with God, and its ultimate impossibility. Man is finite and individual, whereas God is infinite and absolute, so the two can never truly meet. In pursuing the relationship, however, man goes through three stages or modes of existence: the aesthetic mode, the ethical mode, and the religious mode. The aesthetic mode is concerned with the here and now, and focuses primarily on pleasure and pain. Young children live primarily in this mode. The ethical mode involves making choices and wrestling with the concept of responsibility. An individual in the ethical mode must choose whether or not to live by a code or according to the rules of society. This submission to rules and codes may prove useful in terms of making life simple, but it is a dead end. In order to break out of this dead end, one must live in the religious mode by making a firm commitment to do so. While this may lead to the recognition that each of us is a unique individual, it also brings with it the realization of our total inadequacy relative to God. As a result, we experience loneliness, anxiety, fear, and dread. All of this anguish, however, allows us to know what is really true, and for Kierkegaard truth was synonymous with faith (in God). However, as important as man’s relationship to God was for Kierkegaard, he was adamantly opposed to organized religion. Kierkegaard rejected objective, so-called “truth” in the form of religious dogma in favor of the subjective “truth” that each person “knows” within themselves. While this subjective, personal truth brings with it the responsibility that leads to anxiety, it can also elevate a person to an authentic existence (Breisach, 1962; Frost, 1942).
Another philosopher considered essential to the foundation of existentialism was the enigmatic German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900). A key element of Nietzsche’s philosophy is the will-to-power. He believed this will-to-power is the fundamental force in the universe (Alfred Adler considered it fundamental to personality development). Ironically, according to Nietzsche, the universe has no regard for humanity. Natural forces (such as disaster and disease) destroy people, life is extremely difficult, and even those who struggle on attempting to realize their will eventually succumb to death. There is no hope to be found in an afterlife, since Nietzsche is famous for declaring that God is dead! Neither is there much hope within society for many people. Nietzsche believed that inequality was the natural state of humanity, so he considered slavery to be perfectly understandable and he felt that women (who are physically weaker than men) should never expect the same rights as men. Nonetheless, Nietzsche saw a great future for humanity, in the belief, indeed the faith, that we would create a superman (or superwoman, as the case may be). It is the creation of the superman that gives purpose to existence. Although the concept of the superman helped to fuel Nazi views on creating a German master race, it also made its way into American comic books as the great hero Superman (Fritzsche, 2007; Frost, 1942; Jaspers, 1965). In perhaps Nietzsche’s most famous work, Thus Spoke Zarathustra, the would-be prophet Zarathustra encouraged people to seek a better future for humanity:
I will teach you about the superman. Man is something that should be overcome. What have you done to overcome him? (pg. 81, Nietzsche, quoted in Fritzsche, 2007)
The German existentialists Martin Heidegger (1889-1976) and Karl Jaspers (1883-1969) focused on human existence itself and our role in the world. In a sense, Heidegger trivialized the nature of God, equating God with little more than the greatest being in the world, but a being nonetheless (just as humans are). Jaspers was not an atheist, but still his existential theory focused on the human journey toward a freedom that has meaning only when it reveals itself in union with God (Breisach, 1962; Lescoe, 1974). Heidegger considered individuals as beings who are all connected in Being, thus distinguishing between mere beings (including other animals) and the nature of truth or Being. Only humans are capable of understanding this connection between all beings, and Heidegger referred to this discovery as Dasein (“being here,” or existence). On one level, Dasein is common to all creatures, but the possibility of being aware of one’s connection to Being is uniquely human. For those who ask the big questions, Dasein can become authentic existence. This experience comes in the fullness of life, but only if one adopts the mode of existence known as being-in-the-world. Heidegger insisted that Dasein and being-in-the-world are equal. Being-in-the-world is an odd concept, however, since Heidegger believed that Being can only arise from nothingness, and so we ourselves arise as being-thrown-into-this-world. Having been thrown into this mysterious world we wish to make it our own, but our desire for connection with Being leads to anxiety. This anxiety cannot be overcome, because we are aware that we will die! Surprisingly, however, Heidegger considers death to be something positive. It is only because we are going to die that some of us strive to experience life fully. If we can accept that death will come, and nothing will follow, we can be true to ourselves and live an authentic life (Breisach, 1962; Lundin, 1979).
Finally we come to the French existentialist Jean-Paul Sartre (1905-1980). Sartre was an extraordinary author and one of the most important philosophers of the twentieth century. He was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1964, but chose to reject it. More importantly for us, however, is the fact that he carried existential philosophy directly into psychology, with books such as The Transcendence of the Ego (Sartre, 1937/1957) and a section entitled “Existential Psychoanalysis” in his extraordinary work Being and Nothingness (Sartre, 1943). Whereas Kierkegaard believed that man could never truly be one with God, and Heidegger trivialized God, Sartre simply stated that God does not exist. But this is not inconsequential:
The Existentialist, on the contrary, thinks it very distressing that God does not exist, because all possibility of finding values in a heaven of ideas disappears along with Him; there can no longer be an a priori Good, since there is no infinite and perfect consciousness to think it. (pg. 459; Sartre, 1947/1996).
If one looks at the title of Sartre’s most famous philosophical work, Being and Nothingness (Sartre, 1943), you might get the impression that Sartre followed in the footsteps of Heidegger. However, Sartre did not agree with Heidegger (see Sartre, 1943). Sartre divided the world into en-soi (the in-itself) and pour-soi (the for-itself). Pour-soi can be defined as conscious beings, of which there is only one kind: human beings. Everything else is en-soi, things (including non-human animals) that are silent and dead, and from which come no meaning, they only are (Breisach, 1962). For Sartre, there is no mystery, no Being, tying all of creation together. Man’s consciousness is not a connection to God that can be realized, it is simply a unique characteristic of the human species. The nothingness to which Sartre refers is a shell around the pour-soi, the individual, which separates it from the en-soi. People who try to deny living authentically, those who try to deny the responsibility that comes with being conscious and settle into being nothing more than en-soi will have a shattering experience and be totally destroyed (since there is no Being, as described by Heidegger, beyond the shell surrounding the pour-soi; Breisach, 1962). This establishes critical ethical implications for the individual, since their life will be what they make of it, and nothing more.
Unfortunately, many people do reject their unique consciousness and desire to be en-soi, just letting life happen around them. As the en-soi closes in around them, they begin to experience nausea, forlornness, anxiety, and despair. Herein lays the need for existential psychoanalysis:
Existential psychoanalysis is going to reveal to man the real goal of his pursuit, which is being as a synthetic fusion of the in-itself with the for-itself; existential psychoanalysis is going to acquaint man with his passion…Many men, in fact, know that the goal of their pursuit is being; and … they refrain from appropriating things for their own sake and try to realize the symbolic appropriations of their being-in-itself…existential psychoanalysis…must reveal to the moral agent that he is the being by whom values exist. It is then that his freedom will become conscious of itself… (pg. 797; Sartre, 1943)
Sartre proposed that individuals become conscious, and through that consciousness create the world itself, but also that we are “condemned to despair” and “doomed to failure” when we realize that all human activities are merely equivalent. This philosophical approach leads into Sartre’s criticism of the psychology of his time. Sartre believed that psychologists, and even most philosophers, stopped short of really understanding people:
For most philosophers the ego is an “inhabitant” of consciousness...Others - psychologists for the most part - claim to discover its material presence, as the center of desires and acts, in each moment of our psychic life. We should like to show here that the ego is neither formally nor materially in consciousness: it is outside, in the world. It is a being of the world, like the ego of another. (pg. 31; Sartre, 1937/1957)
So, Sartre believed that an existential psychoanalysis was needed to go beyond the limits of Freudian psychoanalysis. It is not enough, according to Sartre, to stop at describing mere patterns of desires and tendencies (Sartre, 1943). In critiquing the psychoanalytic biography of a famous author named Flaubert, Sartre asked very meaningful questions about this individual's life: why did Flaubert become a writer instead of a painter, why did he come to feel exalted and self-important instead of gloomy, why did his writing emphasize violence, or amorous adventures, etc.? Sartre’s point is a common criticism of Freudian psychoanalytic theory. If most any result can come from an individual’s experiences, then what does psychoanalysis really tell us about anyone? Sartre proposed a deeper form of psychoanalysis:
This comparison allows us to understand better what an existential psychoanalysis must be if it is entitled to exist. It is a method destined to bring to light, in a strictly objective form, the subjective choice by which each living person makes himself a person; that is, makes known to himself what he is. Since what the method seeks is a choice of being at the same time as a being, it must reduce particular behavior patterns to fundamental relations - not of sexuality or of the will-to-power, but of being - which are expressed in this behavior. It is then guided from the start toward a comprehension of being and must not assign itself any other goal than to discover being and the mode of being of the being confronting this being. It is forbidden to stop before attaining this goal…This psychoanalysis has not yet found its Freud. (pp. 733-734; Sartre; 1943)
Placing Existential Psychology in Context: Height Psychology Goes Deeper Than Depth Psychology
The two theorists highlighted in this chapter were truly extraordinary individuals. Both Viktor Frankl (who coined the term “height psychology”) and Rollo May were well immersed in existential thought and its application to psychology when they faced seemingly certain death. For Frankl, who was imprisoned in the Nazi concentration camps, death was expected. For May, who was confined to a sanitarium with tuberculosis, death was a very real possibility (and indeed many died there). But Frankl and May were intelligent, observant, and thoughtful men. They watched as many died, while some lived, and they sought answers that might explain who was destined for each group. Both men observed that for those who resigned themselves to death, death came soon. But for those who chose to live, they had a real chance to survive despite the terrible conditions in which they existed.
Frankl and May also shared their training in traditional psychoanalysis, and both had studied with Alfred Adler, at least somewhat. However, they found the so-called depth psychology as lacking, since it did not address the true potential for humans to rise above their conditions. In this regard, existential psychologists have typically been viewed as belonging within the humanistic psychology camp. However, both Frankl and May considered humanistic psychology to also be lacking, in that it neglected the true potential for humans to make bad choices, and to harm both themselves and others. So for existential psychologists, the center of their focus is on the immediate existence of the individual, in the context of their relationship to others. It is this seeming paradox, and the drive to resolve it, that provides the motivation and energy for life.
There is also a natural connection between existentialism and Eastern schools of thought, including yoga, Buddhism, and Taoism. Some of the comparisons are so striking that, shortly after discussing Taoism, May wrote “one gets the same shock of similarity in Zen Buddhism” (May, 1983). And so, this chapter should provide an interesting transition to the final section of this text, in which we will examine both Eastern and Western spiritual approaches to making positive choices in one’s life. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/09%3A_Viktor_Frankl_Rollo_May_and_Existential_Psychology/9.01%3A_Chapter_Introduction.txt |
Viktor Frankl (1905-1997) was truly an extraordinary man. His first paper was submitted for publication by Sigmund Freud; his second paper was published at the urging of Alfred Adler. Gordon Allport was instrumental in getting Frankl’s book Man’s Search for Meaning (Frankl, 1946/1992) published in English, a book that went on to be recognized by the Library of Congress as one of the ten most influential books in America. He lectured around the world, and received some thirty honorary doctoral degrees in addition to the medical degree and the Ph.D. he had earned as a student. He was invited to a private audience with Pope Paul VI, even though Frankl was Jewish. All of this was accomplished in spite of, and partly because of, the fact that he spent several years in Nazi concentration camps during World War II, camps where his parents, brother, wife, and millions of other Jews died.
A Brief Biography of Viktor Frankl
Viktor Frankl was born in Vienna, Austria on March 26, 1905. Although his father had been forced to drop out of medical school for financial reasons, Gabriel Frankl held a series of positions with the Austrian government, working primarily with the department of child protection and youth welfare. He instilled in his son the importance of being intensely rational and having a firm sense of social justice, and Frankl became something of a perfectionist. Frankl described his mother Elsa as a kindhearted and deeply pious woman, but during his childhood she often described him as a pest, and she even changed the words of Frankl’s favorite childhood lullaby to include calling him a pest. This may have been due to the fact that Frankl was often asking questions, so much so that a family friend nicknamed him “The Thinker” (Frankl, 1995/2000). From his mother, Frankl inherited a deep emotionality. One aspect of this emotionality involved a deep attachment to his childhood home, and he often felt homesick as his responsibilities kept him away. And those responsibilities began at an early age (Frankl, 1995/2000; Pattakos, 2004).
Even in high school Frankl was developing a keen interest in existential philosophy and psychology. At the age of 16 he delivered a public lecture “On the Meaning of Life” and at 18 he wrote his graduation essay “On the Psychology of Philosophical Thought.” Throughout his high school years he maintained a correspondence with Sigmund Freud (letters that were later destroyed by the Gestapo when Frankl was deported to his first concentration camp). When Frankl was just 19, Freud submitted one of Frankl’s papers for publication in the International Journal of Psychoanalysis, afterward hoping that Frankl would agree and give his belated consent. Despite having impressed Freud, Frankl himself was already impressed by Alfred Adler. Frankl became active in Adler’s individual psychology group, and as he began medical school he was urged by Adler to publish a paper in the International Journal of Individual Psychology. It is hard to imagine that many people could have come into the favor of both Freud and Adler by such a young age, even before having begun medical school or a career in psychiatry. Despite Frankl’s young age and somewhat limited experience, the paper published by Adler was dealing with difficult material, specifically the “border area that lies between psychotherapy and philosophy, with special attention to the problems of meanings and values in psychology” (Frankl, 1995/2000). Eventually, however, Frankl fell out of favor with Adler. Frankl had been impressed with two men, Allers and Schwarz, whose views were at odds with Adler. On the evening when Allers and Schwarz announced to the society that they could not agree with Adler, Adler challenged Frankl and a friend to speak up. Frankl chose to do so, and he defended Allers and Schwarz, believing that a middle ground could be found. Adler never spoke to Frankl again, even when Frankl said hello in the local coffee shop. For a few months Adler had other people suggest to Frankl that he should quit the society. When Frankl did not, he was expelled by Adler (Frankl, 1995/2000; Pattakos, 2004).
Frankl proceeded to develop his own practice and his own school of psychotherapy, known as logotherapy (the therapy of meaning, as in finding meaning in one’s life). As early as 1929, Frankl had begun to recognize three possible ways to find meaning in life: a deed we do or a work we create; a meaningful human encounter, particularly one involving love; and choosing one’s attitude in the face of unavoidable suffering. Logotherapy eventually became known as the third school of Viennese psychotherapy, after Freud’s psychoanalysis and Adler’s individual psychology. During the 1930s Frankl did much of his work with suicidal patients and teenagers. He had extensive talks with Wilhelm Reich in Berlin, who was also involved in youth counseling by that time. As the 1930s came to an end, and Austria had been taken over by the Nazis, Frankl sought a visa to emigrate to the United States, which was eventually granted. However, Frankl’s parents could not get a visa, so he chose to remain in Austria with them. He also began work on his first book, eventually published in English under the title The Doctor and the Soul (Frankl, 1946/1986), which provided the foundation for logotherapy. He fell in love with Tilly Grosser, and they were married in 1941, the last legal Jewish marriage in Vienna under the Nazis.
Shortly thereafter, the realities of Nazi Germany overcame what little privilege Frankl had enjoyed as a doctor at a major hospital. Since it was illegal for Jews to have children, Tilly Frankl was forced to abort their first child. Frankl later dedicated The Unheard Cry for Meaning “To Harry or Marion an unborn child” (Frankl, 1978). Then the entire Frankl family, except for his sister who had gone to Australia, was deported to the Theresienstadt concentration camp (the same camp from which Anna Freud cared for orphans after the war). As they marched into the camp with hundreds, perhaps thousands, of other prisoners, his father tried to calm those who panicked by saying again and again: “Be of good cheer, for God is near.” Frankl’s parents, his only brother, and his wife Tilly died in the concentration camps. Most tragically, Frankl believed that his wife died after the war, but before the liberating Allied forces could care for all of the many, many suffering people (Frankl, 1995/2000).
When Frankl was deported, he tried to hide and save his only copy of The Doctor and the Soul by sewing it into the lining of his coat. However, he was forced to trade his good coat for an old one, and the manuscript was lost. While imprisoned, he managed to obtain a few scraps of paper on which to make notes. Those notes later helped him to recreate his book, and that goal gave such meaning to his life that he considered it an important factor in his will to survive the horrors of the concentration camps. It would be difficult to adequately describe the conditions of the concentration camps, or how they affected the minds of those imprisoned, especially since the effects were quite varied. Frankl describes those conditions in Man’s Search for Meaning. The book is rather short, but its contents are deep beyond comprehension. Frankl himself, however, might take exception to referring to his book as “deep.” Depth psychology was a term used for psychodynamically-oriented psychology. In 1938 Frankl coined the term “height psychology” in order to supplement, but not replace, depth psychology (Frankl, 1978).
After the war, Frankl’s life was nothing less than amazing. He returned to his home city of Vienna, married Eleonore Katharina, née Schwindt, and raised a daughter named Gabriele, whose husband and the Frankl’s grandchildren all lived in Vienna. He lectured around the world, received many honors, wrote numerous books, all while continuing to practice psychiatry and teach at the University of Vienna, Harvard, and elsewhere. He had a great interest in humor and in cartooning. Throughout his life, Frankl steadfastly refused to acknowledge the validity of collective guilt toward the German people. When asked repeatedly how he could return to Vienna, after all that happened to him and his family, Frankl replied:
…I answered with a counter-question: “Who did what to me?” There had been a Catholic baroness who risked her life by hiding my cousin for years in her apartment. There had been a Socialist attorney (Bruno Pitterman, later vice chancellor of Austria), who knew me only casually and for whom I had never done anything; and it was he who smuggled some food to me whenever he could. For what reason, then, should I turn my back on Vienna? (pp. 101-102; Frankl, 1995/2000)
Viktor Frankl died peacefully on September 2, 1997. He was 92 years old. During his life, his work influenced many people, from the ordinary to the famous and influential. “Viktor Frankl, to be sure, leaves a profound legacy” (pg. 24; Pattakos, 2004).
The Theoretical Basis for Logotherapy
While Frankl was in medical school, he considered specializing in dermatology or obstetrics. A fellow student who was aware of Frankl’s wide-ranging interests, however, introduced Frankl to the works of Kierkegaard. This friend had been reminded of Kierkegaard’s emphasis on living an authentic life, and he urged Frankl to pursue his interest in psychiatry. While still in medical school Frankl delivered a lecture to the Academic Society for Medical Psychology, of which Frankl was the founding vice-president, and used the term logotherapy for the first time (a few years later he first used the alternative term existential analysis; Frankl, 1995/2000). The word logos is Greek for “meaning,” and this third Viennese school of psychotherapy focuses on the meaning of human existence and man’s search for such a meaning. Logotherapy, therefore, focuses on man’s will-to-meaning, in contrast to Freud’s will-to-pleasure (the drive to satisfy the desires of the id, the pleasure principle) or Adler’s will-to-power (the drive to overcome inferiority and attain superiority; adopted from Nietzsche) (Frankl, 1946/1986, 1946/1992).
The will-to-meaning is, according to Frankl, the primary source of one’s motivation in life. It is not a secondary rationalization of the instinctual drives, and meaning and values are not simply defense mechanisms. As Frankl eloquently points out:
…as for myself, I would not be willing to live merely for the sake of my “defense mechanisms,” nor would I be ready to die merely for the sake of my “reaction formations.” Man, however, is able to live and even to die for the sake of his ideals and values! (pg. 105; Frankl, 1946/1992)
Unfortunately, one’s search for meaning can be frustrated. This existential frustration can lead to what Frankl identified as a noogenic neurosis (a neurosis of the mind or, in other words, the specifically human dimension). Frankl suggested that when neuroses arise from an individual’s inability to find meaning in their life, what they need is logotherapy, not psychotherapy. More specifically, they need help to find some meaning in their life, some reason to be. When reading Frankl’s examples of how he helps such people, and Frankl offers many of these examples in his writings, it seems so simple. But it must be remembered that it takes a great deal of experience, knowledge, and maturity, as well as an ability to put oneself in another’s shoes, in order to creatively think of how another person can find meaning in their life. It would be safe to say that many of us find it difficult to find meaning in our own lives, and research has indeed shown that the will-to-meaning is a significant concern throughout the world (Frankl, 1946/1992). In order to make sense of this problem, Frankl has suggested that we should not ask what we expect from life, but rather, we should understand that life expects something from us:
A colleague, an aged general practitioner, turned to me because he could not come to terms with the loss of his wife, who had died two years before. His marriage had been very happy, and he was now extremely depressed. I asked him quite simply: “Tell me what would have happened if you had died first and your wife had survived you?” “That would have been terrible,” he said. “How my wife would have suffered?” “Well, you see,” I answered, “your wife has been spared that, and it was you who spared her, though of course you must now pay by surviving and mourning her.” In that very moment his mourning had been given a meaning - the meaning of a sacrifice. (pg. xx; Frankl, 1946/1986)
The latter point brings us back to Frankl’s discussion of how one can find meaning in life: through creating a work or doing a deed; by experiencing something or encountering someone, particularly when love is involved; or by choosing one’s attitude toward unavoidable suffering. Those of us who have lost someone dear know how easily it leads to deep suffering. Frankl had already written the first version of The Doctor and the Soul when he entered the Theresienstadt concentration camp, so his views on how one should choose their attitude toward unavoidable suffering were put to a test that no research protocol could ever hope to achieve! His observations form the basis for much of Man’s Search for Meaning. Both his observations of others and his own reactions in this unimaginably horrible and tragic situation are quite fascinating:
…as we stumbled on for miles, slipping on icy spots, supporting each other time and again, dragging one another up and onward, nothing was said, but we both knew: each of was thinking his wife…my mind clung to my wife’s image…Real or not, her look was then more luminous than the sun…A thought transfixed me: for the first time in my life I saw the truth as it is set into song by so many poets, proclaimed as the final wisdom by so many thinkers. The truth - that love is the ultimate and the highest goal to which man can aspire. Then I grasped the meaning of the greatest secret that human poetry and human thought and belief have to impart: The salvation of man is through love and in love. (pp. 48-49; Frankl, 1946/1992)
…One evening, when we were already resting on the floor of our hut, dead tired, soup bowls in hand, a fellow prisoner rushed in and asked us to run out to the assembly grounds and see the wonderful sunset. Standing outside we saw sinister clouds glowing in the west and the whole sky alive with clouds of ever-changing shapes and colors, from steel blue to blood red…Then, after minutes of moving silence, one prisoner said to another, “How beautiful the world could be!” (pg. 51; Frankl, 1946/1992)
…The experiences of camp life show that man does have a choice of action. There were enough examples, often of a heroic nature, which proved that apathy could be overcome, irritability suppressed. Man can preserve a vestige of spiritual freedom, of independence of mind, even in such terrible conditions of psychic and physical stress.
We who lived in concentration camps can remember the men who walked through the huts comforting others, giving away their last piece of bread. They may have been few in number, but they offer sufficient proof that everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms - to choose one’s attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one’s own way. (pp. 74-75; Frankl, 1946/1992)
Discussion Question: Frankl considered the most important aspect of survival to be the ability to find meaning in one’s life. Have you found meaning in your life? Are there goals you have that you believe might add meaning to your life? Do you know anyone personally whose life seems to be filled with meaning, and if so, how does it appear to affect them?
Logotherapy as a Technique
Unfortunately, as noted by Frankl, not everyone can successfully accomplish the will-to-meaning. Those who rapidly declined toward death itself had lost the ability to have faith in the future; they could not identify any goal that provided meaning for their future. Such individual’s exist in what Frankl called an existential vacuum. We have no instincts that tell us what we have to do, fewer and fewer traditions that tell us what we should do, and we often don’t even know what we want to do. Therein lays the need for logotherapy. As a technique, logotherapy relies primarily on paradoxical intention and dereflection (Frankl, 1946/1986, 1946/1992). Paradoxical intention is based on a simple trap in which neurotic individuals often find themselves. When a person thinks about or approaches a situation that provokes a neurotic symptom, such as fear, the person experiences anticipatory anxiety. This anticipatory anxiety takes the form of the symptom, which reinforces their anxiety. And so on… In order to help people break out of this negative cycle, Frankl recommends having them focus intently on the very thing that evokes their symptoms, even trying to exhibit their symptoms more severely than ever before! As a result, the patient is able to separate themselves from their own neurosis, and eventually the neurosis loses its potency.
Similar to anticipatory anxiety, people often experience a compulsive inclination to observe themselves, resulting in hyper-reflection. For example, people who suffer from insomnia focus on their efforts to sleep, or people who cannot enjoy a sexual relationship often focus on their physical, sexual responses. Because of this intense focus on sleep, or having an orgasm, these very things are unattainable. In dereflection, patients are taught not to pay attention to what they desire. A person who cannot sleep might read in bed, they will eventually fall asleep. A person who cannot enjoy intimate sexuality could focus on their partner, and as a result they should experience satisfaction that they did not expect. In essence, whereas paradoxical intention teaches the patient to ridicule their symptoms, dereflection teaches the patient to ignore his or her symptoms (Frankl, 1946/1986).
Discussion Question: Logotherapy relies on paradoxical intention and dereflection to break the anticipatory anxiety that often leads to failure (and then, more anxiety). Are there situations where you find yourself getting anxious or nervous even before the situation begins? What steps, if any, have you taken to break out of that pattern?
The Search for Ultimate Meaning
Kierkegaard believed that man could never truly be in contact with the infinite and absolute God. Similarly, Frankl talked about a super-meaning to life, something that goes far deeper than logic. When Frankl told his daughter that the good Lord had cured her measles, his daughter reminded him that the good Lord had given her the measles in the first place. Since children may not benefit from the challenges of suffering as adults might, and even adults find it difficult to find meaning in truly horrible situations like the concentration camps of Nazi Germany or the gulags of the former Soviet Union, the meaning of life in the greater context of human societies is often not readily apparent. But as Frankl says:
This ultimate meaning necessarily exceeds and surpasses the finite intellectual capacities of man; in logotherapy, we speak in this context of a super-meaning. What is demanded of man is not, as some existential philosophers teach, to endure the meaninglessness of life, but rather to bear his incapacity to grasp its unconditional meaningfulness in rational terms. Logos is deeper than logic. (pg. 122; Frankl, 1946/1992)
In discussing the value of logotherapy, Frankl offered critiques of other popular fields in psychology and psychiatry. His most serious critique was of the deterministic nature of psychoanalysis. Frankl fervently believed in an individual’s freedom to transcend their self and choose to make the best of any situation. And he had plenty of experience to back up his opinion: “…I am a survivor of four camps - concentration camps, that is - and as such I also bear witness to the unexpected extent to which man is capable of defying and braving even the worst conditions conceivable” (pg. 47; Frankl, 1978). He did not, however, reject determinism entirely. Instead, he attributed determinism to the psychological dimension, whereas freedom exists within the noölogical dimension. He acknowledged Freud and Adler for teaching us to “unmask the neurotic.” As for behaviorism, Frankl acknowledged that it helped to “demythologize” neurosis, by pointing out that not every psychological problem is due to unconscious forces from early childhood, and he included Pavlov, Watson, and Skinner as great pioneers. Still, both psychoanalysis and behaviorism ignore the essential humanness of the individual.
Despite his emphasis on the individual human, Frankl did not consider logotherapy as belonging within humanistic psychology (or at least not within what he called pseudo-humanism; Frankl, 1978). He believed that humanistic psychology focused so much on the humanity of individuals, that they did not quite appreciate the uniqueness of each person. It is not enough to merely encounter another person. In order to be moved on the personal level there must be an element of love (love for another person, if not a more intimate and personal love as for a spouse or a child). As we will see below, Rollo May also considered love to be of great importance to our lives. The emphasis that Frankl placed on love may have something to do with his deep spirituality. Frankl believed in a spiritual unconscious, separate from the instinctual unconscious described by Freud (Frankl, 1948/2000). In order for an individual to experience an authentic existence, they must determine whether a given phenomenon (thoughts, feelings, impulses, etc.) is instinctual or spiritual, and then freely choose how to behave or respond. Frankl returned to Heidegger’s concept of Dasein, living according to the understanding that one is connected to Being. Although this concept may seem reminiscent of Jung’s collective unconscious, nothing could be further from the truth:
…It cannot be emphasized strongly enough that not only is the unconscious neither divine nor omniscient, but above all man’s unconscious relation to God is profoundly personal. The “unconscious God” must not be mistaken as an impersonal force operant in man. This understanding was the great mistake to which C. G. Jung fell prey. Jung must be credited with having discovered distinctly religious elements within the unconscious. Yet he misplaced this unconscious religiousness of man, failing to locate the unconscious God in the personal and existential region. Instead, he allotted it to the region of drives and instincts, where unconscious religiousness no longer remained a matter of choice and decision. According to Jung, something within me is religious, but it is not I who then is religious; something within me drives me to God, but it is not I who makes the choice and takes the responsibility. (pg. 70; Frankl, 1948/2000)
According to Frankl, the most human of all human phenomena is the will-to-meaning. Religion, or spirituality, seeks a will-to-ultimate-meaning. Once again, Frankl believed that Freudian psychoanalysis and Adlerian individual psychology had failed to sufficiently credit the self-transcendent quality of individuals who live authentic lives. It is in the study of authentic lives that “height psychology,” as Frankl called it, can address the higher aspirations of the human psyche. In other words, beyond seeking pleasure and/or power, there is man’s search for meaning (Frankl, 1948/2000).
Discussion Question: Frankl was a very spiritual man. He talked about super-meaning and a will-to-ultimate-meaning. Are you a spiritual and/or religious person? If yes, does your faith help to give meaning to your life? | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/09%3A_Viktor_Frankl_Rollo_May_and_Existential_Psychology/9.03%3A_Viktor_Frankl_and_Logotherapy.txt |
Rollo May (1909-1994) introduced existentialism to American psychologists, and has remained the best known proponent of this approach in America. Trained in a fairly traditional format as a psychoanalyst, May considered the detachment with which psychoanalysts approached their patients as a violation of social ethics. For example, if a psychoanalyst helps a patient to be the best they can be, and the person happens to earn their living in an unseemly or criminal way, it hardly seems proper (Stagner, 1988). On the other hand, who is to decide which values should be preferred in a particular society? In the pursuit of freedom, May suggested that sometimes individuals might reasonably oppose the standards or morality of their society. Politics, a wonderful topic for lively debates, is dependent on opposing viewpoints. Only when an individual lives an authentic life, however, should their opinion be considered valid, and existential psychology seeks to help individuals live authentic lives.
A Brief Biography of Rollo May
Rollo Reese May was born on April 21, 1909, in Ohio, and grew up in Marine City, Michigan. He attended Oberlin College in Ohio, graduating in 1930. Having always been interested in art and artistic creativity, he joined with a small group of artists and traveled to Europe, where they studied the local art of Poland. In order to remain in Europe, May took a teaching position with the American College at Salonika in Greece. When not teaching, he traveled widely throughout Greece, Poland, Romania, and Turkey. He attended the summer school taught by Alfred Adler. Deeply impressed by Adler (as Frankl had been), he nonetheless considered Adler’s theories overly simplistic and too general. This may well have been due to his awakening awareness of the tragic side of human life, keeping in mind that much of Europe suffered greatly during the depression between World War I and World War II (Reeves, 1977).
Upon returning to the United States, May worked as a student advisor and the editor of a student magazine at Michigan State University. In 1936, he enrolled at Union Theological Seminary in New York, with the intention of asking, and most likely hoping to find answers to, the ultimate questions about human life. Despite having no particular desire to become a minister, he did serve in a parish in Montclair, New Jersey for a while. While at the seminary, he became a lifelong friend of Paul Tillich, a well-known existential theologian. Tillich, whose classes May regularly attended, introduced May to the works of Kierkegaard and Heidegger. May also met Kurt Goldstein during this time, and became acquainted with Goldstein’s theories of self-actualization and anxiety as a reaction by organisms to catastrophic events. Regarding his time as a minister, May reflected that the only events which seemed to include an element of reality were the funerals (Reeves, 1977).
Shortly after graduating from the seminary, May began writing books on counseling and creative living. He worked as a counselor at the College of the City of New York, and trained as a psychoanalyst at the William Alanson White Institute of Psychiatry, Psychoanalysis, and Psychology in New York. His time at the training institute overlapped with Harry Stack Sullivan being the president of the William Alanson White Foundation, and Erich Fromm as a fellow associate. In 1946, May began a private practice in psychoanalysis, in 1948 he became a faculty member at the institute, and in 1949 he received the first Ph.D. in clinical psychology at Columbia University. His doctoral dissertation was published as The Meaning of Anxiety (May, 1950), a book that heavily cites the work of Freud and Kierkegaard on anxiety, as well as Fromm, Horney, and Tillich (May, 1950; Reeves, 1977).
Similar to Viktor Frankl, May’s life had taken a dramatic turn during this time, an uncontrollable event that threatened his life: May contracted tuberculosis. At the time, there were no effective treatments for this contagious disease, many people died from it, and like many others May had to spend several years at a sanitarium (Saranac Sanitarium in upstate New York). It was during his time in the sanitarium that May theorized about anxiety and came to one of the most important conclusions in his career. He determined that although Freud had done a masterful job of characterizing the effects of anxiety on the individual, it was Kierkegaard who had truly identified what anxiety is: the threat of becoming nothing. From this point on May could clearly be identified as an existential psychologist. He collaborated with Abraham Maslow, Carl Rogers, and Gordon Allport to present a symposium on existential psychology, in conjunction with the 1959 annual convention of American Psychological Association, which led to the publication of a book on the subject (Reeves, 1977).
As May’s career continued, he became a supervisory and training analyst at the William Alanson White Institute, and an adjunct professor of psychology in the graduate school at New York University. He gave a series of radio talks on existential psychology on a Canadian Broadcasting Corporation show, he served as a visiting professor at Harvard and Princeton, and he continued writing. His later books include works on dreams, symbolism, religion, and love. He eventually settled in California, where he died in 1994.
Anxiety
May considered anxiety to be the underlying cause of nearly every crisis, whether domestic, professional, economic, or political. He described the world we live in as an age of anxiety. Even though May published The Meaning of Anxiety in 1950, it is safe to say that his concerns are even more relevant today, particularly with the advent of the depersonalization of our world due to the computer age (Reeves, 1977). May considered a wide range of theories on anxiety, including philosophers, neurologists (Kurt Goldstein), and the major psychodynamic theorists (including Freud, Adler, Jung, Horney, Sullivan, and Fromm). He came to the conclusion that Freud had done the best job of explaining anxiety, but it was Kierkegaard who best understood anxiety. May was particularly impressed by Kierkegaard’s idea that anxiety must be understood in the context of an orientation toward freedom. Freedom is the goal of personality development, and although this freedom brings with it anxiety, it is through facing this anxiety that the possibility of freedom arises (May, 1950). In praise of Kierkegaard, May wrote:
…Kierkegaard is proclaiming that “self-strength” develops out of the individual’s successful confronting of anxiety-creating experiences; this is the way one becomes educated to maturity as a self. What is amazing in Kierkegaard is that despite his lack of the tools for interpreting unconscious material - which tools have been available in their most complete form only since Freud - he so keenly and profoundly anticipated modern psychoanalytic insight into anxiety; and that at the same time he placed these insights in the broad context of a poetic and philosophical understanding of human experience. (pg. 45; May, 1950)
In defining anxiety, May distinguished between anxiety and fear, and between normal anxiety and neurotic anxiety. According to May, “anxiety is the apprehension cued off by a threat to some value which the individual holds essential to his existence as a personality” (pg. 191; May, 1950). The threat may be either physical or psychological, such as facing death from tuberculosis or being imprisoned in a concentration camp (which, of course, brought the threat of death in addition to the loss of freedom), or the threat may challenge some other value that the individual identifies with their existence or personal identity (such as the loss of a career, a divorce, a challenge to patriotism in time of war, etc.). What differentiates anxiety from fear, is that fear is a reaction to a specific event, whereas anxiety is vague and diffuse. For example, during a robbery you may fear a man with a gun, but in America today many people are anxious about terrorism. No one can tell when or where terrorists may strike, or even whether they will be foreign terrorists (such as in the World Trade Center attacks) or American terrorists (such as the bombing of the federal building in Oklahoma City or the D.C. sniper killings). May carefully pointed out that using the terms “vague” and “diffuse” to describe anxiety should in no way diminish our understanding of the intensity and painfulness that anxiety can bring. Therein lies the difference between normal vs. neurotic anxiety (May, 1950).
Everyone faces challenges in life, but not everyone sees the same challenges as actual threats. Losing one’s job can be an opportunity to begin a new career, perhaps to go back to school to pursue that new career. However, the transition is often difficult, especially when one is used to being the primary wage earner in the family, and also if the family has to cut back on items they can no longer afford. So anxiety would be a reasonable reaction. That anxiety is considered normal if it is 1) not disproportionate to the objective threat, 2) does not involve mechanisms of intrapsychic conflict, and 3) does not require defense mechanisms for its management (May, 1950). Normal anxiety is often overlooked in adults since it is not particularly intense, especially compared to neurotic anxiety, and it can be managed constructively. It does not show itself in panic or other dramatic symptoms. Neurotic anxiety is, simply, the opposite of normal anxiety. It is disproportionate to the objective threat, it does require intrapsychic defense mechanisms, and it results in neurotic symptoms in spite of those defense mechanisms. It is important to keep in mind that we should not consider individuals who suffer from neurotic anxiety as suffering from objective weaknesses, but rather they suffer from inner psychological patterns and conflicts that prevent them from using their powers to cope.
True to his training in psychodynamic theory, May believed that the psychological patterns resulting in the inability to cope have their origin in childhood, particularly due to poor early relations between the infant and its parents, since an infant’s essential values arise from the security patterns established between the infant and its caregivers (as in Erikson’s first psychosocial crisis: trust vs. mistrust, see Chapter 7). One of the most important factors seems to be the infant’s subjective interpretation of rejection by its primary caregiver, and that subjectivity is influenced by expectations that form later in life (e.g., middle- and upper-class children, who expect more support from their parents, are especially prone to react to rejection with neurotic anxiety; May, 1950).
Discussion Question \(1\)
May felt that we must understand anxiety in relation to freedom, or rather, as the fear that we will lose our freedom. He said that some of this anxiety is normal, and only in extreme cases does it become neurotic anxiety. What are some of the situations in your life that make you anxious, and how might they be a threat to your personal freedom? Do you think the level of these anxieties is normal, or is it severe enough to perhaps be considered neurotic?
Culture, Anxiety, and Hostility
May also addressed the effects of culture on anxiety, and the close interrelationship between anxiety and hostility. Culture affects both the kinds and the quantities of anxiety experienced by individuals. Beyond the essential relationship between infant and caregiver, the determinants of personality that each of us consider essential to our existence as a personality are largely cultural. Indeed, even the nature of the infant/caregiver relationship is subject to cultural influence. The amount of anxiety most people are likely to experience is determined, in part, by the stability of the culture. For example, if a culture is relatively stable and unified, there will be less anxiety throughout that culture (May, 1950). Today, however, many societies are in dramatic flux, due in large part to the powerful trend toward globalization.
As psychologists have begun to examine anxiety in different groups around the world, a variety of interesting, and sometimes disturbing, results have been found. Keep in mind, however, that these are generalities, and do not necessarily apply to each individual within any group. Generally, Asians are more anxious than Europeans and White Americans, who are more anxious than Black Americans and Africans, and there may be a neurological basis for these relative anxiety levels (Rushton, 1999). However, when looking at the specific form of anxiety related to taking academic tests, Black Americans and Chilean students demonstrate higher levels of test anxiety than White Americans (Clawson, Firment, & Trower, 1981; Guida & Ludlow, 1989). One suggestion for the higher levels of anxiety among Blacks in America is that our society is much less sociocentric than most African cultures. Thus, Blacks in America, even if they have lived here for generations, still experience the effects of their displacement from Africa when the culture they carried with them is at odds with Western cultural expectations (Okeke at al., 1999), and even more so when an individual seems to be at odds with most members of their own cultural group (Copeland, 2006). Indeed, the greater the discrepancy between one’s individual cultural expectations and the cultural expectations of the majority of society, the greater the anxiety an individual experiences. This is particularly true during attempts at intercultural communication (Matsumoto & Juang, 2004). Any subsequent breakdown of intercultural communication, which is more likely during periods of high anxiety, can either lead to or enhance pre-existing hostility, prejudice, discrimination, and scapegoating (Whitley & Kite, 2006). One important challenge to intercultural communication in psychology is the need for clinical psychologists to recognize the growing number of anxiety disorders unique to non-Western cultures, such as: hwa-bung (Korea), koro (Malaysia and Southern China), nervios (Latin America), dhat syndrome (India), susto (Latin America), and taijin kyofusho (Japan) (Castillo, 1997).
Culture can influence individuals in a wide variety of ways. May (1950) used the example of competitive individual success in the Western world as his main example, which he considered to be the dominant goal in America. There are many negative effects of this competition, including the high incidences of gastric ulcers and heart disease in our society. Less than a decade later, Freidman and Rosenman (1959) published their classic study on the relationship between Type A behavior (studied in highly competitive businessmen) and cardiovascular disease. Subsequent studies have shown that the key component of Type A behavior predictive of heart disease is hostility, which we will discuss in more detail below (Dembrowski et al., 1985; Lachar, 1993; MacDougal et al., 1985). There has also been a great deal of discussion in our society about media influences on body image, the relationship between unreasonable expectations for women to be thin and the incidence of eating disorders in girls and women, and the repression of female sexuality in many cultures. Goldenberg (2005) recently presented an existential perspective on the body itself as a threat. Cultural beliefs often help to overcome fears of mortality by convincing individuals that they are of greater value than other, lower animals. However, despite the beliefs of many that only humans have a soul, our body is still a mortal animal. As a reaction to the anxiety presented by the reality of our mortal body, many people act in a hostile fashion toward their own bodies, ranging from denying themselves healthy physical relationships with others (e.g., sexual repression) to outright self-destructive behavior (e.g., anorexia nervosa). The problem reaches its extreme, however, when one powerful group directs its hostility in an organized fashion toward another group.
The relationship between anxiety and hostility, according to May, involves a vicious circle. Anxiety gives rise to hostility, and hostility gives rise to increased anxiety. But which comes first? May believed that it was anxiety that underlies hostility, and the evidence can be found in clinical cases involving repressed hostility:
Granted the interrelation between hostility and anxiety, which affect is generally basic? There is ground for believing that, even though hostility may be the specific affect present in many situations, anxiety is often present below the hostility…For one example, in some of the psychosomatic studies of patients with hypertension…it has been found that the reason the patients repressed their hostility was that they were anxious and dependent...The hostility would not have to be repressed in the first place except that the individual is anxious and fears counter-hostility or alienation… (pg. 223; May, 1950)
In Reeves’ analysis of May’s theory (1977), Reeves discusses one of the most important social issues to have faced the United States: the civil rights movement of the 1960s. When an individual’s sense of selfhood is challenged by dramatic changes in society, it can be a very painful experience. And one is likely to resent those responsible for those changes. While it is true that many White people in America supported the civil rights movement, White people in the Deep South (and elsewhere, of course) turned their anxiety, and its associated hostility, toward Blacks. It should not be necessary here to describe the many terrible acts of violence that followed. Suffice it to say that the federal government had to use military troops to intervene in some of the worst cases. Today, we face a similar problem in the war on terrorism. Given the often unequal and unfair manner in which globalization brings vastly different cultures into conflict, and the ease with which so many people can travel the globe, perhaps we should not be surprised at the dramatic level of terrorism in the world today.
Connections Across Cultures: Terrorists and Terrorism
Since September 11, 2001, when agents of the terrorist organization Al Qaeda destroyed the World Trade Center in New York City and killed some 3,000 people, the United States has been involved in what has been called an international war on terrorism. As the war on terrorism developed, it had two main goals: to capture Osama bin Laden, leader of Al Qaeda and mastermind of the World Trade Center bombings, and to overthrow Saddam Hussein, the dictator of Iraq (for his alleged role in supporting international terrorism). To date, this war has lasted much longer than World War II, we have spent hundreds of billions of dollars, and thousands more young American men and women have died fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq. Many Iraqi and Afghan civilians, as well as additional coalition military personnel, have also died. Saddam Hussein was removed from power in Iraq; he was also tried, convicted, and executed. It took nearly 10 years, but Osama bin Laden was finally tracked down and killed in a raid in Pakistan by U.S. Navy Seals. However, Al Qaeda is still committing acts of terrorism, Iraq is descending once again into bitter sectarian violence (rising to the level of civil war), and Americans continue to die fighting in Afghanistan as our intended date for withdrawal slowly draws near (after 13 years!). One thing that will not be addressed in this section, because it does not exist, is an easy answer to these problems.
Please allow me to share a little personal history here. When the Iranian revolution under Ayatollah Khomeini overthrew the Shah of Iran, and the revolutionaries captured the American embassy in Tehran and took sixty-six people hostage (fifty-two of those hostages were held for well over a year before being released), I was in the United States Marine Corps Reserve. I received a phone call at 2:00 a.m. on a Friday morning at my apartment in Cambridge, MA. By midnight, that same day, my reserve unit was in Camp Lejeune, NC, with full combat gear, ready to go to war in Iran. We spent the weekend preparing, though President Carter ultimately chose not to send us overseas. Approximately 10 years later, when the first Gulf War erupted after Iraq invaded Kuwait, my sister took part in Operation Desert Storm. As an Air Force nurse, she was sent to England to help prepare a hospital for wounded military personnel being evacuated from the Middle East (fortunately casualties were minimal). I considered re-enlisting in the Marine Corps at that time, since I certainly wasn’t going to sit at home while my own sister “fought” for our country and our allies. Thankfully, that first Gulf War was brief and, seemingly, simple. So I have followed events in the Middle East carefully ever since, and when Al Qaeda attacked us in New York, I saw it as the latest in a continuation of events in my own life since 1979. For people in the Middle East, however, it was a continuation of events that have lasted for thousands of years.
What I believe matters most for Americans today is to begin to make an honest effort to understand terrorism, its causes, its goals, and how best to deal with it around the world. First, we must dispense with misconceptions. Terrorism and Islam are not one and the same. In an insightful and easily readable book entitled Islam versus Terrorism, Firooz Zadeh (2002) discusses how Islam opposes violence and murder, especially of innocent women and children. He also attempts to identify what is and is not terrorism, and in that effort he identifies eight types of terrorism: state terrorism, religious terrorism, criminal terrorism, terrorism by those who are mentally sick, political terrorism, oppositional terrorism, copy cat terrorism, and victim terrorism. According to Zadeh, the highest cost to society results from state terrorism. When the United States supports corrupt, terrorist governments in other parts of the world, our credibility as a nation fighting terrorism is suspect at best. Has this been the case? Yes, and in the worst possible way: we switch sides as it serves our political and economic interests. The United States helped to train Osama bin Laden and the Taliban fighters in Afghanistan when we wanted them to fight the Russians. Now we call them enemies. We provided weapons and training to Saddam Hussein’s army when they were fighting the Iranians, because of the hostages taken in Tehran. Now we have deposed Hussein. We also sold weapons to Iran, and used the money to help support the Contras (freedom fighters or terrorists, depending on your point of view) trying to overthrow the leftist Sandinista government of Nicaragua. Zadeh proposes that people in the Middle East cannot trust the United States, except in one area: our support of Israel. And since other Middle Eastern countries see Israel as the one obstacle to a Palestinian homeland, they disapprove of that support. It does not matter whether the actions of the United States were right or wrong, whether they really were in our best interests or not. What matters is how the rest of the world sees us now, and whether our top government officials are willing to consider how we are viewed globally and to act responsibly in terms of foreign policy in order to ensure what is best for all people around the world. In addressing the Middle East in particular, Fathali Moghaddam wrote:
Islamic communities in many parts of the world are experiencing a profound and historic identity crisis, one tragic manifestation of which is terrorism. In order to understand and avert this destructive trend, we must come to grips with the monumental crisis of identity that is paralyzing moderate movements but energizing fanatic forces in Islamic communities.
…Why do we need to understand how the terrorists see the world? Because this is the best way for us to find an effective means to end terrorism…Seeing the world from the terrorists’ point of view does not mean condoning terrorism; rather, it means better understanding terrorism so as to end it. (pg. ix; Moghaddam, 2006)
As mentioned above, there are many different forms of terrorism, so it is difficult to define exactly what it is. Nevertheless, in an effort to do so, Moghaddam (2005) defines terrorism as “politically motivated violence, perpetrated by individuals, groups, or state-sponsored agents, intended to instill feelings of terror and helplessness in a population in order to influence decision making and to change behavior.” Moghaddam suggests that psychologists need to play an important role in understanding terrorism for two main reasons: the basis for terrorist actions is typically subjectively interpreted values and beliefs, and the actions of terrorists are designed to cause specific psychological experiences, i.e., terror and helplessness. Moghaddam (2005, 2006) proposes a metaphor for how one becomes a terrorist, based on climbing a staircase, in which options are perceived to become more and more limited as one climbs the stairs. The most significant factor is the condition in which many people live on the ground floor, before they even consider climbing that staircase. Many people in this world live in abject poverty, under repressive governments that are unjust. When individuals see no hope within the system, and they lack any political means to effect change, then a path toward terrorism becomes perhaps the only reasonable possibility. Still, very few people are likely to become suicide bombers.
Individuals living in desperate conditions may move to the first floor on the staircase toward terrorism, where they evaluate their perceived options to fight unfair treatment. If there appear to be no options for justice within one’s society, no opportunity to be heard, and no opportunity for personal mobility, the individual may then move to the second floor. Here the individual begins to displace their aggression. This often involves education/propaganda that identifies a clear target, for example the United States, also known as the “Great Satan.” This is the important beginning of an us-versus-them mentality. On the third floor, individuals become morally engaged with the terrorist organization. While we may see terrorists as immoral, they are beginning to believe that they are fighting for a just cause, against the immoral repression of their chosen target. As they move to the fourth floor, they solidify their categorical thinking (the us-versus-them mentality) and begin to see the terrorist organization, and terrorist acts, as legitimate. At this point there is little chance that they can leave the terrorist organization alive. For specific individuals, the training necessary to carry out a terrorist act takes place, often very quickly. Not only does a terrorist need to learn about weapons and tactics, they must also be trained to sidestep the natural, biological inhibition against killing other human beings. Two factors in helping to prepare people to kill are the intense indoctrination in the belief that their actions are for a greater good and secrecy. If an attack is done suddenly and without warning, victims have no opportunity to submit or to beg for mercy. The act occurs before the terrorist might become compassionate as he or she faces their intended victims (Moghaddam, 2005, 2006). Based on this model, Moghaddam proposes four steps that are necessary to stop terrorism by interrupting the formation of new terrorists. First, there must be prevention. Unfortunately, our government has a long history of choosing short-term fixes, rather than long-term preventative measures. Case in point: America’s failure in the war on drugs. Aggressive responses aimed at individuals only provide an opening for someone new to step in and continuing using and/or selling drugs, and the same is true of terrorists. We need to work toward eliminating the pathway to terrorism, so we will not need to use the military and/or FBI to track down individuals (except, of course, in extreme cases such as terrorism that results from psychological disorder - e.g., consider the case of Theodore Kaczynski, the Unabomber). In addition, Moghaddam suggests supporting contextualized democracy, educating against categorical thinking, and promoting interobjectivity and justice. In order for there to be a long-term solution, there must be international dialogue and improved intercultural understanding (Moghaddam, 2005).
Returning to the misconception in the minds of many Americans that terrorism is synonymous with Islam, let’s examine where known terrorist organizations are located around the world. Fairly notorious organizations have come from Northern Ireland (e.g., the Irish Republican Army and the Ulster Defense Association), throughout mainland Europe (e.g., the Red Army Faction in Germany, the Red Brigades in Italy, and Action Directe in France), throughout the Middle East (e.g., Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Palestinian group Hamas, the Stern Gang that fought for the establishment of Israel, and Al Qaeda), Africa, Asia, Latin America, Canada, and the United States (e.g., the Animal Liberation Front, Aryan Nations, the Black Panthers, and the Ku Klux Klan). As of 1999, at least twenty-eight well-organized terrorist groups existed, and when one takes into account factions within those groups and smaller, yet still identifiable, groups, as many as eighty-three terrorists groups have been identified around the world (Henderson, 2001). Some are primarily political, and some are primarily religious. Some are global, and some are more local. They include people and cultures of great diversity: Black, White, Asian, Latin, Catholic, Protestant, Muslim, Hindu, etc. Although terrorism appears to arise out of poverty and desperation, terrorists themselves, or at least the leaders, tend to be better educated than most and they are well versed in propaganda and well trained in weapons and tactics (Moghaddam, 2005; Zadeh, 2002). The only characteristic that all terrorists seem to share is an extreme commitment to violence, which arises out of desperation and perceived injustice, and is viewed as the only means to be heard and to effect change.
So can terrorism effect change, is terrorism effective? One can easily find authors who argue that it does indeed work (Dershowitz, 2002) or that it always fails (Carr, 2002). Alan Dershowitz (2002) argues that the very reason terrorism works is everything we have looked at so far: an effort to understand the root causes of terrorism and the terrorists themselves. Accordingly, he says:
We must take precisely the opposite approach to terrorism. We must commit ourselves never to try to understand or eliminate its alleged root causes, but rather to place it beyond the pale of dialogue and negotiation. Our message must be this: even if you have legitimate grievances, if you resort to terrorism as a means toward eliminating them we will simply not listen to you, we will not try to understand you, and we will certainly never change any of our policies toward you. Instead, we will hunt you down and destroy your capacity to engage in terror. (pp. 24-25; Dershowitz, 2002)
As a case in point, Dershowitz cites the awarding of observer status at the United Nations to the Palestinian Liberation Organization only after Palestinian terrorists began hijacking commercial airliners. Prior to the hijackings, 20 years of pleading their case to the United Nations had little effect. Dershowitz then offers a timeline that appears to clearly establish an effective relationship in which terrorism became more and more effective over time (from 1968-1999) in eliciting international recognition and support for the Palestinian cause. In contrast, Caleb Carr (2002) views terrorism entirely within the discipline of military history. He considers today’s terrorism to be nothing more than a modern permutation of warfare against civilians in order to break their support for either leaders or policies that the terrorists oppose, the origins of which are as old as human conflict itself. Viewing terrorism as warfare has certain interesting implications. Throughout history, those who wage war against civilians ultimately defeated themselves by turning sentiment against them. On 9/11, Al Qaeda attacked civilians to a degree that has not been seen in ages:
…In so doing, the organizers, sponsors, and foot soldiers of every terrorist group involved in the September 11 attacks have unwittingly ensured that their extremist cause will be discredited among many of their sympathizers, disowned by most of their former sponsors, and finally defeated by their enemies: two thousand years of the lessons of terror dictate that this is the ultimate fate that awaits the attackers, no matter how many noncombatants they manage to kill along the way. (pp. 223-224; Carr, 2002).
Carr also addresses the other most important implication of treating terrorism as warfare: it must be met with warfare, but that warfare must not be excessive, such that it might also be viewed as terrorism. If our response to terrorism is excessive military might, then the tide of public opinion can swing back in favor of Al Qaeda, especially in Muslim countries where the United States is not trusted.
Echoing Carr’s concerns about the extent and nature of our military actions in the war on terror, one way in which terrorism might work against us, without seeming to have gained what was intended (if we can even know what was intended), is if our fundamental democratic principles change. In The Lesser Evil: Political Ethics in an Age of Terror, Michael Ignatieff (2004) argues that terrorism must be met with force, and that such force is a lesser evil than the terrorism that necessitated the response. The danger lies in succumbing to the greater evil of seeking revenge. Dershowitz (2002) provides a compelling case for how an amoral society could control and possibly eliminate all terrorism, but America is not an amoral society. Our responses are constrained by the constitution and by the political debate that forms the very basis of our democracy. When we respond to terrorist acts, we must consider what we want that response to accomplish:
Terrorism requires us to think carefully about who we are as free peoples and what we need to do in order to remain so. When we are confronted with terrorist violence, we cannot allow the claims of national security to trump the claims of liberty, since what we are trying to defend is our continued existence as a free people. Freedom must set a limit to the measures we employ to maintain it. (pg. 145; Ignatieff, 2004)
Finally, can the ultimate answer to terrorism be found in promoting democratic governments in every nation? The war on terror has led us to depose both Saddam Hussein in Iraq and the Taliban in Afghanistan, and to replace them with democratically elected governments. Only time will tell whether those governments will survive, but there is reason for caution. Religious turmoil continues in the Middle East. In America, our constitution provides for separation of church and state, and that separation has become an important tradition. But for Muslims, the idea of a secular democracy, one that is not guided by Allah, is simply inconceivable. They are not opposed to democracy per se, indeed it has been argued that Islam is likely to eventually lead to pluralist democracies (Aslan, 2005). But to pressure Islamic countries into accepting the secular democracy that we hold so dear is, according to Robert Shedinger (2004), equivalent to declaring war on Islam. So what appears to be essential to promoting stability in the Middle East, and elsewhere, is an effort to support contextual democracy, that is, forms of democracy that fit with the culture of the people who will create and participate in that democracy (Aslan, 2005; Moghaddam, 2005, 2006; Shedinger, 2004; Zadeh, 2002).
Integration and the Human Dilemma
In the preface to Man’s Search for Himself (May, 1953), May presents the existential philosophy that there is meaning to be found in challenges and suffering, and that psychologists in particular may find a special opportunity in such circumstances:
When our society, in its time of upheaval in standards and values, can give us no clear picture of “what we are and what we ought to be,”…we are thrown back on the search for ourselves. The painful insecurity on all sides gives us new incentive to ask, Is there perhaps some important source of guidance and strength we have overlooked?…How can anyone undertake the long development toward self-realization in a time when practically nothing is certain, either in the present or the future?…The psychotherapist has no magic answers…But there is something in addition to his technical training and his own self-understanding…This something is the wisdom the psychotherapist gains in working with people who are striving to overcome their problems. He has the extraordinary, if often taxing, privilege of accompanying persons through their intimate and profound struggles to gain new integration. (pg. 7; May, 1953)
Integration, according to May, is similar to Heidegger’s concept of Dasein (being-in-the-world). As conscious, free, and responsible beings our goal should be to separate ourselves from the conformist, automaton masses (the en-soi, according to Sartre) and progressively integrate with others in freely chosen love and creative work (May, 1953), or as Clement Reeves puts it: “To understand and elucidate the specific, distinguishing characteristics of the human being, and to grasp what it is to achieve courageous, decisive, integrated response to the challenge inherent in existence…” (Reeves, 1977). The process of integration is lifelong, and should be appropriate for whatever age each one of us happens to be right now. May suggests that a healthy child of eight, who is fulfilling his capacity of self-conscious choice for a child of eight years old, is more of a person than a neurotic adult who is 30 years old. Likewise, a person who can face death courageously at the age of thirty is more mature than someone 80 years old who “cringes and begs still to be shielded from reality” (May, 1953). Thus, it is important to live each moment with freedom, honesty, and responsibility. If each of us lives within the present moment, working to fulfill our potential, being true to whom we are and the situations within which we live, May proposes that we will experience joy and gratification:
…Does not the uncertainty of our time teach us the most important lesson of all - that the ultimate criteria are the honesty, integrity, courage and love of a given moment of relatedness? If we do not have that, we are not building for the future anyway; if we do have it, we can trust the future to itself. (pg. 276; May, 1953)
One of the challenges to living an integrated life is seen in what May described as the human dilemma (May, 1967). Are we the subject of our lives, or are we an object in our world? When we become absorbed in the details of our responsibilities and actions, when we allow ourselves to be controlled and directed in order to accomplish our assigned tasks, when we become slaves to the clock, doing this and that, going here and there, as others expect us to, we are viewing ourselves as objects. This is reminiscent of what Karen Horney called the tyranny of the should. On the other hand, when we consider our feelings, wishes, and desires, when we are true to ourselves, or living authentically, then we are viewing ourselves as subjects, as active participants in our own lives. According to May (1967), the human dilemma arises out of our capacity to experience ourselves as both subject and object at the same time. But how can opposite poles of the human experience both be true? It is in the process between the two poles that development of human consciousness develops, both deepening and widening that consciousness. This is essentially the same idea, though in different form, used by Heidegger and Sartre in describing the unique nature of human beings. For Heidegger this nothingness was the undefined distinction between Being and beings, for Sartre it was the shell that surrounded the pour-soi.
May believed that existential psychology occupied a space somewhere between the two extremes that existed, and continue to exist, in psychology: behaviorism vs. humanism. May rejected Skinner’s arguments that all human behavior can be understood in terms of stimuli and responses, declaring that there is ample evidence in both clinical practice and everyday life of people being active participants in their view of, actions in, and reactions to their world. He was equally critical of Carl Rogers, believing that humanistic psychologists no longer recognized very real irrational behavior, as well as aggression and hostility (May, 1967). He believed that psychology had become trapped in a misguided desire to define everything scientifically, and according to rules that then determined each psychologist’s view of the world and their patients. As a caution to those psychologists who cannot see beyond their theories, May wrote:
Now I am certainly aware, if I may say so without sounding patronizing, that the compelling need for honesty is one of the motives which leads psychologists to seek quantitative measures…I am also aware that research in our day has to be carefully set up so that the results are teachable and can be built upon by others. The compelling drive to get at the truth is what improves us all as psychologists, and is part and parcel of intellectual integrity. But I do urge that we not let the drive for honesty put blinders on us and cut off our range of vision so that we miss the very thing we set out to understand - namely, the living human being. (pg. 14; May, 1967)
discussion question \(2\)
May suggested that we need to separate ourselves from the conformist masses, and then integrate ourselves with others in free and responsible ways. Are you a follower, or a leader? Either way, do you consciously choose the role you play, thereby living an authentic life?
Love and Intentionality
Love was a very important topic for May. Simply put, “To be capable of giving and receiving mature love is as sound a criterion as we have for the fulfilled personality” (May, 1953). He was certainly not alone. Harry Harlow, best known for his studies on contact comfort, described love as “a wondrous state, deep, tender, and rewarding,” and Abraham Maslow said “We must understand love; we must be able to teach it, to create it, to predict it, or else the world is lost to hostility and to suspicion” (Harlow, 1975; Maslow, 1975). However, there are “a million and one” types of relationships that people call love, so it remains a perplexing issue (May, 1953).
May talked about four types of love in Western tradition: sex, eros, philia, and agape (May, 1969). Sex and eros are closely related, but they are different. Sex is what we also call lust or libido, whereas eros is the drive of love to procreate or create. As changes in society allowed the more open study of sex, prompted by the work of people like Sigmund Freud and Wilhelm Reich, May noted three particular paradoxes. First, our so-called enlightenment has not removed the sexual problems in our culture. In the past, an individual could refrain from sexual activity using the moral guidelines of society as an explanation. As casual sex became common, even expected, individuals had to face expressing their own morality as just that: their own! This also created a new source of anxiety for some, namely the possibility that their personal relationships might carry an expectation of sexual activity, and that if they did not comply they might not be able to continue dating someone they liked. The second paradox is that “the new emphasis on technique in sex and love-making backfires” (May, 1969). Emphasizing technique (or prowess) can result in a mechanistic attitude toward making love, possibly leading to alienation, feelings of loneliness, and depersonalization. This can lead to the anticipatory anxiety described by Frankl. Finally, May believed that our sexual freedom was actually a new form of Puritanism. There is a state of alienation from the body, a separation of emotion from reason, and the use of the body as a machine. Whereas in the Victorian era people tried to be in love without falling into sex, today many people try to have sex without falling in love.
Philia and agape are also related to one another, as with sex and love. Philia refers to feelings of friendship or brotherly love, whereas agape is the love devoted to caring for others. Friendship during childhood is very important, and May believed it was essential for meaningful and loving relationships as adults, including those involving eros. Indeed, the tension created by eros in terms of continuous attraction and continuous passion would be unbearable if philia did not enter into the equation and allow one to relax in the pleasant and friendly company of the object of one’s desires. Harry Harlow, once again, showed that the opportunity to make friends was as essential in the development of young monkeys as it appears to be in humans (cited in May, 1969). In the West, however, given our highly individualistic and competitive society, deep, meaningful friendships seem to be something of the past, especially among men. May cautions, however, that since the evidence shows the importance of friendship during development perhaps we should remember the value of having good friends.
Finally we have agape, a selfless love beyond any hope of gain for oneself. May compared this love to the biological aspect of nature in which a parent will fight to the death in defense of their offspring. With agape, we run the risk of being like God, in the sense that we know others never act without some degree of their own interests in mind. Similarly, we don’t want to be loved in an ethereal sense, or on the other hand only for our body. We want to be loved completely. So, all true love involves some element of the other types of love, no matter how little or how obscured it may be (May, 1969).
Figure \(1\)
Agape is exemplified in the bond between a parent and their child.
In the foreword to Love and Will (May, 1969) May acknowledged that some of his readers might find it odd that he combined the two topics in one book, but he felt strongly that the topics belong together. He considered both love and will to be interdependent, they are processes in which people reach out to influence others, to help to mold and create the consciousness of others. Love without will is sentimental and experimental, whereas will without love is manipulative. Only by remaining open to the influence of others can we likewise influence them, so love must have an honest purpose, and purpose must be taken with care.
Will, or will power as it is more commonly known, was one of the earliest subjects in American psychology, having been examined in detail by William James as early as 1890 (see James, 1892/1992) and again in 1897 in The Will to Believe (James, 1897/1992). May considered Sigmund Freud’s greatest discovery to be the uncovering of unconscious desires and motives. Although many people may believe themselves to be acting out of higher ideals, most of us are, in reality, acting according to psychologically determined factors of which we are unaware. Nonetheless, May considered this to be one of the most unfortunate results of Freud’s work. By accepting determinism, we undermine the influence of will and making decisions. As May put it, Freud’s theory suggests that we are “not driving any more, but driven” (May, 1969).
The suggestion that we are no longer in charge of our own lives, that we are driven by psychological determinism, seems strange to those who believe that never before have people had such power, both in terms of individual freedom and in the collective conquest of nature. But May referred to a contradiction in will, the contrast between our feelings of powerlessness and self-doubt and the societal assurances that we can do anything we set our minds to. May believed that we exist in a “curious predicament,” in that the technical wonders that make us feel so powerful are the very same processes that overwhelm us (May, 1969):
Thus, the crisis in will does not arise from either the presence or absence of power in the individual’s world. It comes from the contradiction between the two - the result of which is a paralysis of will. (pg. 189; May, 1969)
Will alone is not the driving force that leads us to responsible and authentic lives. Underlying will is something May called intentionality. Intentionality is the structure that gives meaning to experience, it is both how we perceive the world and how the world can be perceived by us. In other words, through our perceptual processes we influence the world around us; we affect the very things that we perceive. Intentionality is a bridge between subject and object (May, 1969). Compare this once again to the nothingness between beings and Being (à la Heidegger), or between the en-soi and the pour-soi (à la Sartre). Still, our ability to reach and form the very objects that we perceive, in other words, to participate actively in our lives, can be dramatically curtailed by the problem addressed by May early in his career, anxiety:
Overwhelming anxiety destroys the capacity to perceive and conceive one’s world, to reach out toward it to form and re-form it. In this sense, it destroys intentionality. We cannot hope, plan, promise, or create in severe anxiety; we shrink back into a stockade of limited consciousness hoping only to preserve ourselves until the danger is past. (pp. 244; May, 1969)
discussion question \(3\)
Consider the different loves in your life. How do they differ? How have they brought meaning to your life? Has your view of what love is changed during your life, in either good or bad ways?
The Daimonic: Source of Violence and Creativity
The daimonic, according to May, is “any natural function which has the power to take over the whole person” (May, 1969). It can be either destructive or creative, and is often both. In this way it is similar to Jung’s concept of the shadow, and May himself made that comparison (May, 1991; see also Diamond, 1996, Reeves, 1977). In fact, it is the mixture of good and evil in the daimonic that protects us from the dangers of excess, whether excess good or the passivity of feeling powerless. When May did not know whether he would live or die from tuberculosis, he realized that his feelings of helplessness were turning into passivity, and that this was sure to lead to his death (as he had seen with others). He described this experience as the product of his innocence, and that because he was innocent he allowed the bacteria infecting his body to do violence to him. However, when he chose to fight the disease, when he asserted his will to live, he began to make steady progress and, indeed, he recovered. In this sense, May had chosen to allow the daimonic to take over his self in the interest of self preservation. In each instance, how one allows the daimonic to take over is influenced by personal responsibility (Reeves, 1977).
When the daimonic takes over without one having made a responsible choice, however, it can lead to violence toward others. Our lives often involve conflict between those who have power and those who do not. When a person feels powerless, helpless, insignificant, they can lash out under the control of the daimonic. According to May, violence is bred in impotence and apathy (May, 1972). This can be particularly important for those who have little or no advantage in our society. In Power and Innocence (May, 1972), May described a patient who was a young, Black woman. Being both Black and female, born before the civil rights movement, she was about as powerless as one could be in America. Her stepfather had forced her to serve as a prostitute for years. Although quite intelligent, and successful in school and college, she felt so helpless that May described her as having “no active belief that she deserved to be helped.” An important aspect of therapy for this patient was to get in touch with her anger, to get in touch with the violence that had been done to her and that she wished to do to others.
In considering the case of this young woman, May concluded that we must not simply condemn all violence and try to eliminate even the possibility of it. To do so would be to take away a part of full humanity. In this context, May criticizes humanistic psychology and its emphasis on fulfilling self-actualization, an emphasis that May felt moved toward greater moral perfection. However, the recognition that we are not perfect, that each of us has good and evil within, prohibits us from moral arrogance. Recognizing this leads to the restraint necessary for making forgiveness possible.
Our ability to achieve good is dependent on who we are, and who we are is based partly on our own creativity. Since humans are not simply driven by instinct and fixed action patterns, in contrast to every other creature on earth we must create ourselves. This creation must take place within the world that exists around us, and must take into account all of the emotions and predispositions that we do carry with us as biological organisms.
Art - and creative activities of all kinds - can provide comparatively healthy outlets for the constructive expression of anger and rage. Creativity cannot, however, always substitute for psychotherapy. Nevertheless, creativity is at the very core of the psychotherapeutic project: The patient is encouraged to become more creative in psychologically restructuring his or her inner world, and then to continue this creative process in the outer world, not only by accepting and adjusting to reality, but, whenever possible, by reshaping it…
“Creativity” can be broadly defined as the constructive utilization of the daimonic. Creativity is called forth from each one of us by the inevitable conflicts and chaos inherent in human existence… (pp. 255-256; Diamond, 1996)
Pursuing this creativity is not easy, however. We live in a world that is rapidly changing. Since May’s death in 1994 change in the world has probably even accelerated. May asked whether we would withdraw in anxiety and panic as our foundations where shaken, or would we actively choose to participate in forming the future (May, 1975). Choosing to live in the future requires leaping into the unknown, going where others have not been, and therefore cannot guide us. It involves what existentialists call the anxiety of nothingness (May, 1975). Making this bold choice requires courage. One of the reasons we need to be courageous is that we must fully commit ourselves to pursuing a responsible creation of the future, but at the same time we must recognize that sometimes we will be wrong. Those who claim they are absolutely right can be dangerous, since such an attitude can lead to dogmatism, or worse, fanaticism (May, 1975).
Finally, not only must we accept that we might make bad choices, we must also recognize that our creativity is limited. In The Courage to Create (May, 1975), May described having attended a conference where the introductory speaker declared that there is no limit to the possibilities of the human being. Following this statement, the discussion at the conference was a flop. May realized that if there is no limit to what we can accomplish, then there really aren’t any problems any more, we only need to wait until our potentiality catches up with our situation and the problem solves itself. May offered a rather amusing example to clarify this point:
…it is like putting someone into a canoe and pushing him out into the Atlantic toward England with the cheery comment, “The sky’s the limit.” The canoer is only too aware of the fact that an inescapably real limit is also the bottom of the ocean. (pg. 113, May, 1975)
Another inescapable limit is our death. There is no creative act that can change the fact that we will die someday, and that we cannot know when or how it will happen. May believed, however, that these limits are valuable, that creativity itself needs limits. He proposed that consciousness arises from our awareness of these limits, and from the struggle against these limits. May compared this concept to Adler’s theory that much of what we as individuals, and also society as a whole, are arises from our efforts to compensate for inferiority. Thus, our limits lead to what May called a passion for form. In its passion for form, the mind is actively forming and re-forming the world in which we live (May, 1975).
discussion question \(4\)
May believed that creatively taking charge of your life required courage. Have you ever had to make a really difficult decision? Did you take the easy way out, or the safe path, or did you make a bold decision that offered great opportunity?
The Cry for Myth
As a practicing psychoanalyst I find that contemporary therapy is almost entirely concerned, when all is surveyed, with the problems of the individual’s search for myths. The fact that Western society has all but lost its myths was the main reason for the birth and development of psychoanalysis in the first place. (pg. 9; May, 1991)
The preceding quote is how May began The Cry for Myth, the last book of his career (May, 1991). According to May, the definition of a myth is quite simple: it “is a way of making sense in a senseless world.” In addition, myths give substance to our existence. In a healthy society the myths provide relief from neurotic guilt and excessive anxiety, and so a compassionate therapist will not discourage them. In the twentieth century, especially in Western culture, we have lost our myths, and with them we have lost our sense of existence and our direction or purpose in life. The danger in this is that people are then susceptible to cults, drugs, superstition, etc., in a vain effort to replace that purpose (May, 1991).
As we pass through the experiences of our lives, our memory is dependent mainly upon myth. It is well accepted today that human memory is constructive, and influenced by our expectations of memory. As May describes it, the formation of a memory, regardless of whether it is real or fantasy, is molded like clay. We then retain it as a myth, and rely on that myth for future guidance in similar situations. For example, an infant is fed three times a day and put to bed 365 days a year, and yet they remember only one or two of these events from their years of early childhood. For whatever reason, good or bad, these specific events take on mythic proportions and greatly influence the course of our lives. May acknowledges the contribution of Alfred Adler in recognizing the value of these early memories, describing Adler as “a perceptive and humble man, he was gifted with unusual sensitivity for children” (May, 1991). As we have seen, Adler considered the basis for neurosis to be a lack of social interest. In therapy, Adler focused on the “guiding fiction” of a child’s life, something May considered to be synonymous with a “myth.” Since “memory is the mother of creativity,” and memory depends upon myth, May believed that the myths that form the identity of our culture are essential for the formation of our self.
May ends his final book with a chapter entitled The Great Circle of Love. Having covered a variety of famous myths in the book, including Dante’s Divine Comedy, Marlow’s Faust, Captain Ahab in Moby Dick, and Poe’s The Raven, May concludes:
In each of these dramas the liberation of both woman and man is possible only when each achieves a new myth of the other sex, leading to a new significant psychological relationship. They are both then liberated from their previous empty and lonely existence. The woman and the man find their true selves only when they are fully present to each other. They find they both need each other, not only physically but psychologically and spiritually as well. (pg. 288; May, 1991) | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/09%3A_Viktor_Frankl_Rollo_May_and_Existential_Psychology/9.04%3A_Rollo_May_and_Existential_Psychology.txt |
Existential psychotherapy is not so much a technique as it is an overall approach to understanding the nature of the human being. By asking deep questions about the nature of anxiety, loneliness, isolation, despair, etc., as well as about creativity and love, existential psychotherapists seek to avoid the “common error of distorting human beings in the very effort of trying to help them” (May & Yalom, 1995). May believed that American psychology has had both an affinity for and an aversion to existential psychotherapy. The affinity arises from an historical place in American psychology that was very similar to existentialism: William James’ emphasis on the immediacy of experience, the importance of will, and the unity of thought and action. The aversion arises from the Western tendency to dehumanize people through strict adherence to scientific principles of research, i.e., to reform humans in the image of machines (May, 1983).
An essential aspect of existential psychotherapy is to help individuals realize their own being, their own role in choosing the form that their life will take. This is known as the “I-Am” experience. It is all too common for us to associate ourselves with external factors: I am a professor, I am a student, I work at a store, I run a business, etc. We repress our own sense of being. To use an example similar to a case described by May: I am a professor, but that is not really who I am. I am a father and a husband, but that isn’t all that I am. I have a family and a career, but that isn’t quite it either. What is left, or what is common in each of these statements? I am! And as May put it, if I am, I have a right to be (example cited in May & Yalom, 1995). This realization is not the solution to my problems, but it is a necessary precondition to finding the courage to pursue the rest of my life.
Once an individual finds the courage to recreate their life, the existential therapist will address a variety of issues. As discussed above, May placed a great deal of emphasis on anxiety. Guilt is also an important issue to be addressed, since we may feel guilty about poor ethical choices or instances when we failed to be responsible with our actions. As with anxiety, guilt can be normal (after actually doing something bad) or neurotic (when we fantasize some transgression). Both anxiety and guilt affect how we experience Kierkegaard’s concept of being-in-the-world. Our world can be viewed in several different ways, however. There is the Umwelt (the world around), the Mitwelt (the with-world), and the Eigenwelt (the own-world). The Umwelt is the world around us, the natural environment. It encompasses our biological needs, and the unavoidable reality that we will die one day. The Eigenwelt refers to our self-awareness and our ability to relate to our selves, and it is uniquely human (May & Yalom, 1995).
The Mitwelt bears a special relationship to another important concept in existential psychotherapy: time. Because we tend to think about ourselves spatially, as objects within our life, we tend to focus on the past. In other words, we focus on what we have become, as opposed to what we might be. Moments when we truly encounter ourselves are rare, but it is only when we grasp the moment that we truly experience life. Those moments can be positive, such as the experience of love, or negative, such as the experience of depression, but they are real nonetheless. The Mitwelt contains the inner meaning of the events that occur in our lives. Individuals who suffer from brain damage often cannot think in terms of abstract possibilities, they become trapped in concrete time. In order to be fully healthy, and something essential to the growth of humans, is our ability to transcend time:
If we are to understand a given person as existing, dynamic, at every moment becoming, we cannot avoid the dimension of transcendence. Existing involves a continual emerging, in the sense of emergent evolution, a transcending of one’s past and present in order to reach the future. (pg. 267; May & Yalom, 1995)
Although the content described above might seem very different from the type of psychoanalysis described by Freud, the general process of existential psychotherapy is similar to psychoanalysis. It is accepted that the client experiences anxiety, that some of this anxiety is unconscious, and that the client is relying on defense mechanisms in order to cope with the anxiety. A fundamental difference, however, is the focus of the therapy. Rather than digging into the deep, dark past, the existential psychotherapist strives to understand the meaning of the client’s current experiences, the depth of experience in the given moment. For this reason, the therapist-client relationship remains important, but the emphasis is not on transference. Rather, the emphasis is on the relationship itself as fundamentally important (May & Yalom, 1995).
Discussion Question: Have you ever had an “I-Am” experience? | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/09%3A_Viktor_Frankl_Rollo_May_and_Existential_Psychology/9.05%3A_Existential_Psychotherapy.txt |
Buddhism is by far the oldest theory of psychology that we will cover in this book. Applied existentialism, particularly the work of Rollo May, is one of the more recent developments in psychology. And yet, these two approaches share a great deal in common, a fact readily acknowledged by May:
…The likenesses between these Eastern philosophies and existentialism go much deeper than the chance similarity of words. Both are concerned with ontology, the study of being. Both seek a relation to reality which cuts below the cleavage between subject and object. Both would insist that the Western absorption in conquering and gaining power over nature has resulted not only in the estrangement of man from nature but also indirectly in the estrangement of man from himself. The basic reason for these similarities is that Eastern thought never suffered the radical split between subject and object that has characterized Western thought, and this dichotomy is exactly what existentialism seeks to overcome. (pp. 58-59; May, 1983)
In Japan there is a form of psychotherapy, known as Morita, which emphasizes the treatment of anxiety. The treatment consists of acceptance, reattribution, dereflection, and active engagement. The dereflection mentioned is the same technique developed by Viktor Frankl. The active engagement continues this effort at distracting the client from their anxiety, hopefully breaking them out of the circle of anticipatory anxiety and subsequent failure described by Frankl. This procedure has proven both successful and, consequently, influential amongst Japanese psychotherapists. A second Japanese technique, Naikan, combines a more traditional Buddhist approach with elements of existential psychology. The client is directed to reflect intensely on their past relationships, and then to consider what they have done for others, what others have done for them, and the difficulties they have caused for others. The goal is to help the client recognize the interdependence of humans, and to appreciate whether or not they, as well as others, have acted responsibly within the relationships. By confronting feelings of guilt and unworthiness, it is hoped that the client will realize that they have been loved and appreciated nonetheless (Walsh, 1995).
Belinda Siew Luan Khong (2003) has examined the role of responsibility in a particular form of existential psychotherapy known as daseinsanalysis (developed by the Swiss psychiatrist Medard Boss and grounded in the philosophy of Heidegger) and compared it to Buddhist practice in the Theravadan tradition. She found that daseinsanalysis and Buddhist practices share much in common, and that both have something to offer to each other:
…An integration of these two disciplines will make their ideas and practices more accessible to communities outside their traditional domains. The daseinsanalytic and Buddhist perspectives relating to personal and social responsibility provide us with valuable philosophical and psychological insights into this very important human phenomenon and show us practically how individuals can be assisted in taking responsibility for every moment of their existence, and to develop a sense of respond-ability to different situations. (pg. 158; Khong, 2003)
Stephen Batchelor, a former Buddhist monk turned author and teacher, has presented existentialism as an interesting approach to the primary problem facing Buddhism in America today (Batchelor, 1983). According to Batchelor, Buddhism in the west is split between those who wish to follow a traditional path (emphasizing meditation and practice) and those who insist upon an academic approach to the analysis and understanding of Buddhism. Between the two approaches lies a great chasm. As we have seen, existentialism draws its deepest and most meaningful philosophy from nothingness, be it the distinction between Being and beings (Dasein, according to Heidegger) or the shell separating the pour-soi from the en-soi (as proposed by Sartre). Drawing primarily from his Buddhist training and the philosophy of Heidegger and Tillich (see below), Batchelor contrasts being-alone and being-with. We are essentially alone at birth and at death, in that we cannot share the experience with others, and this leads to unavoidable anxiety throughout our lives (though not necessarily overwhelming anxiety for most people). As we will see in the next chapter, the first noble truth of Buddhism is that human life is suffering. But just as much as we are alone, we are unavoidably linked to others as well. What matters then, is that we experience authentic being-with-others, and the root of authentic being-with is concern for others (as opposed to the inauthentic distortion of self-concern; Batchelor, 1983).
The genuine welfare of man, of both oneself and others, is found in the optimum actualization of the potentialities of his being. To exist in the fullest possible way in our aloneness as well as in our relations with others is the fulfillment of the inner aim of human life…(pg. 88; Batchelor, 1983) | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/09%3A_Viktor_Frankl_Rollo_May_and_Existential_Psychology/9.06%3A_Buddhism_and_Existentialism-_The_Completion_of_a_Circle.txt |
Jean-Paul Sartre’s Being and Nothingness (1943) is considered the defining text of modern existentialism. Sartre was an atheist, so the brief introduction to existentialism in this chapter went in the direction of atheism. However, Frankl and May were not atheists, and one of May’s most influential mentors, as well as a close personal friend, was Paul Tillich. Tillich remains a well-known and respected existential philosopher in the spiritual tradition. May went so far as to say that Tillich’ book The Courage to Be might be the best and most understandable presentation of existentialism as an approach to life that has been written in English (May, 1983).
It is also interesting to note that both Frankl and May were significantly influenced by Alfred Adler. Frankl worked closely with Adler for a time, and May took a summer course with Adler. Both cite Adler regularly in their writings. Adler’s focus on the childhood struggle against one’s own inferiority, his emphasis on social interest as a responsible means to superiority, and his recognition of the dangers inherent in seeking superiority at the expense of others, all fit well with the existential perspective on making responsible choices in living one’s life. This point emphasizes, once again, the profound influence that Adler has had on psychology, and that he is in all probability the most under-recognized figure in the history of psychology.
In 1897, William James published an essay entitled Is Life Worth Living? (James, 1897/1992). James begins by describing how some people see the value in life, indeed they fully enjoy life, no matter what happens to them or around them. However, for most people this is not the case, and there is no magic way to give everyone such an optimistic point of view. So, James presents a series of arguments that one might use with suicidal people (that is the term he uses) in order to convince them that life is worth living. He relies heavily on religious faith, though not on any particular religion, but also leads into a discussion of existential thought. Approximately a decade before Frankl and May were even born, James wrote the following words:
…Suppose, however thickly evils crowd upon you, that your unconquerable subjectivity proves to be their match, and that you find a more wonderful joy than any passive pleasure can bring in trusting ever in the larger whole. Have you not now made life worth living on these terms?…This life is worth living, we can say, since it is what we make it, from the moral point of view, and we are determined to make it from that point of view, so far as we have anything to do with it, a success…These, then, are my last words to you: Be not afraid of life. Believe that life is worth living, and your belief will help create the fact. (pp. 501-503; James, 1897/1992)
The challenges that we all face in trying to live authentic lives, the challenges of making responsible and ethical choices that are true to who we ourselves are, can be difficult. In a fascinating book entitled Not a Genuine Black Man, Brian Copeland (2006) talks about his family’s racial struggles during the civil rights movement and the difficulties he faces today as a Black man who has adopted many so-called “White” cultural values. Copeland insists, however, that we cannot so easily claim that any given value or personal interest belongs only to one group of people:
…When all is said and done, I AM indeed a Genuine Black Man - because I am resilient. That’s what being black in America is truly about: resilience…I stayed on my feet through taunts and harassment, through police intimidation and bigoted nuns, through schoolyard bullies and Sylvester, through my mother’s death and bouts of sometimes crippling depression. I am still standing.
I am black because, as my friend Mr. Wilkins once told me, people should be called what they want to be called. I have the right and the ability to determine my identity regardless of what other blacks or whites say. I am not an “oreo,” nor am I “still a nigger.” I am a man. I am a black man.
No one person or group of individuals holds the monopoly on what in this society is the “true” black experience. My world is as “black” as that of Malcolm X, Colin Powell, Snoop Dogg, Jesse Jackson, Usher, Bill Cosby, or Diddy. As their experiences in America are unique, mine is unique - yet it is the same. It is as valid as that of the poor African American living in “the ‘hood,” the rich black rapper balancing a lifestyle of fame and violence, and the black scholar working to better this world through academic dissertation. It is as authentic as the experiences of those who marched with Dr. King for civil rights and those who defy the black community by arguing the conservative point of view.
It is the “true” black experience because it is my experience… (pp. 243-244; Copeland, 2006)
discussion question \(1\)
Brian Copeland talked about how difficult it can be to live an authentic life when you don’t meet the expectations of others. Have you ever gone against the advice of family or friends? Did it prove to be the right decision, or did it at least help you to feel better about your own confidence in yourself? | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/09%3A_Viktor_Frankl_Rollo_May_and_Existential_Psychology/9.07%3A_Some_Final_Thoughts.txt |
The Application of Frankl’s Theories to the Workplace and Everyday Life
In 1989, Stephen Covey published The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. Covey’s book became very popular, selling millions of copies on the way to becoming a #1 New York Times bestseller. If you were to read the first chapter of that book now, it would seem very familiar. Covey presents a very existential approach to understanding our lives, particularly with regard to the problems we experience every day. Perhaps it should not be surprising, then, that in the chapters describing the first two of these seven habits he cites and quotes Viktor Frankl numerous times. Indeed, Covey cites Frankl’s first two books as being profoundly influential in his own life, and how impressed Covey was having met Frankl shortly before Frankl’s death (see Covey’s foreword in Pattakos, 2004).
The first two habits, according to Covey, are: 1) be proactive, and 2) begin with the end in mind. He briefly describes Frankl’s experiences in the concentration camps, and refers to Frankl’s most widely quoted saying, that Frankl himself could decide how his experiences would affect him, and that no one could take that freedom away from Frankl! People who choose to develop this level of personal freedom are certainly being proactive, as opposed to responding passively to events that occur around them and to them. It is not necessary, of course, to suffer such tragic circumstances in order to become proactive in one’s own life:
…It is in the ordinary events of every day that we develop the proactive capacity to handle the extraordinary pressures of life. It’s how we make and keep commitments, how we handle a traffic jam, how we respond to an irate customer or a disobedient child. It’s how we view our problems and where we focus our energies. It’s the language we use. (pg. 92; Covey, 1989)
Covey compares his habit of beginning with the end in mind to logotherapy, helping people to recognize the meaning that their life holds. Covey works primarily in business leadership training, so the value of working toward a greater goal than simply keeping a company in business from day to day is clear, especially for those who care about employee morale and quality control (see also Principle-Centered Leadership; Covey, 1990). When employees share a sense of purpose in their work, they are likely to have higher intrinsic motivation. Think about it for a moment. Have you ever had a job you didn’t really understand, and didn’t care about? Have you ever been given that sort of homework in school or college? So, how much effort did you really put into that job or assignment?
Covey’s remaining habits are: 3) put first things first, 4) think win/win, 5) seek first to understand, then to be understood, 6) synergize, and 7) sharpen the saw. At first glance these principles seem reasonably straight forward, emphasizing practical and responsible actions. However, what does “sharpen the saw” mean? Sharpening the saw refers to keeping our tools in good working order, and we are our most important tool. Covey considers it essential to regularly and consistently, in wise and balanced ways, to exercise the four dimensions of our nature: physical, mental, social/emotional, and spiritual. By investing in ourselves, we are taking care to live an authentic life.
More recently, Covey has examined his principles beyond the business world. In 1997 he published The 7 Habits of Highly Effective Families, a book in which he applies the same 7 habits to family life. Covey certainly has solid credentials as a family man, as father of 9 and grandfather of 43 children, and he won the 2003 Fatherhood Award from the National Fatherhood Initiative. Drawing in large part on his own extensive, personal experience, Covey uses many stories, anecdotes, and examples of real-life situations to help provide context to the challenges of raising a family and how we might best work with them. But first, he introduces a simple process: have a clear vision of what you want to accomplish, have a plan of how you might accomplish it, and use a compass (your own unique gifts that enable you to be an agent of change in your family). In essence, Covey is recommending that you prepare yourself to develop the seven habits. We all know how difficult it is to establish a new habit or break a bad habit; how is your New Year’s resolution going?
Just as families change, so does the world we live in. Recently, Covey addressed this change by proposing an eighth habit (Covey, 2004). He says that this was not simply an important habit he had overlooked before, but one that has risen to new significance as we have fully entered the age of information and technology in the twenty-first century. As communication has become much easier (e.g., email), it has also become less personal and meaningful. Thus the need for the eighth habit: find your voice and inspire others to find theirs. According to Covey, “voice is unique personal significance.” Essentially, it is the same as finding meaning in one’s life, and then helping others to find meaning in their own lives. It is through finding a mission or a purpose in life that we can move “from effectiveness to greatness” (Covey, 2004).
Whereas Covey presented an approach to personal and professional effectiveness (and later to greatness as well) that parallels the principles set forth by Viktor Frankl, Alex Pattakos very directly applies Frankl’s theories to both the workplace and one’s everyday life in Prisoners of Our Thoughts: Viktor Frankl’s Principles at Work (with a foreword by Stephen Covey; Pattakos, 2004). Frankl himself urged Pattakos to publish his book during a meeting in 1996. Pattakos, like Covey, has been profoundly influenced by Frankl’s writings throughout Pattakos’ career. According to Pattakos, we are creatures of habit, and we prefer a life that is both predictable and within our comfort zone. As the world is changing in the twenty-first century, so the conditions under which we work are changing. Pattakos believes there is a need for humanizing work. More than just balancing one’s personal life and career, humanizing work is an attempt to honor our own individuality and to fully engage our human spirit at work. Simply put, it is an effort to apply Frankl’s will-to-meaning in our workplace (Pattakos, 2004).
Like Covey, Pattakos presents seven core principles. They are similar to Covey’s seven habits, but in keeping with Pattakos’ intentions they are aligned more directly with the principles of logotherapy and existential psychology described by Frankl. The seven core principles are: 1) exercise the freedom to choose your attitude, 2) realize your will-to-meaning, 3) detect the meaning of life’s moments, 4) don’t work against yourself, 5) look at yourself from a distance, 6) shift your focus of attention, and 7) extend beyond yourself. These principles include not only the ideas of personal freedom and will-to-meaning, but also dereflection (principles 4 and 6) and the will-to-ultimate-meaning (principle 7). Clearly Pattakos has accomplished his goal of applying logotherapy to the workplace, but how well does this application work in real life?
Pattakos describes the case of a probation officer with the state department of corrections. Rick, as Pattakos identifies him, was raised in foster care and orphanages. However, rather than developing a sense of caring and concern for others who have difficulties in their lives, Rick refers to his clients as “maggots.” Rick has become insensitive and unforgiving, he has also become deeply depressed and anxious. Overall, he feels lost, unhappy, and unfulfilled, and he doesn’t know what to do about it. According to Pattakos, he has become a prisoner of his own thoughts, and only he has the key to his own freedom. Very simply put, he needs to find a new job or find meaning in the one he has now. One possibility is for Rick to consider his own life circumstances in relationship to his clients:
…Whenever we stop long enough to connect to ourselves, to our environment, to those with whom we work, to the task before us, to the extraordinary interdependence that is always part of our lives, we experience meaning. Meaning is who we are in this world. And it is the world that graces us with meaning. (pg. 157; Pattakos, 2004)
By making a responsible choice to seek meaning in our lives, to not work against ourselves, we can put ourselves on a path we had not seen before:
When we live and work with meaning, we can choose to make meaning, to see meaning, and to share meaning. We can choose our attitudes to life and work; we can choose how to respond to others, how to respond to our jobs, and how to make the very best of difficult circumstances. We can transcend ourselves and be transformed by meaning. We can find connection to meaning at work, in the most unusual places and with the most unexpected people. Meaning is full of surprises. (pg. 159; Pattakos, 2004)
And finally, it does not matter what sort of job we have. It is our choice, our freedom:
No matter what our specific job might be, it is the work we do that represents who we are. When we meet our work with enthusiasm, appreciation, generosity, and integrity, we meet it with meaning. And no matter how mundane a job might seem at the time, we can transform it with meaning. Meaning is life’s legacy, and it is as available to us at work as it is available to us in our deepest spiritual quests. We breathe, therefore we are - spiritual. Life is; therefore it is - meaningful. We do, therefore we work.
Viktor Frankl’s legacy was one of hope and possibility. He saw the human condition at its worst, and human beings behaving in ways intolerable to the imagination. He also saw human beings rising to heights of compassion and caring in ways that can only be described as miraculous acts of unselfishness and transcendence. There is something in us that can rise above and beyond everything we think possible… (pg. 162; Pattakos, 2004)
discussion question \(1\)
Stephen Covey and Alex Pattakos have applied Frankl’s theories to both the workplace and our everyday lives. How well do you think the principles of existential psychology can address the problems that you face at work, home, school, etc.? Is it ever really as simple as applying one’s will and choosing to act responsibly? Do you live an authentic life? | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/09%3A_Viktor_Frankl_Rollo_May_and_Existential_Psychology/9.08%3A_Personality_Theory_in_Real_Life.txt |
Review of Key Points
• Existentialism focuses on an individual’s subjective “truth.” The freedom and responsibility that come with personal truth lead to anxiety, but they can also elevate the individual to lead an authentic life.
• Heidegger believed that all creatures are connected, but that only humans can become aware of this connection. Dasein, the realization of this connection, allows us to connect with Being. Awareness of our impending death, however, leads to anxiety, but if we accept that truth we can live an authentic life.
• Sartre believed that humans were unique, something he called en-soi. Awareness of the nothingness that separates the en-soi from the pour-soi is what drives some individuals to make something significant of their lives. For those who cannot, Sartre expressed a need for existential psychoanalysis.
• Viktor Frankl developed his ideas for logotherapy (an existential psychoanalysis) during his impressive early career. He had an extraordinary opportunity to put his ideas to the test while imprisoned in the Nazi concentration camps.
• Recognized as the third Viennese school of psychotherapy, logotherapy focuses on one’s will-to-meaning, the desire to find meaning and purpose in one’s life.
• People who cannot find meaning experience existential frustration, which can lead to a noogenic neurosis.
• Logotherapy itself relies primarily on the techniques of paradoxical intention and dereflection. These techniques are designed to break the cycle of anticipatory anxiety and failure that plague individuals who suffer from existential crises.
• Going beyond ordinary, everyday life, Frankl proposed a super-meaning to life, and he suggested that there is also a will-to-ultimate-meaning that can be pursued through religion or spirituality. In this light, Frankl referred to logotherapy as “height psychology” (in contrast to depth psychology, another term for psychoanalysis).
• Rollo May believed that anxiety underlies nearly every crisis. He proposed that anxiety must be understood in terms of freedom, and he distinguished between normal anxiety and neurotic anxiety.
• Culture has significant effects on the nature and amount of anxiety that people are likely to experience in their lives. Since anxiety can lead to hostility, these cultural factors are, and have been throughout history, very important issues (e.g., opposition to the civil rights movement in the United States, and the recent dramatic rise in international terrorism).
• A critical factor in life, according to May, is our ability to integrate into our world. One of the challenges to integration is the human dilemma: whether we are the subject or the object in our lives. As self-aware beings we can know that we are both subject and object, and so, in psychological terms, we exist in a world between either behaviorism or humanistic psychology.
• There are different types of love, all of which are very important to our lives. Love can give meaning to our lives, but it must be honest and responsible love.
• Through will and intentionality we can give structure to our lives and meaning to our actions. However, overwhelming anxiety can destroy our ability to participate actively in our own lives.
• The daimonic is any function that can take over the whole person. It can be a source of violence, but also a source of creativity. We can choose how the daimonic takes over, and whether that choice is responsible or not determines whether our actions are violent or creative.
• Being creative requires that we live in the future and actively participate in shaping our lives. Such bold choices require courage, especially in light of the inescapable reality that we will die.
• May felt that myth provides an important cultural framework within which we can form our lives. Unfortunately, the Western world has lost many of its myths, making people susceptible to cults, drugs, superstition, etc.
• According to May, the primary goal of existential psychotherapy is to help the client realize their own being, to have an “I-Am” experience. Time is an important aspect of this procedure. The client must be helped to shift their focus from the past to the future, and even more so, to transcend time altogether.
• Although existential psychology is younger than most other schools of psychology, it has much in common with ancient Eastern philosophies, such as Yoga, Buddhism, and Taoism.
• Terrorism is not the result of Islam. Terrorists are found all over the world, from many different races, religions, and nationalities. Islam opposes violence and murder.
• Terrorism is based on psychological factors (a perception that there are no alternatives, and that terrorism is legitimate), and seeks to cause psychological effects (feelings of terror and helplessness). Thus, psychologists have an important role to play in understanding and eliminating terrorism.
• One can easily find those who believe that terrorism either never works or always works. Some believe that we must respond with understanding to eliminate the root causes of terrorism, whereas others believe we must use force (but not too much force, lest we become terrorists as well). Clearly there are no easy answers for dealing with terrorists themselves or terrorism in general. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/09%3A_Viktor_Frankl_Rollo_May_and_Existential_Psychology/9.S%3A_Chapter_Summary.txt |
Gordon Allport is considered the founder of trait theory. Trait theory is sometimes viewed as dry, inflexible, and devoid of paying attention to the rich and interesting developmental aspects of personality that so many students enjoy studying. Those same students would probably be quite surprised to learn that Allport is generally considered to have been humanistic in his approach. It was within his effort to understand the individual, however, that Allport focused on traits, psychological phenomena that allow some ability to predict the behavior of an individual. Allport was also concerned about factors that negatively affect people, such as prejudice. Indeed, in 1954, he published a classic study on prejudice in which he argued that despite all of humanity’s scientific advances we remain “in the Stone Age so far as our handling of human relationships is concerned” (Allport, 1979). This concern for all people likely grew out of his profound spiritual faith (for a collection of Allport’s daily prayer reflections see Bertocci, 1978). Thus, the trait approach to psychology, as envisioned by Allport, was anything but dry and inflexible, and it paid careful attention to the unique value of each individual.
Raymond Cattell provides a dramatic contrast to Allport. His approach to trait theory was purely scientific and mathematical. He focused on psychological testing, and made extraordinary contributions to psychology in this regard. Unfortunately, he was also quite different than Allport with regard to his views on racial, ethnic, and other forms of diversity. Cattell was a staunch advocate of eugenics, the controlled interbreeding of people to enhance desired human traits. He believed that the government should decide how to control the eugenic breeding, that rich people should be encouraged and allowed to have more children than other people, there should be genetic experiments to pursue new and more favorable traits, and once we can identify such favorable traits we should provide prenatal screening and abort those children who will not be good enough (Cattell, 1972).
Hans Eysenck, followed by Paul Costa and Robert McCrae, attempted to identify a smaller number of traits that could be used to provide a reasonable description of an individual’s personality. The Five-Factor Model of personality, identified by Costa & McCrae (see, e.g., McCrae & Costa, 2003), is considered by many to be the culmination of this area of psychology. However, there are many personality traits that are significant factors for certain individuals, but which do not comprise one the five major factors. One example is the sensation-seeking trait described by Marvin Zuckerman (see, e.g., Zuckerman, 1994). As such, Zuckerman represents the approach of many trait theorists today: take a trait of interest, such as sensation-seeking or religiosity, and study it in great detail. In this chapter, we will examine the approaches taken by these theorists, as well as the form of the theories they subsequently presented.
10.02: 10.1 A Brief Biography of Gordon Allport
Gordon Willard Allport was born on November 11, 1897, in Montezuma, Indiana. His father had been a businessman, but then decided to go into medicine and become a country doctor. It was in Indiana that Allport’s father set up his first medical practice shortly before Allport was born, the youngest of four brothers. The family soon moved to Ohio, eventually settling in Glenville, where Allport spent his school years. His brothers were considerably older, causing him to feel like an outsider. Despite feelings of isolation, he worked hard to be the star of a small group of friends. He also did well in school, though he was uninspired and not curious about much outside of routine adolescent concerns (Allport, 1968).
His home life was marked by trust and affection, but it was not one of leisure. Rather, it was marked by “plain Protestant piety and hard work” (pg. 379; Allport, 1968). His mother had been a schoolteacher, and she encouraged philosophical and religious interests among her children. Also, the family home doubled as his father’s medical clinic and hospital, so there was always much work to be done around the house. Family vacations were rare, and his father liked it that way. According to Allport, his father believed that everyone should work as hard as they could and accept as pay only what their family needed to survive, so that there might be enough wealth to go around for everyone. In many ways, the Allport children were taught the importance of being concerned with the welfare of others (Allport, 1968).
After graduating from high school, in 1915, Allport followed his brother Floyd to Harvard University. Floyd Allport had graduated from Harvard in 1913, and then continued in the graduate program in psychology. Floyd Allport encouraged his younger brother to study psychology, and he was the teaching assistant for Allport’s first psychology course. At the beginning of his first semester Allport received poor grades, but after redoubling his efforts, he ended his first year with all As. What Allport found most interesting was the distinction between “causal” psychology and “purposive” psychology, and he wondered if the two couldn’t be reconciled. During World War I he was a member of the Students’ Army Training Corps, but the war ended before he had to serve in Europe. Allport also studied in the Department of Social Ethics, and he engaged in extensive community service. He ran a boys’ club in Boston, Massachusetts, did volunteer work for the Family Society and as a probation officer, and he spent a summer working at the Humane Society in Cleveland, Ohio. Allport found this community service to be very rewarding, partly because he enjoyed it, and partly because it helped him to feel competent (offsetting his general feelings of inferiority). He became convinced that effective social service could only be provided if one first had a sound understanding of human personality. At the 1919 Harvard commencement, he received his bachelor’s degree and his brother Floyd received a Ph.D. (Floyd Allport is considered one of the founders of the discipline of social psychology).
After graduating, Allport spent a year teaching English and sociology at Robert College in Constantinople, Turkey. He was then offered a fellowship for the graduate program in psychology at Harvard. On the way back to the United States, Allport had an extraordinarily influential meeting with Sigmund Freud. He stopped in Vienna to visit his brother Fayette, and while there he requested a meeting with Freud. He received a kind invitation, and when he arrived Freud sat silently waiting for Allport to state the purpose of their meeting. Unprepared for silence, Allport quickly chose to relate a story of a young boy he had seen who was terribly afraid of dirt. The boy's mother was so dominant and proper that Allport thought the source of the boy's anxiety was clear. Freud, however, looked at Allport and asked “And was that little boy you?” Freud had entirely misinterpreted Allport’s reason for visiting him, assuming that it was a therapeutic encounter. Allport became convinced that depth psychology might plunge too deeply, and that psychologists should consider manifest motives before digging into the unconscious (Allport, 1968).
Allport found graduate school quite easy, and in 1922 he received his Ph.D. However, he was unable to find any colleagues who shared his interest in a humanistic approach to the study of personality. Thus, he had to chart his own path. His first paper, published with his brother, was on classifying and measuring personality traits. His course entitled Personality: Its Psychological and Social Aspects, first taught at Harvard in 1924, was probably the first personality course in America. Allport then received a fellowship that allowed him to spend 2 years studying in Germany and England. In 1925 he married Ada Lufkin Gould, who had a masters’ degree in clinical psychology, and in 1927 they had a son named Robert. Allport also moved to Dartmouth College that year. In 1928 he and Floyd published a test for measuring dominant and submissive tendencies, but they never collaborated again. Although they helped each other from time to time, their psychological perspectives were simply too different as their careers progressed (Allport, 1968).
In 1930 Allport returned to Harvard, where he remained for the rest of his career. His first book, Studies in Expressive Movement, included a section on handwriting analysis and personality, known as graphology (Allport & Vernon, 1933). This was followed by The Psychology of Radio (Cantril & Allport, 1935), and then the landmark Personality: A Psychological Interpretation (Allport, 1937). It was in the latter book that Allport outlined the majority of the theory for which he is recognized, and it was the culmination of ideas that had been “cooking” in his head since graduate school. It was his ambition at the time to give a psychological definition to the field of personality. He certainly helped to accomplish that task, but it should also be noted that another landmark personality text, with a similar goal, was published the same year by Ross Stagner, entitled Psychology of Personality (Stagner, 1937; for a discussion of the significance of these two books see Craik, 1993; Stagner, 1993). Somewhat unfairly, Allport is often recognized for having published the first personality textbook, and Stagner is overlooked. However, Stagner was quite young at the time (only 28 years old). Accordingly, Allport was well-established in his field, and Stagner cites earlier work by both Gordon and Floyd Allport numerous times in his textbook.
During World War II, Allport worked with the Emergency Committee in Psychology under the American Psychological Association. He spent some time working on the problem of morale among the American people, and he wrote a daily column for the Boston Traveler that focused, in part, on rumors. An important aspect of rumors was those rumors designed to enhance prejudice and group antagonism. This work led to a series of seminars on race relations for the Boston Police Department, a book entitled The Psychology of Rumor (Allport & Postman, 1947), and ultimately to Allport’s classic study The Nature of Prejudice (first published in 1954; Allport, 1979). Another factor facilitating Allport’s work on social issues was the establishment of a new department at Harvard shortly after WWII: the Department of Social Relations. Given his lifelong interest in social ethics, Allport flourished in this new environment, remaining active in its administration throughout his career. Later in his career Allport continued to refine his personality and social psychological theories, he pursued his interest in social and religious development, with books such as The Individual and His Religion (Allport, 1950) and Becoming (Allport, 1955), and the application of trait theory to the analysis of an individual’s historical documents. With regard to the latter, Allport had published The Use of Personal Documents in Psychological Science in 1942, and after using a collection of personal letters reflecting a mother-son relationships as lecture aids for many years, he eventually published Letters from Jenny in 1965. In 1966, as Allport was entering into semiretirement, Harvard University appointed him the first Richard Clarke Cabot Professor of Social Ethics. Cabot, a wealthy Boston philanthropist, was also a professor of cardiology and social ethics at Harvard. Cabot had been a professional friend and mentor to Allport for many years, and Allport credited him with having a great influence on Allport’s career. As early as 1919, when Allport was just earning his bachelor’s degree, Cabot was commenting on the poor state of the study of personality. Thus, it is perhaps no surprise that he mentored and supported Allport, who went on to become the “patron saint” of personality psychology (Nicholson, 2003).
Allport died in 1967, 1 month shy of his seventieth birthday, leaving behind many unfinished books, articles, and two psychological tests. He had received many honors, including a Gold Medal Award for Life Achievement from the American Psychological Foundation in 1963 (an award his older brother Floyd won five years later) and a Distinguished Scientific Contribution Award from the American Psychological Association in 1964 (Maddi & Costa, 1972). He was the first personality psychologist elected president of APA, and a 1951 survey placed him second only to Freud as a personality theorist whose work was directly applicable to clinical practice. However, one award stood out for him, and it is the only one he mentions in his autobiography. At the XVII International Congress of Psychology, fifty-five of his former doctoral students gave him a two-volume set of their own writings, with an inscription thanking him for respecting their individuality. In Allport’s own words, this was “an intimate honor, and one I prize above all others” (pg. 407; Allport, 1968). In that same autobiography, which was actually published after his death, he acknowledged a small number of personality theorists whom he felt were on the right path toward understanding human life, including Carl Rogers, Abraham Maslow, and Henry Murray.
Placing Allport in Context: The Beginning of Trait Theory
Gordon Allport is viewed by many as the founder of trait theories of personality. In addition, because of his specific focus on personality itself, he is also viewed as the founder of personality psychology as a distinct discipline. His entire approach to psychology, and more specifically to personality, was born of his strong devotion to social ethics. He was a profoundly spiritual man, who challenged the negative aspects of religious dogma and championed the positive aspects of having a spiritual direction in one’s life. Because his psychology carried with it that devotion to social ethics, he wrote one of the most famous books on prejudice, in which he suggested that the future role of psychology in understanding this disturbing inclination of people everywhere must be based on values.
Since his approach to studying and teaching psychology emphasized the value and uniqueness of each person, he is considered to have been a humanistic psychologist, even though he is seldom grouped with Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow (instead, he is grouped with other trait theorists). Always aware of the future challenges facing those who would study personality, Allport hoped that movements toward individual, humanistic, and existential psychology would continue:
I’m quite certain there will be a strong movement toward what is called a third force which will be neither behavioristic nor psychoanalytic. But I wouldn’t be willing to predict that it will dominate the field, though I can say I do hope it will develop sturdily and result in fruitful new methods to approach molar and complex levels of personality structure and social behavior…Human nature is such a hard nut to crack that no one should be denied a chance to contribute to it at any level. (pg. 112; Allport cited in Evans, 1981b) | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/10%3A_Trait_Theories_of_Personality/10.01%3A_Chapter_Introduction.txt |
As a rule, science regards the individual as a mere bothersome accident. Psychology, too, ordinarily treats him as something to be brushed aside so the main business of accounting for the uniformity of events can get under way…With the intention of supplementing this abstract portrait by one that is more life-like, a new movement within psychological science has gradually grown up. It attempts in a variety of ways and from many points of view to depict and account for the manifest individuality of mind. This new movement has come to be known (in America) as the psychology of personality. (pg. vii; Allport, 1937)
With these words, in the preface to Personality: A Psychological Interpretation, Allport “officially” established the study of personality as a discipline in the field of psychology. His goal was two-fold: (1) to gather together the most important research on personality to date, and (2) to provide a framework within which the study of personality might then proceed toward understanding this “endlessly rich subject-matter” (Allport, 1937).
What Is Personality and What Are Traits?
Allport provides an interesting history of the use of the term persona, including a set of definitions written by Cicero (106-43 B.C.): as one appears to others (but not as one really is); the part one plays in life; the collection of personal qualities that fits one’s career (or place in life); and distinction and dignity. These and other definitions of persona represent a contradiction, that persona, or personality in psychological terms, is both something vital and internal and yet also something external and false. Although psychologists came to favor definitions that emphasized an assemblage of personal qualities, Allport noted that no two psychologists could easily agree on one definition for the term “personality.” So Allport offered a definition of his own:
Personality is the dynamic organization within the individual of those psychophysical systems that determine his unique adjustments to his environment. (pg. 48; Allport, 1937)
Dynamic Organization: According to Allport, personality involves active organization, which is constantly evolving and changing, and which involves motivation and self-regulation. Thus, it is dynamic, not static. Organization also brings with it the possibility of disorganization, and the resulting abnormalities associated with personality disorders and/or mental illness.
Psychophysical Systems: The term “psychophysical” is meant to remind us that personality reflects both mind and body, the total organism. The systems include habits, attitudes, sentiments, and dispositions of various kinds. Most important, however, are the traits, which may be either latent or active.
Determine: In Allport’s view, “personality is something and does something.” Personality is not synonymous with behavior, it underlies it, and it comes from within the individual. The systems mentioned above can be viewed as determining tendencies.
Unique: Naturally, each adjustment by an individual is unique in time, space, and quality. However, Allport mentioned this aspect in anticipation of his later discussion of individual vs. common traits (see below).
Adjustments to His Environment: Personality, according to Allport, is a mode of survival, it has functional and evolutionary significance. For humans, we are not simply reactive, as plants and animals are, because we can be spontaneous and creative. We can, and do, seek mastery over our environment (both behavioral and geographic). Unfortunately, once again the possibility exists for maladaptive behavior that arises under abnormal conditions (such as an abusive home environment).
In 1961, Allport wrote an updated and substantially revised version of his personality text entitled Pattern and Growth in Personality. He made only one significant change to his definition of personality, which reflected a greater emphasis on cognitive processes. He changed the phrase “unique adjustments to his environment” to “characteristic behavior and thought” (pg. 28; Allport, 1961). He described “characteristic” in essentially the same way as he had described “unique” so that change was insignificant. However, the phrase “behavior and thought” was intended to indicate that individuals do more than simply adjust to their environment, they also reflect on it. Thus, the human intellect is an important factor in the manner in which we seek mastery over our environment and, indeed, over our lives.
So now we turn our attention to traits, those special psychophysical systems that are at the center of Allport’s theory of personality. In 1936, Allport and Odbert had examined the 1925 edition of Webster’s New International Dictionary and identified 17,953 words (4½ percent of the English language) that described aspects of distinctive and personal behavior that would commonly be described as traits (see Allport, 1937). Allport viewed a trait as both a form of readiness and a determining tendency. There are a number of other concepts that share some similarity with traits, such as habits, attitudes, needs, types, and instincts. In each case, however, these other forms of readiness to engage in certain responses or activities are different than traits, particularly with regard to their specificity and external focus or, as in the case of types, they describe a collection of correlated attributes. After describing the differences, Allport arrived at the following definition of a trait:
We are left with a concept of trait as a generalized and focalized neuropsychic system (peculiar to the individual), with the capacity to render many stimuli functionally equivalent, and to initiate and guide consistent (equivalent) forms of adaptive and expressive behavior. (pg. 295; Allport, 1937)
The essential aspect of this definition is equivalence, both perceptually and behaviorally. As the result of a trait, different stimuli are perceived as similar, and responded to in similar ways. This occurs regardless of the nature of the stimuli themselves. Suppose, for example, an individual is paranoid. If someone walks by and says “Hi, how are you today?” the paranoid individual might wonder “What is that supposed to mean? Why are they pretending to be so nice? What are they really up to?” As illogical as this response might seem, a paranoid trait has the ability to render even a simple hello as a threat.
Allport also made an important distinction between individual traits and common traits. Underlying this discussion was another important topic in Allport’s approach to psychology: the distinction between the idiographic and nomothetic approaches to studying psychology. As psychologists attempted to define their discipline as a scientific endeavor, they pursued a nomothetic approach, one that emphasizes general rules that apply to all. However, the psychology of personality that Allport was pursuing is inherently idiographic, an approach that emphasizes individuality. Strictly speaking, no two people can have exactly the same trait. Thus, all traits are inherently individual traits. However, this creates an extraordinary challenge for psychologists, both experimental psychologists who would measure traits and clinical psychologists who would describe an individual as possessing a certain trait (at some level) in order to provide a framework for communication and therapy. Allport agreed that is was logical to assume the existence of common traits, since normal people in a given culture would naturally tend to develop comparable modes of adjustment. However, Allport cautioned that developing clinical or experimental measures of such traits would at best be approximations of the individual traits present in each person (Allport, 1937, 1961).
Discussion Question \(1\)
Allport described the persona as something vital and internal, yet external and false. How can this be? Can you think of different aspects of your personality that fit both perspectives, and if so, how do those aspects of your personality fit together?
Personal Dispositions
Having acknowledged that there is logic to examining common traits as opposed to individual traits, Allport then returned to each individual’s unique personality by addressing personal dispositions. A personal disposition is based on traits, but somewhat more complex, such as in a unique combination of traits (e.g., someone who is tentatively aggressive, as opposed to someone who is belligerently aggressive). In another important change between the 1937 and 1961 editions of Allport’s general personality text, the latter book discusses cardinal, central, and secondary dispositions, rather than cardinal, central, and secondary traits.
A cardinal disposition is one that dominates an individual’s entire life. It cannot remain hidden, and the individual will be known by it. Historically, some commonly used terms have adopted the reputation of famous figures, including at least one that appears in the DSM-IV-TR: the Narcissistic Personality Disorder (named after Narcissus, from Greek mythology). Another example would be to describe someone as Christ-like. Personalities that posses one cardinal disposition, however, are quite unusual.
Much more common are central dispositions. If you were asked to describe a good friend, you would most likely offer a handful of distinguishable central dispositions. The interesting question, of course, is how many central dispositions does a typical personal have? Allport suggested that a person’s central dispositions would be those things one would mention in a carefully written letter of recommendation, a response that might make sense to someone like a professor, who often writes such letters.
Of lesser importance, according to Allport, are the secondary dispositions. These are less conspicuous, less consistent, and are less often called into play. In concluding his discussion of cardinal, central, and secondary dispositions, Allport acknowledged that these gradations are arbitrary, and presented primarily for convenience. In reality, he said, there are many degrees of personality organization, from the most loosely structured and unstable to the most pervasive and firmly structured. The value of these distinctions is to provide a relative measure of the influence of traits and dispositions when discussing personality.
Personality Development, Functional Autonomy, and the Mature Personality
According to Allport, a newborn infant has no personality, for it has not experienced the world in which it will live and it has had no opportunity to develop its distinctive modes of adjusting to that environment. Personality exists only later, after the common elements of human nature have interacted and produced the unique, self-continuing, and evolving systems that form the individual’s personality. The basic aspects of growth, following the infant’s initial random and diffuse behavior, involve differentiation, integration, maturation, and learning. As the child’s nervous system develops, it gradually gains finer control over its movement. Little by little, the young child differentiates more efficient and adaptive patterns of behavior, including vocal behavior. Psychologically, this differentiation involves more than just behaviors themselves, it also includes the ability to control the initiation of those behaviors. Very young children have little capacity for delaying their actions; they want to do things now! As the child’s behavioral repertoire increases, it becomes just as necessary and adaptive to begin integrating some of those behaviors into coordinated actions. Once again, if applied to psychological and cognitive processes, the development of traits and dispositions begins with the integration of life’s experiences. As these processes are occurring, the child is also maturing physically. Allport did not view maturation as something that contributed directly to personality, but it does indirectly by bringing out every inherited feature of the individual, including temperament, intellectual capacity, physical features, etc. All of these factors, plus the extensive contribution of different types of learning, contribute to the manner in which the individual experiences their environment (Allport, 1937). However, we can never truly know the personality that develops:
Of the whole of our own natures we are never directly aware, nor of any large portion of the whole. At any single moment the range of consciousness is remarkably slight. It seems only a restless pencil point of light entirely insufficient to illuminate the edifice of personality…It is through…temporal reference and content, that we arrive at the conviction that we do somehow possess consistent personalities surrounding the momentary conscious core. (pg. 159; Allport, 1937)
As a sense of self develops, these developmental processes of childhood progress through a series of stages: (1) a sense of bodily self, (2) a sense of continuing identity, (3) a sense of self-esteem or pride, (4) the extension of self, (5) a self-image, (6) a sense of self as rationally able to cope, and finally, in adolescence, (7) a sense of “directedness” or “intentionality.” Allport described these seven aspects of selfhood as a sense of self-relevance that we feel. When combined, they create the “me” as felt and known. In order to identify this sense of “me” or “I” Allport recommended the term proprium. Proprium is derived from the Latin term proprius, and it refers to a property common to the members of some class, but which is not part of the definition of that class. In other words, everyone has a personality, but no one’s personality is part of the definition of what it means to be a person. But why not simply use the word “self?” Allport felt that many psychologists use the words “self” and “ego” to mean only one or two aspects of the entire proprium. Also, Allport wanted to distinguish between the self as an object, and the self as the “knower” of that object. The proprium refers specifically to the self as an object, whereas self refers both to the object and the “knower.” We can be directly aware of the proprium in a way that we can never be fully aware of the “knower” (Allport, 1961).
As the child matures, both physically and psychologically, the individual’s interests and motives become stable and predictable. A special type of psychological maturity (as opposed to genetic/biological maturity) takes place, which Allport termed functional autonomy. Functional autonomy regards adult motives as varied, and as self-sustaining systems that are unique to the individual. They may have arisen out of developmental processes and experiences, but they are independent of them. This means that any tie between adult motives and early childhood experience is historical, not functional. This is a radically different view than that of Sigmund Freud and most psychodynamic theorists, who considered early childhood experiences to be the driving force behind adult behavior, especially neurotic behavior. Allport offers the example of a good workman. Such a workman feels compelled to do his best work, even though his income no longer depends on maintaining high standards. Indeed, doing his very best on every job may actually hurt him financially, but his personal standards, his motivation, demand nothing less (Allport, 1937, 1961). When viewed a different way, functional autonomy serves another important motivational role. If one considers early childhood experiences to be the determining factors in personality, then all adult motives must have some infantile source. However, by separating adult motives from their childhood antecedents, then there does not need to be anything childish about what motivates adults. This allows for entirely new sources of motivation to be relevant during adulthood, motives that might have been completely beyond the intellectual and cognitive capacities of children.
In considering what constitutes a mature personality, Allport considered the writings of Sigmund Freud, Richard Clarke Cabot, Erik Erikson, and Abraham Maslow. He also considered the length of each man’s list. Allport settled on a list of six ideal characteristics of the mature personality. He described the list as an ideal, because he freely acknowledged that no one is perfect, even the “sturdiest of personalities have their foibles and their regressive moments; and to a large extent they depend on environmental supports for their maturity” (pp. 282-282; Allport, 1961).
Extension of the Sense of Self: The mature person focuses on more than simple needs or drive-reduction; they develop strong interests outside of themselves. By truly participating in life, they give direction to their life.
Warm Relating of Self to Others: The mature person is marked by two kinds of warmth. On one hand, through self-extension they are capable of great intimacy in their capacity for love, whether it involves family members or friends. On the other hand, they avoid gossipy, intrusive, or possessive relationships with other people. They respect other persons as persons, they express tolerance and the so-called “democratic character structure.”
Emotional Security (Self-Acceptance): Mature individuals demonstrate emotional poise; they have the ability to avoid overreacting. Especially important, according to Allport, is that they possess the quality of “frustration tolerance.”
Realistic Perception, Skills, and Assignments: Generally speaking, the mature person is in close contact with what we call the “real world.” They see things, including people, for what they really are.
Self-Objectification - Insight and Humor: In describing this characteristic, Allport quoted Socrates: “know thyself.” In Allport’s psychology classes, 96 percent of his students thought they had average or better than average insight (by definition, only 50 percent can be above the average). So people think they have good insight, but this is often not the case. There does appear to be a high correlation between insight and humor. People who truly know themselves are able to look at themselves objectively, and to laugh at their own failings and mistakes.
The Unifying Philosophy of Life: According to Allport, humor may be essential, but it is never sufficient. Maturity requires a sense of life’s purpose. This sense of purpose can be found in having a clear direction to one’s life, in a strong orientation to values, within one’s religious sentiment, or through a generic conscience. Allport found it quite interesting that many people consider their desire to serve society was a more important generic motive than the fulfillment of any sense of religious or spiritual duty. He concluded that an integrated sense of moral obligation can provide a unifying philosophy of life regardless of whether or not it is tied to one’s religious sentiments.
discussion question \(2\)
Consider Allport’s definition of a mature personality. Do you know anyone who fits all of the criteria? What are they like as a person, and do you consider them a friend (or, do they consider you a friend)?
The Assessment of Personality
Personality is so complex a thing that every legitimate method must be employed in its study. (pg. 369; Allport, 1937)
In Chapter 1 we examined the common procedures used to assess personality today, and Allport reviewed similar concepts, as well as procedures that were available at the time. It is interesting to note that, in his 1937 text, the very first topic in Allport’s survey of assessment methods is the importance of evaluating the cultural setting. Two other topics were also of particular interest to Allport: the study of expressive behavior and the use of personal documents.
Allport’s first two books, Studies in Expressive Movement (Allport & Vernon, 1933) and The Psychology of Radio (Cantril & Allport, 1935), both addressed what Allport considered to be the second level at which personality is evaluated (the first level consists of the traits, interests, attitudes, etc., that compose the “inner” personality). He considered the study of expressive movement to be a more direct analysis of personality, since it is based on observation, and does not require the use of tests that only indirectly address the inner dispositions revealed in the first level of analysis. For example, what a patient says or writes while taking the Rorschach test is projective, but how they say or write it, the tone of their voice or the style of their handwriting, is expressive (Allport, 1961). Perhaps the primary value of expressive behavior is that it is freely emitted by the person being observed. It can include all aspects of behavior, including walking, talking, handwriting, gesturing, shaking hands, sketching, doodling, etc. Cantril and Allport examined a variety of curious aspects of radio voices. For example, a natural voice is more revealing of personality than a voice transmitted over the radio. They also found that blind people are not better at judging personality from voices than other people, perhaps dispelling the common belief that when people lose one sense they enhance their ability to rely on other senses. Much of what they found was difficult to interpret, however. Voice definitely conveyed accurate measures of personality, but there are no characteristics of personality that are always revealed correctly. Most people preferred to hear a male voice on the radio, but no one could actually explain why, and there were a variety of differences based on the specific aspects of the message or its content (Cantril & Allport, 1935). As for handwriting analysis, Allport felt that through careful research it could become a valid tool for personality analysis. He acknowledged that this was a difficult and complex task, but he concluded that both handwriting and gestures reflect essentially stable and consistent individual styles (Allport & Vernon, 1933).
There are many types of personal documents, including letters, diaries, recorded interviews, and autobiographies. Perhaps the richest of these sources, personal letters, may well become a thing of the past. Letter writing has become much less formal with the advent of phone calls and email. Today, text messages don’t even rely on whole words. Politicians often rely on speech writers, so even their written words aren’t necessarily their own. Of greater concern, according to Allport, is that personal documents are not representative samples and they are not objective (Allport, 1942, 1961). However, if they can still provide insight into the nature of an individual’s personality, then why shouldn’t they be used with caution? Allport had a unique set of letters that had been written over a number of years by a woman, between the ages of 58 and 70, to a young married couple. The young husband had been her son’s college roommate. Seeing value in the letters as a source of psychological material, the couple made them available for publication, and they came into Allport’s possession to be published. For many years he used the letters to provide examples in his own classes, and eventually Allport published them again, along with his analysis of the woman’s personality, in Letters from Jenny (Allport, 1965). Of particular interest, is that Allport interpreted the letters in a variety of ways, including existential, Jungian, Adlerian, and Freudian perspectives. Allport concluded by addressing whether or not Jenny was normal, a point on which some people disagreed. Using his six characteristics of a mature personality, he assigned relatively low scores to Jenny based on her letters, but he also found some strengths within each characteristic. Thus, although Jenny appears to have been troubled, Allport concludes that it is not a simple matter to say she is normal or abnormal, but “her tangled life has contributed stimulus and challenge to posterity” (pg. 223; Allport, 1965).
Religion and Prejudice
Two contrary sets of threads are woven into the fabric of all religion - the warp of brotherhood and the woof of bigotry. I am not speaking of religion in any ideal sense, but, rather, of religion-in-the-round as it actually exists historically, culturally, and in the lives of individual men and women, the great majority of whom (in our land) profess some religious affiliation and belief. Taken in-the-round, there is something about religion that makes for prejudice, and something about it that unmakes prejudice. It is this paradoxical situation that I wish to explore here. (pg. 218; Allport, 1968)
Allport was a deeply spiritual man, and he often wrote about the role of religion in personality. Religion is such an important factor in so many people’s lives, that Allport considered it “thoroughly ridiculous” that psychologists had paid so little attention to it (see Evans, 1981b). Although Allport acknowledged that there were useful and logical reasons for psychology to establish itself as a scientific endeavor, he felt it was just as illogical to reject religion. Allport made neither assumptions nor denials regarding the claims of revealed religion, and he felt that as a scientist he had no right to do so. Still, he believed that psychology must examine subjective religion in the structure of personality whenever and wherever religion is involved. So he delivered a series of six lectures on religion, and published them as The Individual and His Religion (Allport, 1950). The book takes a positive perspective on the role of religion. Allport acknowledged that religion seems primarily symptomatic of fear and frustration in many people’s live, but he preferred to focus on the psychology, not the psychopathology, of religion. What he found was that the religious sentiment, as it pertains to personality, is as varied and unique as each individual. His findings echoed those of William James, whose own foray into this area of psychology was published in The Varieties of Religious Experience (James, 1902/1987).
The relation between religion and prejudice seems to stem from a dichotomy within religion itself. There appears to be an intrinsic value and an extrinsic value associated with religion. The extrinsic or outwardly directed attitude, one that the individual uses for their own purposes, is correlated with prejudice, whereas the intrinsic attitude is correlated with very low prejudice (Evans, 1981b). In focusing on the positive aspects of the intrinsic religious sentiment, Allport suggested that it was attached to the most elusive facets of becoming, enhancing one’s unifying philosophy of life and a sense of direction, intentionality, and good conscience (Allport, 1955). When fully developed, the religious sentiment is distinct from its developmental origins (it has functional autonomy). In other words, it is not simply the following of family tradition, or the practice of meaningless rituals, but rather it becomes a unique part of the individual. It becomes morally true for the person, as it engages reason, faith, and love. This was particularly true for Allport. From 1938 to 1966, about twice a year, Allport offered a prayerful meditation during the daily prayers in Appleton Chapel at Harvard University (collected in Bertocci, 1978). In a meditation offered on The Virtues and Social Science, Allport wrote:
We have much to learn about industrial relations, about the resolution of conflict (personal, national, international); about the control of prejudice, the strengthening of brotherhood and compassion. In such areas as these we have yet to make vital discoveries; we have yet “to think God’s thoughts after Him.” (pp. 89-90; Allport cited in Bertocci, 1978)
Unfortunately, however, there remains the extrinsic attitude toward religion that is correlated with prejudice. In many ways, religions encourage bigotry, most commonly through doctrines of revelation or election. Revealed truth is not to be tampered with, and certain people are chosen, or cursed, above all others. However, these attitudes often follow a very selective reading of the religious texts, and even disagree with other writings. Nonetheless, one cannot deny the horrifying impact that religion can have when perverted for purposes of those who wield power. Allport relates stories such as the Nazi Propaganda Minister Goebbels declaring that Hitler was the intermediary between the German people and God’s throne, or the member of the Ku Klux Klan (an allegedly Christian organization) who justified killing Black children by saying that when you kill rattlesnakes you don’t care if they are young or old (Allport, 1960, 1968). Allport described such people as using religion as they would use any social group, for their own purposes: making friends, influencing people, furthering business pursuits, gaining prestige, etc. It becomes exclusionistic so that only the members of the group benefit, not anyone else. However, although this is a common outcome of religious activity, there remains a minority of people for whom this does not occur. They serve their religion, not the other way around. They have adopted the creeds and doctrines as an important component of their value system, but included within that value system is the doctrine of human brotherhood (see Evans, 1981b). Religion is, of course, only one factor that leads to prejudice and discrimination. Allport studied those factors in great detail in his classic work on prejudice.
Connections Across Cultures: The Nature of Prejudice
Since Allport was committed to social ethics throughout his life, his classic study on prejudice did not arise suddenly. During World War II, one of his projects was to study the effects of rumor. A rumor, according to Allport’s definition, is a specific proposition for belief, passed from person to person, without any secure standards of evidence. When a rumor follows some event, the information that people report is based on memory. Important aspects of those memories are often false, and they are false in conjunction with negative stereotypes. Interestingly, this is much less likely to occur with children, who often fail to identify the racial aspects of scenes they have observed (at least in a research setting). Rumors are particularly dangerous when they incite riots, and Allport and Postman wrote that “no riot ever occurs without rumors to incite, accompany, and intensify the violence” (pg. 193; Allport & Postman, 1947). In 1943 there were major riots in Harlem and Detroit, in which negative racial rumors played an important role. In Detroit in particular, according to Allport, if the authorities had listened to the rumors the violence might have been avoided.
The following year, Allport taught a course on minority group problems to the police captains for the city of Boston, Massachusetts. In 1947 he repeated the course for police officers in Cambridge, Massachusetts. One year later, he presented some of his material in a Freedom Pamphlet entitled ABC’s of Scapegoating (Allport, 1948). This pamphlet later grew (rather dramatically, from 36 pages to 537 pages) into his book The Nature of Prejudice, which was published in 1954 (Allport, 1979). Despite this preparation, the challenge of a major study on prejudice was still daunting. The problem of the causes of prejudice was so large that it took Allport several years to work out the table of contents, which ended up being eight pages long, including sections on preferential thinking, group differences, perceiving and thinking about group differences, sociocultural factors, acquiring prejudice, the dynamics of prejudice, character structure, and reducing group tensions.
Despite being over 500 pages long, The Nature of Prejudice is concise. In part, this indicates the magnitude of the problem of prejudice, and also makes it extremely difficult to summarize the book. Allport begins by asking “What is the problem?” He describes five levels at which people act on prejudice. Most people will only talk about their prejudice with like-minded friends. If the prejudice is strong, they may actively avoid members of another group, and then they may discriminate against them, engaging in detrimental activities toward the disliked group. More extreme prejudice may actually lead to physical attacks, and ultimately, to extermination, such as lynchings or genocide. Is this behavior to be expected? According to Allport, the essential ingredients of prejudice, erroneous generalization and hostility, are natural and common capacities of the human mind. What is necessary, however, is the formation of in-groups, and the rejection of out-groups. We form in-groups naturally as we develop; we learn to like the things we are familiar with. This does not require hostility toward out-groups, but it is an unfortunate reality that many people define their loyalty to the in-group in terms of rejecting the values and customs of the out-group. For those people, rejecting the out-group becomes a powerful need.
Although many differences exist between groups, why has race been emphasized? The answer is, in part, disturbingly simple: we can see race. In addition, most people don’t know the difference between race and ethnic group, or race and social caste. Thus, it is simply easier to identify out-groups on the basis of race. Making matters worse, of course, is the reality that we can’t even define race that well. Allport discusses research that has suggested as many as thirty different human races or types, yet most of us think in terms of three basic races: White, Black, and Asian (more recently the number would be four, including Hispanics). Discriminating against one “race,” such as Blacks in America, without even beginning to understand individual character (i.e., personality) or other aspects of culture, such as religion, customs, or national character (which can also be quite complex), is simply an ignorant act. Yet a point that Allport returns to, as an explanation regarding how natural it is to be prejudice, is that people who are different seem strange, and strangeness is something that makes most people uncomfortable, and it may actually be aversive to many people.
Unfortunately, the victimization of minority groups can enhance the differences and discomfort that exist between groups. As Allport noted:
Ask yourself what would happen to your own personality if you heard it said over and over again that you were lazy, a simple child of nature, expected to steal, and had inferior blood. Suppose this opinion were forced on you by the majority of your fellow-citizens. And suppose nothing that you could do would change this opinion - because you happen to have black skin. (pg. 142; Allport, 1979)
Minorities can become obsessively concerned about everything they do and everywhere they go in public. They develop a basic feeling of insecurity. The simplest response to prejudice is to deny one’s membership in the minority group. For example, some very light-skinned Blacks have passed as White people. But this can lead to great personal conflict, and the feeling that one is a traitor. Huey Newton, co-founder of the Black Panthers, had to fight against prejudice within the Black community itself against those Blacks whose skin was viewed as too light. Oppressed minority group members might also become withdrawn, passive, or they might act like clowns, trying to make fun of their circumstances. Worse, they may identify with the majority group, leading to self-hate and acting out against members of their own group. Of course, there are those who will also fight back aggressively, such as Huey Newton and the members of the Black Panthers.
How might we begin to combat prejudice? Allport discussed an interesting study that addressed the sociological theory of contact between groups. During the Detroit riots of 1943, both Black and White students at Wayne University (which later became Wayne State University) attended class peacefully during what became known as Bloody Monday. It has been suggested that when groups of humans meet they go through a four-stage process: contact itself, followed by competition, then accommodation, and finally assimilation. Thus, the initial contact naturally leads to a peaceful progression of the inter-group relationship. While this is not always the case, there are many examples where it has been. But, it cannot occur without the initial contact. Thus, encouraging contact between groups is an important step in combating prejudice. Allport notes, however, that it is important for the contact to be of equal status and to be in the pursuit of common goals.
Allport also addressed the issue of using legislation to fight prejudice. Unfortunately, as he points out, laws can only have an indirect effect on personal prejudice. They cannot affect one’s thoughts and feelings, they can only influence behavior. However, it is also known that behavior can influence one’s thoughts, opinions, and attitudes. Thus, Allport encourages the continued use of legislation as a significant method for reducing public discrimination and personal prejudice. More important, however, is the need to take positive action toward reducing prejudice, including the use of intercultural education.
In a fascinating study published one year after The Nature of Prejudice, Gillespie & Allport presented the results of a study entitled Youth’s Outlook on the Future (Gillespie & Allport, 1955). What made the study remarkable was that it included students from the United States, New Zealand, South Africa (both Black and White students), Egypt, Mexico, France, Italy, Germany, Japan, and Israel. Included among the questions was the issue of racial equality, whether students desired greater racial equality and whether they expected greater racial equality. A large majority of college students reported that they desired greater racial equality, ranging from 83 to 99 percent. The notable exceptions were Germany (65 percent), and English speaking South Africans (75 percent) and Afrikaners in South Africa (14 percent - this was during Apartheid). As for the expectation that there would be greater racial equality in the future, students in most of the countries studied said yes between 67 to 73 percent of the time, with notable exceptions being Black South Africans (57 percent), Japanese (53 percent), and Mexicans (87 percent). Thus, most college students around the world (in 1955) desired racial equality, but a significant portion of them did not expect to see it in the future. Considering the state of the world today, we are far from learning the final outcome of this crucial social issue.
If it were possible to achieve a world in which people were not prejudice, what attitude should replace it? This question was recently addressed by Whitley and Kite (2006), and they identify the two most commonly raised options: color-blindness and multiculturalism. The color-blind perspective suggests that people should ignore race and ethnicity, acting as if they simply don’t exist, whereas the multicultural perspective considers ethnic/racial identity as cognitively inescapable and fundamental to self-concept. Color-blind proponents argue that as long as race is an issue, there will be some forms of discrimination. Multicultural proponents argue in favor or retaining one’s cultural heritage, thus preserving integrity, while also encouraging group interaction and harmonious coexistence. Does one approach appear to be more effective at reducing prejudice? To date, the evidence favors the multicultural approach. Whitley and Kite suggest that reducing prejudice is most likely to occur as a result of individuals both changing their own attitudes and working to help others change their attitudes as well. It is important to reflect on one’s own thoughts and behaviors, and to help others become aware of their attitudes and behaviors. In addition, it is important to learn more about other groups, and to actively participate in inter-group contact (Whitley & Kite, 2006). In other words, multiculturalism works best when it actually exists; people need to associate with people of other races, religions, and cultures. Only then can ignorance, as in simply not knowing about other people and their cultural differences, be replaced by knowledge and acceptance.
When Allport published his study on prejudice, it was important that the topic was even being addressed. Today, it is more common to examine the nature of cultural differences and to pursue positive aspects of the value of multicultural settings. A number of recent studies have emphasized various aspects of the differences between people from various cultures, the importance of not feeling so different, and how interaction between groups can prove valuable. For example, the Chinese tend to anticipate change more readily than Americans, they predict greater levels of change when it begins, and they consider those who predict change to be wise (Ji, Nisbett, & Su, 2001). Asian Americans, South Koreans, and Russians are more likely than Americans to adopt avoidance goals, but the adoption of those goals is not a negative predictor of subjective well-being in those collectivist cultures, as it is in individualistic cultures (Elliot et al., 2001). The Japanese appear to be subject to cognitive dissonance effects in a “free” choice paradigm, but only in the presence of important others. Americans, in contrast, are less affected by social-cue manipulations in a “free” choice situation (Kitayama et al., 2004). Although social stereotyping typically results in an over-generalized tendency to include people in groups, under certain circumstance it can also lead to excluding certain individuals from their apparent in-group (Biernat, 2003). Particularly for young people, in-group connection is very important. Low-income, high risk African American and Latino teens who do not “look” like other members of their in-group are at a much higher risk for dropping out of school, but the ability to fit in has a protective effect (Oyserman et al., 2006). Even when significant contact between groups does occur, it may only reduce certain aspects of prejudice, and may do so only for the minority group (as opposed to any change in the majority group; Henry & Hardin, 2006). So how can contact between different cultural groups begin to reduce prejudice and discrimination in such a complex issue? It has been shown that when college students are placed in racially diverse groups, they actually engage in more complex thinking, and they credited minority members with adding to the novelty of their discussions (Antonio et al., 2004). Perhaps most importantly, multiculturalism can also foster the development of a character strength described by Fowers and Davidov (2006) as openness to the other.
However, multiculturalism is not without its challenges. Working in diverse teams can lead to social divisions, increasing the likelihood of negative performance teams. Accordingly, it is essential to examine the types of diversity that come into play, since some favor and exploit a wider variety of perspectives and skills, whereas others more readily lead to conflict and division (Kravitz, 2005; Mannix & Neale, 2005). Within the field of psychology, a discipline actively encouraging the growth of minority group membership, there has been a lag in successfully moving students beyond the bachelor’s degree to the doctoral level (Maton et al., 2006). The challenges faced by minority graduate students and faculty are, not surprisingly, as diverse as the individuals themselves (see Vasquez et al., 2006). Thus, we have a long way to go in understanding and overcoming prejudice and discrimination. However, within a framework first established in detail by Allport, our examination and understanding of the major issues is rapidly growing.
discussion question \(3\)
Are you prejudiced? Now that you have probably answered no, think again. Are there times, or situations, where you find yourself having thoughts that make you uncomfortable when you stop to really think about them? What do you think is more important, eliminating prejudice, or enacting laws against discrimination? | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/10%3A_Trait_Theories_of_Personality/10.03%3A_Allport%27s_Psychology_of_Personality.txt |
Raymond Bernard Cattell was born on March 20, 1905, in the seaside town of Staffordshire, England. Cattell developed a great love for the sea, and his first book was actually about sailing. His father was a mechanical engineer who worked on projects such as innovations for WWI military equipment, the steam engine, and the new internal combustion engine. Cattell was an excellent student, and he earned a scholarship to attend London University. He majored in chemistry, and he received his bachelor’s degree in 1924, with first class honors.
The years following World War I were a time of great change in Europe, and Cattell decided that studying psychology would provide him with the opportunity to address the political and economic issues facing society. He entered University College in London, where he worked on his Ph.D. with Charles Spearman, the renowned statistician and expert on intelligence testing (a student of Wilhelm Wundt, and advisor to David Wechsler as well). During his studies, he was involved in the development of factor analysis, a new statistical method that was to have a profound effect on the development of psychological tests (including the MMPI). He completed his Ph.D. in 1929, after which he both worked and continued his education. He spent six years as the director of the City Psychological Clinic, a child guidance center in Leicester, earned a master’s degree in education, and a doctorate of science degree.
In 1937, he came to America to work with E. L. Thorndike at Columbia University, where he continued his work on theories of intelligence. In 1939, he moved to Clark University, where his research interests turned to developing objective measures of personality. In part, this work led to his theory on fluid vs. crystallized intelligence. Then, in 1941, at the invitation of Allport, Cattell joined the faculty at Harvard University. While at Harvard, he was influenced by Allport and Henry Murray, and Cattell became even more strongly interested in the study of personality. It was in this stimulating environment that be began to consider applying factor analysis to the study of personality.
In 1945, Cattell accepted a research professorship at the University of Illinois, where he remained for nearly 30 years. The University of Illinois soon became the site of the first electronic computer, providing Cattell with the technology necessary to conduct large-scale factor-analytic studies on personality (factor analysis is a math intensive statistical technique, even relative to other statistical techniques). He established the Laboratory of Personality Assessment and Group Behavior, where he and his colleagues were highly productive and produced a number of influential books advancing psychological science, including Description and Measurement of Personality (Cattell, 1946), An Introduction to Personality Study (Cattell, 1950a), Personality: A Systemic Theoretical and Factual Study (Cattell, 1950b), Factor Analysis (Cattell, 1952), and Personality and Motivation Structure and Measurement (Cattell, 1957). In these books, Cattell gathered together extensive data from a methodologically sophisticated program of research on the development and organization of personality. In 1960, he called for an international meeting of researchers in the scientific study of personality, which resulted in the foundation of the Society of Multivariate Experimental Psychology, and in 1966 he co-wrote and edited the influential Handbook of Multivariate Experimental Psychology (Cattell, 1966).
After retiring in 1973, Cattell continued his research in Colorado. In 1978, he moved to Hawaii, where he taught at the University of Hawaii and the Hawaii School of Professional Psychology (which later became the American School of Professional Psychology). During his career, Cattell received many honors, including the Wenner-Gren Prize from the New York Academy of Sciences, and in 1972 the Society of Multivariate Experimental Psychology established the Cattell Award for young psychologists. In 1997, he was chosen to receive a Gold Medal Award for Life Achievement (the same honor received by both Gordon and Floyd Allport). However, the announcement resulted in objections that Cattel should not be honored, because he had used his psychological theories to support eugenics. Essentially, he was accused of using his research to support racism, and, therefore, he was a racist. In an open letter to the American Psychological Association, Cattell claimed that his views had been misinterpreted, and that he was being held accountable for statements made as a young man in the 1930s. However, he continued to publish these controversial ideas in the 1970s and 1980s. Regardless, Cattell asked that his name be withdrawn from consideration. Less than two months after writing the letter, Cattell died at his home in Honolulu on February 2, 1998 (Cattell & Horn, 2007; Gale Reference Team, 2004).
Placing Cattell in Context: Statistical Analysis of Trait Dimensions
Raymond Cattell stands alongside Allport as one the two principal founders of the trait approach to understanding personality. As his unique contribution, Cattell brought a level of precision to the scientific and statistical analysis of personality factors that was not available beforehand. Indeed, Cattell helped to develop the factor analysis method that revolutionized objective psychological testing. His 16-PF test was the forerunner of the research that led to today’s highly regarded conception of the Big Five personality traits.
In addition, although he is not generally known for it, Cattell was one of the few early personality theorists who considered the continuation of personality development throughout the lifespan. His publication of these ideas coincides with Erik Erikson’s publication of his first major book, so Cattell was not simply echoing the work of someone who came before him, but rather had developed this interest on his own.
Unfortunately, Cattell also provided the basis for one of the most controversial topics in psychology today. Specifically, he advocated directing the efforts and support of society toward those already advantaged within it. In contrast, the discipline of psychology, as a social science, is held by the vast majority of its members to expectations of ethics and morality that emphasize improving the good of all people. Thus, most psychologists would agree that our discipline, as well as our society, should focus most of its support on those who need it most, even if that approach does not stand up well to a cost-benefit analysis. After all, how does one apply the concept of costs and benefits to the value of a human being? | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/10%3A_Trait_Theories_of_Personality/10.04%3A_A_Brief_Biography_of_Raymond_Cattell.txt |
Cattell studied a variety of personality types and personality traits. Of particular interest to Cattell was how to assess personality, and his work is heavily influenced by the systematic collection of scientific data. This is quite different than many of the psychodynamic and humanistic theorists, who based their theories on clinical observation, but it is similar to the learning theorists, who also value careful, objective observation and the collection of scientific data. Neither approach is inherently better, since they each serve a different purpose. Cattell’s approach, however, has had a dramatic effect on psychological testing.
Types and Traits
A psychological type refers to a broader description of personality than a psychological trait, and is often associated with abnormal psychology. According to Cattell, a type can only be understood in terms of personality traits. For example, a villain is a type based on a pattern of associated traits such as immorality, cruelty, and disregard for the law and the rights of others. Cattell considered types to fall into one of five principal categories: temperamental characteristics, interests and character, abilities, disposition, and disintegration and disease processes. As further examples, and in accordance with Cattell’s type categories, we can include the ancient personality types of Hippocrates (sanguine, choleric, melancholic, phlegmatic), the oral-erotic and anal-erotic types of Sigmund Freud, musical vs. mathematical geniuses, unrestrained vs. restrained personalities, and various neurotic and psychotic syndromes (Cattell, 1946, 1950a,b, 1965).
Cattell believed that clinical psychologists always took personality traits for granted, but focused their attention on the patterns of traits that defined clinical syndromes (or types). However, if one wishes to conduct a thorough description and measurement of personality, traits must be the target of that investigation. Thus, Cattell focused his attention on the details of understanding and describing traits. He agreed with Allport’s description of individual vs. common traits, though he preferred the use of the term unique traits to describe the former. Cattell described a trait as a collection of reactions or responses bound by some sort of unity, thus allowing the responses to be covered by one term and treated similarly in most situations. The challenge lies in identifying the nature of the unity, which has been done in different ways throughout the history of studying personality. For Cattell:
…the unity of a set of parts is established by their moving - i.e., appearing, changing, disappearing - together, by their exercising an effect together, and by an influence on one being an influence on all. (pg. 71; Cattell, 1946)
Thus, a trait guides behavior in a specific direction, by connecting all aspects of that trait into a unit (whether the process is directed outward, a response, or the result of external stimuli, a reaction). Since an understanding of an individual’s traits would allow us to predict the nature of such responses or reactions, Cattell offered a rather simple definition of personality:
Personality is that which permits a prediction of what a person will do in a given situation. (pg. 2; Cattell, 1950b)
According to Cattell, traits and types are not fundamentally different, but rather opposite extremes of the same statistical measures. The fundamental, underlying traits are known as source traits. Source traits often combine and/or interact in ways that appear, on the surface, to indicate a single trait. For example, in the area of abilities, a unitary intelligence shows itself in good academic performance, such a child who does well in school. Of course, children who do well in school typically do well in most areas, such as math, English, social studies, etc. What may now appear to be a type, a “good student,” can also be described as a surface trait (Cattell, 1950b). As useful as surface traits, or types, may be descriptively, in order to truly understand personality, one must address the source traits. First, however, they must be identified.
Source Traits and Factor Analysis
Cattell used the factor-analytic technique to identify sixteen source traits. He often uses the terms source trait and factor interchangeably. Factor analysis is a statistical technique that determines a number of factors, or clusters, based on the intercorrelation between a number of individual elements. Cattell considered factor analysis to be a radical departure from the personality research that preceded his, because it is not based on an arbitrary choice as to which variables are the most important. Instead, the factor-analytic technique determines the relevant variables, based on the available data:
…the trouble with measuring traits is that there are too many of them!...The tendency in the past has been for a psychologist to fancy some particular trait, such as ‘authoritarianism’, ‘extraversion’, ‘flexibility-vs-rigidity’, ‘intolerance of ambiguity’, etc., and to concentrate on its relations to all kinds of things…individual psychologists lead to a system which tries to handle at least as many traits as there are psychologists! (pg. 55; Cattell, 1965)
When Cattell applied factor analysis to the list of words identified by Allport and Odbert, he identified 16 personality factors, more or less. The reason for saying more or less is that any statistical technique is subject to known probabilities of error. Thus, Cattell considered his sixteen factors to be only an estimate of the number of source traits (Cattell, 1952). As potential source traits were identified that Cattell found difficult to put into words, he assigned them a Universal Index (U.I.) number, so that they could be kept for consideration until they could be studied and explained. Cattell identified as many as forty-two personality factors (see Cattell, 1957). By 1965, when Cattell wrote The Scientific Analysis of Personality, he had included three additional factors to his primary list, giving him nineteen personality factors, and kept thirteen of the remaining factors on his list as yet to be confirmed (though each one had a tentative name).
In the late 1940s, Cattell and his colleagues developed the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (commonly known as the 16-PF), based on the 15 factors they considered best established by their data, plus general intelligence as the sixteenth factor (see Cattell, 1956). The sixteen factors are described in Table 13.1. In a very interesting chapter written by Heather Cattell (Cattell’s third wife), the 16-PF profiles are presented, and compared, for a married couple in which the husband was undergoing therapy with Heather Cattell (see H. Cattell, 1986). She described how the profiles offer insight into the problems occurring for Mr. A (as the husband is identified in the chapter), both in his personal life and in his marriage. Although the marriage ended in divorce, a subsequent follow-up found both Mr. A and Mrs. A seemingly doing well in their separate lives.
Table \(1\): The Sixteen Personality Factor
Questionnaire Dimensions
Factor
Low Score Description
High Score Description
A Reserved - detached, critical,aloof, stiff Outgoing- warmhearted,easy-going, participating
B Less Intelligent - concrete-thinking More Intelligent - abstract-thinking, bright
C Affected By Feelings - emotionally less stable, easily upset, changeable Emotionally Stable - mature,faces reality, calm
E Humble - mild, easily led, docile, accommodating Assertive - aggressive, stubborn, competitive
F Sober - taciturn, serious Happy-Go-Lucky - enthusiastic
G Expedient - disregards rules Conscientious - persistent, moralistic, staid
H Shy - timid, threat-sensitive Venturesome - uninhibited, socially bold
I Tough-Minded - self-reliant, realistic Tender-Minded - sensitive, clinging, overprotected
L Trusting - accepting conditions Suspicious - hard to fool
M Practical - “down-to-earth” concerns Imaginative - bohemian,absent-minded
N Forthright - unpretentious,genuine but socially clumsy Astute - polished, socially aware
O Self-Assured - placid, secure, complacent, serene Apprehensive - self-reproaching, insecure, worrying, troubled
Q1 Conservative - respecting traditional ideas Experimenting - liberal,free-thinking
Q2 Group-Dependent - a “joiner” and sound follower Self-Sufficient - resourceful, prefers own decisions
Q3 Undisciplined Self-Conflict - lax, follows own urges, careless of social rules Controlled - exacting will power, socially precise, compulsive
Q4 Relaxed - tranquil, unfrustrated, composed Tense - frustrated, driven, overwrought
For examples of 16-PF profiles used in a therapy setting see H. Cattell (1986).
The Types of Data Used in the Assessment of Personality
In a rather obvious statement, Cattell noted that in order for a psychologist to study correlations there must be two measures available to be correlated. The systematic measure of various aspects of the mind, including personality, has led to the development of a specific branch of psychology known as psychometry. In order for a psychometrist to get a complete and unbiased measure of personality, they must have a concept of the individual’s total behavior, what Cattell called the personality sphere. Cattell believed this could best be accomplished by taking a sample 24-hour period in the person’s life and collecting three types of data: measures of the individual’s “life-record,” or L-data; information provided by questionnaires, or Q-data; and data on their personality structure provided by objective tests, or T-data (Cattell, 1965).
L-data deals with the individual’s actual everyday situations. Ideally, L-data can be collected without the need for the judgment of a trained psychometrist. Examples of specific behaviors include things such as their grades in school, the number of automobile accidents a person has had, the number of times they have been arrested by the police, how many organizations they belong to, etc. Sometimes these data are not so easy to obtain, and must be gathered from someone who knows the person well. For example, we may ask friends or family members to rate the person in terms of how sociable they are in school, how emotionally stable they are when playing sports, or how responsible they are (Cattell, 1965).
Q-data is obtained by having the person fill out a questionnaire, such as the information sheet you fill out when waiting to see a doctor for a medical exam. Unfortunately, these data are subject to a number of problems, such as distortions due to poor self-knowledge, delusions about the self, or the deliberate intention to fake the outcome of the questionnaire. Therefore, it is very important that a psychologist choose the right words when developing a questionnaire:
Although a questionnaire looks like a simple series of questions to which a person underlines a brief answer, such as ‘yes’, ‘no’, ‘generally’, [sic] etc., actually a great deal of art enters into the psychologist’s choice of words, the direction of the question, the use of adjectives to ensure that all alternatives are well used, and so on. (pg. 61; Cattell, 1965)
As noted above, T-data is obtained from objective tests. According to Cattell, questionnaire may seem objective, since their scoring is objective, but the process involves having the individual evaluate themselves. In truly objective tests the individual’s specific behaviors or thoughts are directly and precisely measured. It is essential that only closed-ended questions are used, such as multiple choice or Yes-No options. If open-ended questions are used, such as “How do you feel when you wake up in the morning?” it is possible that two psychologists will interpret the answer quite differently. If there is a possibility of different interpretations, obviously the test cannot be objective.
In comparing the three types of data, Cattell made some interesting observations regarding L-data. Although it occurs naturally, measuring it is artificial and somewhat arbitrary. Although it is objective in the sense that it is real behavior, it is neither created nor controlled, it is simply observed. It is also subject to cultural differences much more so than Q-data and T-data. Of particular concern to Cattell, however, was the commonplace nature of L-data:
Much of the irresponsible theorizing on personality criticized in Chapter 1 happens to have grown up in the realm of L-data, for this has been the traditional field of observation of the philosopher, the armchair observer, and the clinician, whereas Q- and T-data have been developed by the psychometrist concerned with the more disciplined methods. L-data is, indeed, the field of behavior that is the common property of everyone…there arises at this point the need for a proper development of measurement techniques particularly as they apply to L-data… (pp. 54-55; Cattell, 1957)
discussion question \(1\)
Cattell believed that personality assessment worked best when the psychologist understood a person’s entire personality sphere. To accomplish this, one needs to measure L-data, Q-data, and T-data. Do these data provide a complete picture of the person? What data do you think might be the most difficult to obtain, and how might that affect the overall personality picture?
Stages of Development
Cattell described six principal life stages: infancy, childhood, adolescence, maturity, middle age, and old age. Infancy, from birth to 6 years old, is the “great formative period for personality” (pg. 211; Cattell, 1950a). In relation to its family members, the infant develops its basic social attitudes, sense of security or insecurity, the strength of various defense mechanisms (which determine whether the individual will be prone to neuroses), and the general strength of the ego and super-ego. Childhood, the period from age six to fourteen years old, is, according to Cattell, a relatively easy period of consolidation. The child grows toward independence, moving from its family to relationships with peers. Children are primarily realists, but they may have an active day dream life as they long for the status and privilege of adult life (Cattell, 1950a,b).
Adolescence is, of course, a period of psychological storm and stress, requiring many adjustments and readjustments in one’s life. Covering the ages of approximately 14 to 23 years old, Cattell believed that the stress experienced by normal individuals could best be illustrated by its consequences in extreme personalities. Adolescence is the time when some individuals become delinquents, whereas others show the initial signs of mental illness and neurotic behavior. While many of the changes occurring during adolescence are due to the physiological changes associated with puberty, external factors are also critical. All cultures appear to have some ritual associated with the break between childhood and adulthood, and many arrange for an initiation or formal ritual to take place. Of course, there are also positive changes associated with adolescence, such as increased interest in the arts of emotionality and love: poetry, religion, and drama (Cattell, 1950a,b).
Indeed adolescence is the time when even the dullest clod knows that he possesses a soul; and it has been said of the genius that he lives in a perpetual adolescence. (pg. 215; Cattell, 1950a)
Adulthood brings with it maturity, and the pursuit of a career, a mate, a family, and a home. From age 23 to 46 years old, personality becomes set, and the chosen habits of adolescence become settled. Cattell considered it a busy and happy time for most people, but not for those few who failed to resolve their adolescence. They become, in Cattell’s words, shipwrecked in physical disease, mental illness, and the persistent inability to solve the questions of work and wife (or husband, as the case may be; Cattell, 1950a). Middle age is characterized by the beginning of certain physical and mental changes that begin the inevitable decline toward old age and death. Thus, middle age demands a reevaluation of one’s life values, and often leads to the search for some philosophy to make sense of life. Positive changes include an increase in leisure. First, the responsibilities for raising children lessen as the children move out on their own, and later, one approaches the age of retirement.
Old age requires further adjustment, as one begins to question one’s place and value in society. This can cause the frustration of ego needs and a sense of insecurity, which can lead to a restricted range of interests, “crabbiness,” and constant worry about one’s financial state and physical health. However, many people retain their general intellectual capacity and positive attitude toward life unimpaired until death. Even in 1950, Cattell took note of the growing number of people who were living longer and doing so in better health, thus making our understanding of the psychology of old age an increasingly important issue (Cattell, 1950a,b). That trend not only continues today, but may actually be increasing as our knowledge of medicine and interests in health psychology continue to grow.
National Character and Intelligence
Cattell was interested in measuring intelligence throughout his career. Just before coming to the United States, he published A Guide to Mental Testing (Cattell, 1936), which covered topics as diverse as the measurement of intelligence, aptitudes (mechanical, musical, artistic, etc.), scholastic attainment, temperament, interests, and character. Much later in his career, Cattell confirmed his controversial interest in the relationship between intelligence and national achievement (see Cattell, 1983). What made this research controversial was the apparent racist overtones of the research. As noted above, Cattell claimed that his views were taken out of context, and that the most controversial claims were made in the 1930s, before he even came to the United States. However, consider some of the following statements written by Cattell in 1983!
In the state of Hawaii, where I happen to be writing, there are at least a dozen ethnic groups of good sample size and differing in racial composition and life style. The lack of seriousness about education, and lack of concern with conversations on things of the mind, can be well brought into relief by comparing some low groups (which shall be nameless) with say, high groups such as the Japanese, the Chinese, and the Jews, whose literacy, school achievement, and employment rates are high. (pg. 12; Cattell, 1983)
…a 15 point difference in average tells us nothing immediately about an individual, White or Black. It does tell us that there will be considerable overlap of the two groups…It also tells us, however, that if we look for persons with I.Q.s of above, say, 130…the chances of finding a Black among 1,000 or of a White among 1,000 to exceed 130 is far higher in the second group. (pg. 41; Cattell, 1983)
…regarding special educational expenditure. Should it be on the top, say, 10% of highly gifted children or on the lagging 10% of dull and backward children?...A eugenist is compelled to argue that the social conscience should, in terms of family planning have shifted the higher birth rate in the first place from the I.Q. 70-80 range to the I.Q. 120-130 range. (pg. 59; Cattell, 1983)
Incidentally one would expect most effect on both productivity and potency of national defense to derive from the magnitude of the supply in the topmost ranges of intelligence, from which, given appropriately more advanced education, resourceful management and beneficial invention result. The numbers in that range depend both on their birth rates and the assortiveness of mating, and a rise in the latter could admittedly temporarily offset a decline in the former. Surely everyone will agree that the schools should turn to giving appropriate education to these much brighter individuals, but it will take a more far-sighted public to encourage measures for their greater production. (pp. 14-15; Cattell, 1983)
Taken together, these suggestions lead to very clear impression of Cattell’s opinions and goals: there are “low” groups and “high” groups of people, Blacks in America are a “low” group, special education spending should not be wasted on people of low intelligence, the families who produced those children should not have any more children, and “resourceful management” should be used to ensure that “high” groups have more children and “low” groups do not! What makes these views most disturbing is not that one person has them, but rather, that Cattell has colleagues who agree with him. Most notorious, in recent times, was the publication of The Bell Curve by Herrnstein & Murray (1994; for a discussion of some of the problems associated with The Bell Curve see Belgrave & Allison, 2006).
The suggestion of people like Cattell, Herrnstein, & Murray, that society should discard whole groups of people is unconscionable to many people, and should have no place in a psychology that emphasizes the improvement of the human condition. Another somewhat controversial figure, Arthur Jensen, also argues that general intelligence, or g as it was first described by Spearman, is largely inherited, but at the same time he acknowledges that there is an environmental component to even this most basic aspect of intelligence (Jensen, 1998). Considering any role for environmental factors in intelligence, we must then take into serious consideration the discriminatory practices that denied adequate education to minorities throughout history, both in America and elsewhere. When provided with good education, Blacks have demonstrated an equal ability to learn as compared to Whites (see Belgrave & Allison, 2006; Miller & Garran, 2008). Thus, rather than seeking to exclude people from opportunities to advance within our society, we should be encouraging, as much as possible, equal access to educational support systems.
In a somewhat related article, Robert McCrae (whose research on the Big Five personality traits will be examined below) and Antonio Terracciano examined whether or not there is a valid basis for determining national character based on personality traits. People in all cultures have shared perceptions of what people are like in both their own culture and in other cultures, perceptions which form the basis of stereotypes. After examining data from nearly fifty different countries, McCrae & Terracciano concluded that national character stereotypes are unfounded, even when examining people’s impressions of their own country (McCrae & Terracciano, 2006)! Clearly, if stereotypes based on personality are not accurate reflections of personality, how can stereotypes based on measures of intelligence have a meaningful bearing on our decisions regarding social programs?
Discussion question \(2\)
Cattell created a great deal of controversy with his views on nationality, race, intelligence, and achievement. What effect, if any, do you think it has on the field of psychology when one of its leading scientists makes an issue of such controversy? How much worse, if at all, did it make it when he claimed he was being persecuted for comments made in the 1930s as a young man, when in fact, he had continued to publish these ideas as late as 1983! | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/10%3A_Trait_Theories_of_Personality/10.05%3A_Basic_Concepts_of_Cattell%27s_Theory.txt |
Hans Eysenck offered a theory of personality that was much more concise than that of Cattell, suggesting that there were only three major factors. He also emphasized the importance a hereditary basis for personality and intelligence, and he applied his research to some important everyday life circumstances. Accordingly, he was a very popular and widely acknowledged researcher. In 1997, he was identified as the most widely cited living person, second only to Sigmund Freud and Karl Marx amongst the most cited individuals of all time (Jensen, 1997). In addition, he was honored with not one, but two Festschriften, the first on his sixty-fifth birthday (Lynn, 1981), and the second in honor of his eightieth birthday (Nyborg, 1997).
Eysenck was born in Berlin, Germany, in 1916. His parents divorced when he was 2, and he was raised by his grandmother, seeing his parents only once or twice a year. He was a star athlete, including being a nationally ranked tennis player. He left Germany to escape the Nazis in 1934, and spent a brief period of time studying literature and history in France and England. His grandmother, however, died in a concentration camp around 1941 or 1942. He eventually began studying psychology at University College in London, under the renowned Cyril Burt. He earned his Ph.D. in 1940, and during World War II he worked as a research psychologist using factor analysis to study personality. After the war he became a psychologist at Maudsley Hospital, where he became friends with Philip Vernon (who completed his Ph.D. with Allport; see, e.g., Allport & Vernon, 1933), then helped to form a psychiatry institute at the hospital and affiliated with the University of London. He spent the rest of his career there, though he spent some time as a visiting professor in the United States (Eysenck, 1982, 1997). Eysenck received numerous awards during his career, including a Distinguished Scientist Award from the American Psychological Association. He died in 1997.
The Structure of Personality
According to Eysenck, the sixteen primary personality factors identified by Cattell in the 16-PF test were unreliable and could not be replicated. Eysenck chose instead to focus on higher order factor analysis, and he identified three “superfactors:” extraversion, neuroticism, and psychoticism (Eysenck, 1982). According to Eysenck, higher order factors are similar to types, and they represent combinations of primary personality traits. Thus, he considered the sixteen factors that Cattell included in the 16-PF as primary factors, whereas extraversion, neuroticism, and psychoticism were second-order factors (or types). Actually, even the primary factors are comprised of lower level responses that result in a hierarchical model of personality: specific responses, habitual responses, traits (or factors), and finally, types (or superfactors). Similarly, g, or general intelligence, is a higher order factor than its component intelligences (e.g., verbal, numerical, memory, visuo-spatial, and reasoning). Thus, Eysenck’s theory does not contradict that of Cattell, but rather looks at a higher level of personality structure (Eysenck, 1952, 1967, 1970).
An extravert is commonly described as an outgoing, expressive person, but the technical definition described by Eysenck is more complex. Extraversion is a combination of sociability, impulsiveness, frivolity, general activity, and overt sexuality. The complex nature of each higher order factor may lead to some of the differences in personality theory. According to Eysenck, the impulsiveness associated with extraversion is most likely hereditary (a temperamental trait), whereas the sociability aspect of extraversion is more likely to be influenced by one’s environment. Thus, perhaps, it is not surprising that Eysenck finds support for hereditary influences on personality whereas others, like Cattell, find support for environmental influences. Depending on how one designs their questions and experiments, the component traits within a higher order factor can support different perspectives (Eysenck, 1982).
Neuroticism refers to one’s emotional stability, or lack thereof. It incorporates mood swings, poor emotional adjustment, feelings of inferiority, a lack of social responsibility, a lack of persistence, issues of trust vs. suspiciousness, social shyness, hypochondria, and the lack of relaxed composure. Neuroticism raises the intensity of emotional reactions. Since it is a function of the reactivity of the autonomic nervous system, it is an inherited characteristic. Individuals who measure high in neuroticism are more likely to suffer from neuroses, but high neuroticism is not necessarily less desirable than low levels of neuroticism. For example, aesthetic appreciation and creativity can benefit from an individual being highly emotional. On the clearly negative side, high levels of neuroticism have routinely been found in criminals, perhaps because whenever an individual has antisocial tendencies, a high level of neuroticism enhances their fear/anxiety responses and functions as a powerful, albeit dysfunctional, drive (Eysenck, 1977, 1982; Kendrick, 1981). Cattell also studied neuroticism, and his findings were very similar to those of Eysenck (Cattell & Scheier, 1961).
Psychoticism was added to Eysenck’s theory well after identifying extraversion and neuroticism, and it is the least clearly defined or heritable of the three superfactors. It incorporates traits of dominance-leadership, dominance-submission, sensation seeking, and the lack of a superego. Children who score high on a measure of psychoticism tend to have behavior problems and learning difficulties, they become loners, skip school, commit crimes, and are generally disliked by teachers and peers. Whether as children or as adults, they do not typically benefit from traditional psychotherapies or counseling, as there tends to be a paranoid, suspicious barrier. There is some evidence, however, for successful treatment with intensive behavioral techniques. Interestingly, whether or not these children become criminals as adults seems to depend on how they score on the other two superfactors. High neuroticism seems to be the factor which makes juvenile delinquency a habit that persists into a life of crime (S. Eysenck, 1997).
discussion question \(1\)
In contrast to Cattell’s sixteen primary factors, Eysenck proposed just three superfactors. Can a reasonable evaluation of personality be conducted along just three dimensions? If not, do you think these are still the three most essential dimensions?
The Role of Heredity in Personality
Eysenck believed strongly in the inheritance of personality and intelligence. If it is true that genetics plays a major role in personality, then evolution should provide us with an interesting test: do other primate species demonstrate the same superfactors that we see in humans? Eysenck examined this question in conjunction with Harry Harlow. After conducting factor analysis on the social behavior of rhesus monkeys, they found three clear behavior factors: affectionate, fearful, and hostile social behavior. These factors match well with the human factors of extraversion, neuroticism, and psychoticism, respectively. Of course, there were marked differences between animals, but those differences were characteristic and reliable for each monkey. Thus, it would appear that the biological basis for personality superfactors can be confirmed in comparative psychological studies (Chamove, Eysenck, & Harlow, 1972).
Figure \(1\)
Whether heredity or learning is more important in personality development remains unclear.
Reviews of Eysenck’s overall contribution to the field of behavior genetics have, however, been the subject of debate. Whereas some praise Eysenck for identifying the significant role that genetic determinants play in personality factors (see Martin & Jardine, 1986), others argue that Eysenck’s own data provide evidence that he overstated the significance of genetics (see Loehlin, 1986). Indeed, Loehlin suggests that the data in Eysenck’s own publications can be interpreted to suggest that genetics account for about half of the variance in personality factors, which leaves the other half subject to the environment. Still, Loehlin acknowledges Eysenck’s primary role in bringing these issues into the realm of science, and he commends Eysenck for providing his data openly, so that others, like Loehlin, might be able to evaluate and debate those results (Loehlin, 1986). Eysenck, for his part, acknowledged the points made by Loehlin, and expressed hope that continued research in the future would help to better clarify the role of genetics in determining behavior, intelligence, and personality (Eysenck, 1986).
Personality and Real Life Issues
Although Eysenck’s approach to personality focused on group differences and genetics, he was not without concern for the individual and her or his daily life. He also challenged the way in which psychologists are pursuing their discipline, and the effect it has on the public’s view of psychology. In 1972, he published Psychology is About People, which included jokes about psychology and psychiatry, as well as topics as diverse as sex, socialism, education, pornography, and behaviorism (Eysenck, 1972). In Uses and Abuses of Psychology he challenged the stereotypes associated with views on national character, and urged the learning of facts about other cultures (numerous other topics are covered as well; Eysenck, 1953). In Sense and Nonsense in Psychology he examined such things as hypnosis, lie detectors, telepathy, interpreting dreams, and politics:
If it be true that there are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamed of in our philosophy, it is surely equally true that things are dreamed of in our philosophy which do not appear in heaven or on earth. Among these figments of the imagination appear such varied objects as the philosopher’s stone, which was supposed to transmute base metals into gold, the Oedipus complex, which was supposed to transmute a normal person into a gibbering neurotic…and the Jungian archetypes, which are supposed to haunt our modern minds with mystical reminders of the inherited wisdom, or otherwise, of our race. (pg. 71; Eysenck, 1957)
Eysenck wrote extensively about sex and personality, and the role that violence and the media may play in distorting sexuality (e.g., Eysenck, 1976; Eysenck & Nias, 1978). He also wrote about the relationship between personality and criminal behavior (e.g., Eysenck, 1964; Eysenck & Gudjonsson, 1989), and the role that personality and stress play in the lives of people who smoke cigarettes (Eysenck, 1991). Like Cattell, Jensen, and others, Eysenck was very much caught up in the controversy over racial differences in intelligence testing (see, e.g., Eysenck, 1973a,b, 1995; Eysenck & Kamin, 1981; Pearson, 1991). Eysenck, however, offered something for the average person, two books on how to measure your own I.Q. (Eysenck, 1962, 1966). Late in his career, Eysenck offered an interesting reflection on his decision to focus most of his career on differences between people, as opposed to the uniqueness of each person:
Gordon Allport and I did not always see eye to eye on theoretical matters. I remember very well him telling me that he thought every psychologist should write his autobiography at the end of his life, to see the unities that emerged in his conduct over a lengthy period of time. This idiographic point of view contrasted very much with my own nomothetic one, and at the time I paid little attention to it. Now, half a life-time later, I can see what he was driving at, and can also see the possible importance of such consistencies of behaviour in one’s own life. (pg. 375; Eysenck, 1986)
discussion question \(2\)
Eysenck wrote two books that challenged the field of psychology: Uses and Abuses of Psychology and Sense and Nonsense in Psychology. What advantages do you think it has for the field when someone of Eysenck’s stature questions the scientific validity of certain areas of study or certain procedures? | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/10%3A_Trait_Theories_of_Personality/10.06%3A_Hans_Eysenck%27s_Dimensions_of_Personality.txt |
Costa and McCrae followed in the footsteps of Eysenck, but they expanded slightly upon the number of second order factors. The result of their efforts became one the most widely respected perspectives on personality structure today: the Five-Factor Model of personality. Indeed, the Five-Factor Model has been so well researched, research that has supported and expanded the original conception, that Costa and McCrae believe it now deserves to be referred to as the Five-Factor Theory (see McCrae & Costa, 2003).
Paul Costa earned a Ph.D. in human development from the University of Chicago in 1970. He taught for 2 years at Harvard University, and then joined the faculty of the University of Massachusetts at Boston. In 1978 he joined the National Institute on Aging, a branch of the National Institutes of Health. Since 1985, he has been the Chief of the Laboratory of Personality and Cognition, Gerontology Research Center. He also holds appointments at the University of Maryland, Duke University Medical Center, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, and the Georgetown University School of Medicine. Among numerous awards, he has been elected as a Fellow of the Gerontological Society of America, the American Psychological Association, and the Society of Behavioral Medicine. He has published hundreds of research articles, many of them in collaboration with Robert McCrae. McCrae earned his Ph.D. in personality psychology at Boston University in 1976. After teaching and conducting research at Boston University, the Veteran’s Administration Outpatient Clinic in Boston, and the University of Massachusetts at Boston, in 1978 he joined the Gerontology Research Center at the National Institute on Aging, where he continues to conduct research today. He is also a Fellow of the Gerontological Society of America, as well as a Fellow of the American Psychological Society and Division 20 (Adult Development and Aging) of the American Psychological Association (for more information visit the National Institute on Aging website at www.grc.nia.nih.gov).
The Five-Factor Theory of Personality
Costa and McCrae acknowledged the important role that Eysenck played when he identified extraversion and neuroticism as second-order personality factors, and for developing the Maudsley Personality Inventory, the Eysenck Personality Inventory, and the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (the latter test, developed with his wife Sybil, was the first to include psychoticism; see S. Eysenck, 1997) as tools for measuring these factors. However, they disagreed with Eysenck regarding psychoticism. They initially proposed a different factor called openness. When they discussed this issue with Eysenck, he felt that openness might be the opposite pole of psychoticism, but McCrae and Costa believed the factors were significantly different (see Costa & McCrae, 1986). Since that time, Costa and McCrae have moved beyond the third factor of openness, and added two more second-order factors: agreeableness and conscientiousness (see Costa & McCrae, 1989; Costa & Widiger, 1994; McCrae & Allik, 2002; McCrae & Costa, 2003). Together, Costa and McCrae developed the NEO Personality Inventory (or NEO-PI) to measure neuroticism, extraversion, and openness, and later they developed the Revised NEO-PI, or NEO-PI-R, which also measures agreeableness and conscientiousness (see McCrae & Costa, 2003).
Table \(1\): The Five-Factor Model of Personality
Factor
Low Score Description
High Score Description
Neuroticism
Calm, Even-tempered, Self-satisfied, Comfortable, Unemotional, Hardy Worrying, Temperamental, Self-pitying, Self-conscious, Emotional, Vulnerable
Extraversion
Reserved, Loner, Quiet, Passive, Sober, Unfeeling Affectionate, Joiner, Talkative, Active, Fun-loving, Passionate
Openness to Experience
Down-to-earth, Uncreative, Conventional, Prefer routine, Uncurious, Conservative Imaginative, Creative, Original, Prefer variety, Curious, Liberal
Agreeableness
Ruthless, Suspicious, Stingy, Antagonistic, Critical, Irritable Softhearted, Trusting, Generous, Acquiescent, Lenient, Good-natured
Conscientiousness
Negligent, Lazy, Disorganized, Late, Aimless, Quitting Conscientious, Hardworking, Well-organized, Punctual, Ambitious, Persevering
Taken from McCrae and Costa (2003).
The general descriptions of extraversion, neuroticism, openness, agreeableness, and conscientious are listed in Table 13.2. It is important to note that these five factors are distinct, and neither low nor high scores are necessarily better or ‘good’ or ‘bad:’
…all traits have passed the evolutionary test of survival, and from society’s point of view all kinds of people are necessary: those who work well with others and those who can finish a task on their own; those who come up with creative new ways of doing things and those who maintain the best solutions of the past. There are probably even advantages to found [sic] in Neuroticism, since a society of extremely easygoing individuals might not compete well with other societies of suspicious and hostile individuals. Cultures need members fit for war as well as peace, work as well as play… (pp. 51-52; McCrae & Costa, 2003)
As a basis for studying personality, the Five-Factor Model has proven quite comprehensive. The five factors stand up well when measured with a variety of other tests and within other theoretical perspectives, including a thorough comparison with the list of human needs proposed by Henry Murray. Particularly important in psychology today, the Five-Factor Model has also stood up very well when examined across cultures, a topic we will examine in more detail in Connections Across Cultures.
Connections Across Cultures: The Big Five Across Cultures
In order to evaluate the cross-cultural application of the Five-Factor Model, Robert McCrae has suggested that we need to address the issue in three ways. Transcultural analyses look for personality factors that transcend culture. In other words, personality factors that are universal, or common to all people. Intracultural analyses look at the specific expression of traits within a culture. And finally, intercultural analyses compare trait characteristics between cultures (see Allik & McCrae, 2002). In 2002, McCrae and Allik published The Five-Factor Model of Personality Across Cultures, a collection of research in which a variety of investigators examined the applicability of the Five-Factor Model (FFM) in a wide variety of cultures. The various studies contained in this book examine personality structure, as well as the validity and generalizability of using the NEO-PI-R to measure personality, in some forty cultures spread across five continents. McCrae and Allik acknowledge that there is much more to personality than just traits, but the traits identified in the FFM appear to offer a robust cross-cultural foundation for understanding personality worldwide.
The potential validity of translating the NEO-PI-R and studying the FFM in different cultures is based on the idea that the most important factors in human interaction would be encoded in the languages of most, if not all, cultures (see Pervin, 1999). Given concerns regarding this lexical hypothesis and the challenges of translation, Peabody (1999) used trait descriptions with contrasting terms to help clarify matters in a study on the judgment of national character. He had judges from 12 different European countries, plus America, the Philippines, Japan, and China rate one another. Upon examining the data from a FFM perspective, Peabody found strong support for the utility of this model in cross-cultural studies. Other investigators have had significant success using the NEO-PI-R in direct translation. Rolland (2002) collected data from studies in which the NEO-PI-R was administered to people in cultures speaking 16 different languages (including Sino-Tibetan, Indo-European, Uralic, Hamito-Semitic, and Austronesian languages, and one unclassified language [Korean]). Overall, he confirmed the generalizability of the personality structure identified by the FFM in these varied cultures. Similar favorable results pertaining to personality structure have been identified with both adults and adolescents in Czeck, Polish, and Slovak groups (Hrebickova, et al., 2002) and amongst the Shona in Zimbabwe (Piedmont, et al., 2002), as well as for the relationship between personality and emotion amongst Canadian, Spanish, Chinese, Japanese, and Korean subjects (Yik, et al., 2002) and the relationship between personality and cultural goals in Americans and Vietnamese (Leininger, 2002). These studies, as well as numerous others that are not mentioned, provide substantial support for the consistency of the FFM across a wide variety of cultures, at least as far as personality structure is concerned. However, it remains unclear whether the scores obtained from two different cultural groups are equivalent (see Poortinga, Van de Vijver, & Van Hemert, 2002). In other words, if Culture A scored higher than Culture B on, say, agreeableness, it may be that the translation used for Culture A is more responsible for the result than an actual difference between Cultures A and B. Further research will be necessary in order to address issues such as this.
Despite the numerous studies that support the cross-cultural application of the FFM, there are psychologists, generally favorable to the FFM, who nonetheless emphasize caution. The fundamental question is whether or not trait descriptions are how people in other cultures describe another person. While it is true that using abstract trait names is common practice in American culture, in other cultures, such as India and China, it is more common to describe people in terms of context dependent actions. To fit such data into a FFM requires some manipulation, which leaves the validity of the work open to some debate (see Pervin, 1999). However, when comparing Chinese and American students, the FFM does provide an adequate measure of each group’s stereotypes regarding one another (Zhang, et al., 1999). What is clear is the need for continued research on cross-cultural perspectives, as well as a need for cross-cultural training programs. In that regard, Brislin (1999) has offered ways in which the FFM can be used as one basis for developing such programs, in part by telling us something about each person in a cross-cultural training program and, therefore, which type of program might work best for them (see also McCauley, Draguns, & Lee, 1999). Whether one favors the FFM or some other model of personality structure, the importance of cross-cultural studies is clear:
Human nature cannot be independent of culture. Neither can human personality. Human beings do share certain social norms or rules within their cultural groups. More than 2000 years ago, Aristotle held that man is by nature a social animal. Similarly, Xun Kuang (298-238 B.C.), a Chinese philosopher, pointed out that humans in social groups cannot function without shared guidance or rules. Therefore, each culture or cultural group establishes its own norms. Constantly, these norms and rules are connected with the behavior and personality of members within a culture and society. (pg. vii; Lee, McCauley, & Draguns, 1999)
In proposing a Five-Factor Theory of personality, McCrae and Costa addressed the nature of personality theories themselves:
A theory of personality is a way of accounting for what people are like and how they act; a good theory explains a wide range of observations and points researchers in the right direction for future research. Freudian theory pointed researchers toward the study of dreams, but decades of research have yielded very little by way of supportive evidence…Trait theory pointed researchers toward general styles of thinking, feeling, and acting, and has resulted in thousands of interesting and useful findings. That is why most personality psychologists today prefer trait theory to psychoanalysis…But…there is more to human personality than traits. (pp 184-185; McCrae & Costa, 2003)
They propose that there are three central components to personality: basic tendencies (which are the five personality factors), characteristic adaptations, and self-concept (a highly adapted and extensively studied form of characteristic adaptation). The basic tendencies interact with three peripheral components that mark the interface with systems outside personality. There are the biological inputs to the basic tendencies, the external environment, and objective biography (all that a person does and experiences). Connecting all of these components are dynamic processes, such as perception, coping, role playing, reasoning, etc. Although this theory is newer, it does account for one of the most important issues challenging trait theories in general: how does one account for the general consistency of traits, yet the potential for, and occasional observation of, change in personality? Simply, the basic tendencies are consistent, whereas the characteristic adaptations are subject to change, both as a result of dramatic environmental influences and due to changes associated with aging (McCrae & Costa, 2003).
Consistency Across the Lifespan
In over 25 years of teaching, it has been my experience that most college students want to believe that adult personality can readily change. Likewise, most psychologists, particularly clinical psychologists helping people to change their dysfunctional lives, want to believe that personality can change. However, trait theorists have repeatedly shown that traits are highly resistant to change once adulthood has been reached (see, e.g., Costa & McCrae, 1989; McCrae & Costa, 2003). This is particularly true for Neuroticism, Extraversion, and Openness, for both men and women, and for Blacks and Whites. While Costa and McCrae acknowledge that individuals sometimes change dramatically, as a general rule, consistency is clearly more important. They also suggest that this should be an opportunity for optimism. As individuals age, they should not fear becoming a different person, such as someone isolated or depressed. If, however, an individual of younger age is isolated, depressed, or suffers from some other psychological malady, they should also realize that time or aging alone is not likely to change them, but rather, psychotherapy may be a desirable and effective course of action. Once again, Costa & McCrae emphasize the newness of these theories, and suggest the need for systematic prospective studies of the Five-Factor Theory over the entire adult lifespan. Fortunately, the NEO-PI-R provides the tool necessary to evaluate the Five-Factor Theory throughout life and in different cultures. Given the steady increase in life expectancy in Western societies, and the growing percentage of elderly people within our society, this research is likely to become a priority in the field of personality. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/10%3A_Trait_Theories_of_Personality/10.07%3A_Paul_Costa_and_Robert_McCrae_and_the_Five-Factor_Model_of_Personality.txt |
Marvin Zuckerman represents the current approach taken by many psychologists who study traits. He developed an interest in one particular trait, and he has studied that trait in great detail. He called it sensation seeking, and in order to study it carefully he also developed the Sensation Seeking Scale. The study of this trait has enjoyed a certain popular appeal, exemplified by the success of the X Games and, more recently, the popularity of televised mixed martial arts competitions.
Zuckerman was the son of a mechanical engineer who came to America from Russia. His mother’s father had also come from Russia, and both sides of the family had a tradition of their sons becoming rabbis. As a boy, Zuckerman enjoyed playing football, but most of his sensation seeking centered on reading adventure books. He first became interested in psychology when he encountered a book about graphology. When he entered the University of Kentucky, he experienced the “disinhibitory joys of drinking, sex, and hitchhiking around the country” (pg. 46; Zuckerman, 1993). He then suffered a period of depression, during which he discovered the work of Sigmund Freud. He decided to become a psychoanalyst, so, after serving his duty in the army (following World War II), attended New York University. Unfortunately, a bad grade in chemistry made it impossible to get into the medical school of his choice, so he chose to begin the graduate program in clinical psychology at NYU.
Zuckerman found it difficult to find an area of psychology that appealed to him, except for a vague interest in experimental studies that suggested an “exploratory drive,” something we might also call curiosity, in a variety of animal species. Zuckerman also found clinical work unfulfilling, so he began to focus more on conducting research. He spent a few years at a hospital and then a psychiatric research institute in Indiana, where he began studying sensory deprivation (see, e.g., Zuckerman et al., 1962). In contrast to sensory deprivation, he also began to study sensation seeking, its apparent counterpart. After several moves, including the threat of being fired from Adelphi University due to newspaper photos of the college professor arrested and lying in the local jail (following his involvement in a protest against racism), in 1968 he joined the faculty of the University of Delaware. Since he found it difficult to find continued funding for sensory deprivation research, he began to focus on sensation seeking itself. In 1975, Zuckerman took a sabbatical to work with Hans Eysenck, leading to the publication of some joint papers, and Zuckerman’s eventual contribution to Eysenck’s second festschrift (see Zuckerman, 1997). His work on sensation seeking, and his relationship with Eysenck, have led Zuckerman to become one of today’s leading proponents of the biological basis of personality. He retired in 2002, but has remained busy enjoying life, giving talks, writing, and conducting research (Zuckerman, 1983, 1991, 2006).
The Sensation Seeking Trait
Sensation seeking is a trait defined by the need for varied, novel, and complex sensations and experiences and the willingness to take physical and social risks for the sake of such experience…The high-sensation seeker is sensitive to his or her internal sensations and chooses external stimuli that maximize them. (pg. 10; Zuckerman, 1979)
All people seem to seek an optimal level of stimulation and/or arousal. For some, that level of arousal is quite high, for others, it is rather low. The concept was not new when Zuckerman began to study sensory deprivation and sensation seeking. Indeed, the examination of optimal levels of arousal dates back to the very beginning of psychology: the experimentalist Wilhelm Wundt was studying it as early as 1893 (see Zuckerman, 1979), as were Sigmund Freud and Josef Breuer in 1895 (Freud and Breuer, 1895/2004). Following the “brainwashing” techniques used by the Chinese during the Korean War, the Canadian government pursued research on sensory deprivation, work led by D. O. Hebb. Following this early research, Zuckerman began his own investigations. Generally, sensory deprivation leads to increased anxiety, somatic discomfort, and thinking and concentration difficulties. In addition, many of the subjects experienced both auditory and visual hallucinations. None of the effects of sensory deprivation seemed to correlate with any personality variables (Zuckerman et al., 1962). It was because of these profound effects of sensory deprivation that Zuckerman began to pursue the underlying variable that leads individuals to their optimal level of arousal.
The Sensation Seeking Scale has been revised a number of times. The fifth version was developed in collaboration with Hans and Sybil Eysenck, and included comparisons of males to females and American students to English students (see Zuckerman, 1979, 1994). Using factor analysis, Zuckerman and his colleagues have identified four subscales within the sensation seeking trait:
Thrill and Adventure Seeking: Many people enjoy engaging in risky sports and other potentially dangerous experiences that produce unique sensations related to speed or defying gravity, such as rock climbing, BASE jumping, or drag racing. This factor is exemplified by the sports included in the X Games.
Experience Seeking: This factor encompasses novel sensations and experiences, such as arousing music, art, and travel. It also incorporates social nonconformity, particularly associated with belonging to groups on the fringes of conventional society.
Disinhibition: This factor covers sensation seeking that focuses on social activities, such as parties, drinking, illegal drugs, and sex.
Boredom Susceptibility: Individuals who score high on this factor cannot tolerate any kind of repetitive experience, including routine work and boring people.
Figure \(1\)
Sensation seeking comes in many forms. Here, the author is hanging from two ice screws about 800 or 900 feet up the alpine route Pinnacle Gulley on Mt. Washington in New Hampshire. The temperature was an invigorating -15 o F.
Sensation seeking should not be confused with being reckless. For example, individuals who are high sensation seekers are more likely to have varied sexual experiences, but they are not more likely to avoid using condoms. They may be more inclined to drive fast, but they are not less likely to use their seatbelts. And rock and ice climbers take full advantage of safety gear, they study self-rescue techniques, and they check their gear carefully before each trip. However, adolescence may be a particularly risky time, since there is a temporal gap between the onset of puberty, during which adolescents are highly thrill seeking, and the slow maturation of the cognitive-control systems that govern such behavior in adulthood (Steinberg, 2007). It is also important to note that it is neither good nor bad to score high or low on this scale:
In this sociobiological sense, the high sensation seeker is a hunter and the low sensation seeker is a farmer. Hunters are positively excited by change, danger, and the variety and unpredictability of the hunt. They need a strong capacity to focus attention on the prey while remaining alert to other factors like the direction of the wind and the movements of other hunters. Farmers, in contrast, depend on stability of the environment (rainfall, sun, and other seasonal regularities of climate). Plants grow slowly and require patience and tedious kinds of labor to insure their survival. (pp. 384-385; Zuckerman, 1994)
During the course of his research, Zuckerman found a close relationship between sensation seeking and impulsivity. If he limited his factor analysis to five factors, as Costa and McCrae had, impulsivity and sensation seeking always combined to form a factor that he called impulsive sensation seeking. This proved to be rather curious, since impulsivity was a substrate of neuroticism, whereas “excitement seeking” was a substrate of extraversion. Another problem that Zuckerman expressed with regard to the Five-Factor Model was his belief that words like “conscientiousness” have no meaning in species other than humans. Since Zuckerman favors a biological/genetic basis for personality, there should be evolutionary correlates of any personality structure in other animals, particularly the closely related apes. Thus, Zuckerman examined his data, conducted a factor analysis, and offered an alternative to the Five-Factor Model. His five factors are sociability, neuroticism-anxiety, impulsive sensation seeking, aggression-hostility, and activity (Zuckerman, 2006). While Zuckerman did not intend for his five factors to match those of Costa and McCrae exactly, it is easy to see a relationship between sociability and agreeableness, activity and extraversion, sensation seeking and openness, and neuroticism and neuroticism. Aggression-hostility, however, seems to relate more to Eysenck’s factor psychoticism. Thus, there remains a need for continued research into this field, particularly as it pertains to the evolutionary basis for personality factors, but Eysenck, Costa, McCrae, and Zuckerman have provided an excellent and coherent basis for further research.
Figure \(2\) Figure \(3\)
The author is highly susceptible to boredom, so he likes to travel to interesting places. Here we see the author in Mt. Washington’s alpine garden (NH) in winter (top left) and above the clouds on Mt. Rainier, Washington (bottom right), and the author’s son walking in the Great Salt Lake in Utah’s desert (top right).
Figure \(4\)
Discussion question \(1\)
Which areas of Zuckerman’s sensation seeking trait do you find most interesting, and which subscales do you think you would score high on (they may not be the same)? If there are any subscales on which you think you would score either low or high, what impression do you have of people who have an opposite score on those same scales? | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/10%3A_Trait_Theories_of_Personality/10.08%3A_Marvin_Zuckerman_and_the_Sensation_Seeking_Personality_Trait.txt |
Another specific trait that has become somewhat popular recently in higher education has been called grit by Angela Duckworth and her colleagues (see Duckworth et al., 2007). Grit is defined as the perseverance and passion necessary to accomplish long-term goals. In particular, it refers to the ability to continue striving toward those goals despite temporary failure, adversity, and plateaus in one's progress. Although much of the research on grit has focused on academic goals, grit does not correlate well with intelligence. Rather, it correlates highly with the Big-Five trait of conscientiousness.
We used to believe that individuals who become experts in a particular area (whether it's math, playing a musical instrument, playing chess, or competing in athletic events, etc.) had some innate ability or talent for their skill. However, Anders Ericsson proposed and studied a different theoretical framework. Although an individual may show some early talent in a particular domain, what resulted in their becoming an expert, or a star athlete, was the intensive deliberate practice that followed, often taking many years before the individual truly excelled (Ericsson, 2004; Ericsson et al., 1993). Working together, Duckworth, Ericsson, and a few of their colleagues showed that deliberate practice is the key to success in an academic competition that tends to fascinate many people because of just how difficult it is: the National Spelling Bee (Duckworth et al., 2010).
Whether it's grit, consciousness, or the associated behavior of deliberate practice, those who continue to strive toward their goals tend to succeed not only in school, but also in most aspects of life, including life satisfaction and earning a good income (Duckworth & Carlson, 2013; Duckworth et al., 2012). But what can, perhaps, interfere with one's ability and/or motivation to continue striving toward one's goals? It appears that life stress in early adolescence can significantly impair one's ability to strive toward a positive and fruitful future (Duckworth et al., 2013). It's quite possible that since adolescence is the time of developing one's identity, according to Erik Erikson, and identity associated with negative life events and stress is incompatible with maintaining grit.
As I mentioned above, this is an area only recently becoming well-known (i.e., popular) in the field of higher education. It is likely to become an increasingly significant factor in how we work toward helping students achieve their goals, whether academic or in other aspects of their lives.
Final Note: Moving Toward a New “Big Five”?
In 2006, Dan McAdams and Jennifer Pals argued that personality psychology has failed to provide a comprehensive framework in which we can understand the whole person. Since this was a guiding principle of many of the founders of this field, an effort to combine recent research with early principles would help the field of personality psychology move toward maturity. In a manner similar to Costa and McCrae’s Five-Factor Theory, McAdams and Pals suggest that those who study personality should be guided by five fundamental principles: evolutionary design, dispositional traits, characteristic adaptations, integrative life narrative, and culture. Their examination of these principles led them to the following definition of personality:
Personality is an individual’s unique variation on the general evolutionary design for human nature, expressed as a developing pattern of dispositional traits, characteristic adaptations, and integrative life stories complexly and differentially situated in culture. (pg. 212; McAdams & Pals, 2006)
If personality psychologists use these principles in their ongoing efforts to understand each individual, they should be able to achieve an understanding of an old paradox offered to explain personality: every person is like every other person, like some other persons, and like no other person (see McAdams & Pals, 2006). | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/10%3A_Trait_Theories_of_Personality/10.09%3A_Grit-_Getting_Things_Done.txt |
Reconceptualizing Personality Disorders within the Context of the Five-Factor Model
There remains debate as to exactly how personality disorders should be classified (see the Appendix). This issue is more than just a matter of curiosity, since our entire conception of personality disorders is an essential factor in how we approach their treatment. As perhaps the most widely accepted and scientifically validated trait perspective on normal personality, it stands to reason that the Five-Factor Model (FFM) ought to also provide a basis for classifying abnormal personality and, in particular, the personality disorders. Thus, Costa and Widiger (1994) brought together a group of experts, including Theodore Millon, to address personality disorders within the context of the FFM.
The DSM-III and DSM-IV use diagnostic categories for the personality disorders, whereas the FFM suggests a dimensional approach. The categorical approach has several advantages. It is relatively easier to conceptualize disorders as either having them or not, clinicians are familiar with the current categories, and when clinical decisions are categorical they tend to be consistent. However, the dimensional approach offers the advantages of not being arbitrary in defining specific symptom cut-off points for a diagnosis, they allow for retaining information on those patients who just miss the cut-off point for a diagnosis (and could, therefore, simply be classified as not having the disorder), and the dimensions are more flexible than a categorical diagnosis. More importantly than just speculating on advantages and disadvantages, however, is that the majority of empirical data seems to support the dimensional approach (Widiger & Frances, 1994). For example, borderline personality disorder patients do not show a specific profile on the MMPI, but rather a nonspecific elevation across most scales. Diagnosis is typically made following a clinical evaluation including an interview. A similar challenge faces clinicians using the NEO-PI (the assessment tool specifically designed for the FFM), but useful and relevant data are available from looking at the specific trait scores within factors, particularly within the factor neuroticism (Trull & McCrae, 1994). In addition, factor analysis on the dimensions of personality disorder yielded results that fit very well with the FFM, with several aspects of personality disorder (but not all) again being linked to neuroticism (Schroeder, Wormworth, & Livesley, 1994). It is important to remember, however, that the very idea of using a dimensional approach is based, in part, on an assumption:
…If one assumes that disordered personality is qualitatively different from normal personality, then the inclusion of a dimensional model of personality may be insufficient or inappropriate for investigation. If one assumes that disordered personality reflects quantitative differences in the manifestation or severity of normal personality traits (i.e., a dimensional approach), then the adoption of a personality taxonomy for use as a structural referent becomes a necessary or even fundamental conceptual task. (pp. 73-74; Wiggins & Pincus, 1994)
What, then, might personality disorders look like in terms of a dimensional description? Clark, Vorhies, and McEwen (1994) take an integrated approach based on two basic propositions pertaining to traits: first, that they are continuously distributed and exhibit wide individual variation; and second, that they are not fixed, but rather they are adaptations to the environment that are consistent within one’s individual range. These two points lead to the notions that a single trait structure can represent both normal and abnormal personality, that within the normal range there is great individual difference in each person’s characteristic and adaptive styles of thinking, feeling, and behaving, and that personality disorders are characterized by extreme and inflexible expressions of the normal personality structure. When examining data from individuals diagnosed with personality disorder, they have identified symptom clusters that form dimensions, or factors, which once again fit well with the FFM (Clark, et al., 1994). Widiger and several colleagues have actually offered five-factor translations of the standard categories of DSM-III and DSM-IV personality disorders (see Widiger, et al., 1994). The purpose of these translations is to take the personality disorder categories that psychologists are familiar with and put them in terms of the FFM. Consider two examples:
Paranoid Personality Disorder: Paranoid personality disorder (PAR) involves interpreting the actions of others as threatening or deliberately demeaning. These individuals tend to be suspicious, mistrustful, hypervigilant, and argumentative. According to the FFM, PAR is characterized primarily by excessively low agreeableness, particularly on the suspiciousness facet (a facet is one of the traits that makes up a factor). They are also characterized by the low agreeableness facets of very low straightforwardness and compliance, which represent the PAR tendencies to be secretive and oppositional. PAR is also characterized by the angry hostility facet of neuroticism, low extraversion, and low openness.
Antisocial Personality Disorder: Antisocial personality disorder (ATS) is characterized by irresponsible and antisocial behavior, and often involves criminal activity and a lack of regard for the rights of others. Within the FFM, they score excessively low on conscientiousness and agreeableness (particularly low on the facets of straightforwardness, altruism, compliance, and tendermindedness). They score high on the neuroticism facets of hostility, anxiety, depression, and impulsivity. However, so-called “successful” psychopaths may be characterized by very low levels of anxiety and self-consciousness.
(see Widiger, et al., 1994)
So, given the possibility of reconceptualizing personality disorders within the FFM, is it something we should do? Millon suggests that we view personality as the psychological equivalent of the body’s biological systems. Personality is, in this conception, a psychic system of structures and functions that lead to characteristic patterns of thought, feeling, and behavior. These characteristics cannot be viewed as simply normal or abnormal, since any specific element of the personality might be adaptive in one situation but maladaptive in another. Thus, the dimensional approach to describing personality provides a comprehensive picture in which little information of potential significance is lost (Millon, 1994). McCrae questions the very validity of Axis II of the DSM system, which appears to have little empirical support. He suggests that clinicians include in their diagnosis of patients a global assessment of the five personality factors. Thus, the diagnostic report would provide the necessary information on personality pertaining to the common symptoms and problems associated with either high or low scores on each factor (McCrae, 1994; Widiger, 1994). For example:
High Neuroticism: chronic negative affects, difficulty in inhibiting impulses, irrational beliefs
Low Neuroticism: lack of appropriate concern for potential problems in health or social adjustment, emotional blandness
High Agreeableness: gullibility, excessive candor and generosity, inability to stand up to others, easily taken advantage of
Low Agreeableness: cynicism and paranoid thinking, inability to trust, quarrelsomeness, too ready to pick fights, exploitative and manipulative, lying, rude and inconsiderate
(see McCrae, 1994)
Perhaps the most valuable aspect of any model used for classifying the personality disorders is its ability to provide guidelines for conceptualizing a treatment strategy. Sanderson and Clarkin (1994) have indeed found the NEO-PI useful in differential treatment planning. For example, the NEO-PI, in conjunction with a clinical interview, helps describe the typical interpersonal patterns of the patient, suggesting areas of difficulty needing treatment regardless of whether the therapy format is individual, family, or a group setting. In addition, the NEO-PI can help to identify which therapy format might be best suited to each particular patient. Although Sanderson and Clarkin (1994) caution that such conceptions still await empirical confirmation, they do offer some examples from their own supportive clinical experience. Likewise, MacKenzie (1994) offers numerous specific examples from cases in which factor scores provided clear target areas for focusing therapy. For example, a women who scored high in agreeableness acknowledged that she repeatedly got into relationships in which she felt used, a teacher who scored very high on openness was overly stimulated in new situations and felt overwhelmed with creative ideas, and a man who scored low on conscientiousness felt stuck in life, having worked only itinerant construction jobs despite having earned a graduate degree in college. In each case, the NEO-PI data matched the clinical presentation quite well, suggesting that the FFM would indeed be an effective conceptualization of treatment strategies for personality disorder issues (as well as, presumably, for other psychological and adjustment disorders).
The diagnosis of personality disorders, whether categorical or dimensional, remains a controversial topic. Of even greater concern, is the resistance of these disorders to treatment. However, the FFM appears to offer an advantageous way of describing personality disorder as an extreme extension of normal personality dimensions, and the NEO-PI scales offer practical direction with regard to treatment strategies. Change, however, may not come easily:
Some observers have said that what is at issue here is the American Psychiatric Association “versus” the American Psychological Association. In other words, the potential conflict between psychiatric/categorical and psychological/dimensional models could stall progress in this field. It has been suggested that the American Psychological Association should issue a rival DSM that uses a dimensional approach. We believe a far better solution would be cooperation between the two approaches, which would lead to more coordinated research and shared clinical experience. (pg. 325; Costa & Widiger, 1994). | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/10%3A_Trait_Theories_of_Personality/10.10%3A_Personality_Theory_in_Real_Life.txt |
Review of Key Points
• Allport’s approach to the study of personality emphasized the individual above all else.
• In defining personality, Allport proposed a dynamic interaction between traits and how they affect the individual’s adjustment to his or her environment.
• Allport defined traits as neuropsychic systems that had the effect of rendering different aspects of the environment as the same, thus guiding behavior in consistent ways (in keeping with the traits, not the environment per se).
• Individual traits provide the basis for an idiographic approach to personality, whereas common traits relate more to the nomothetic approach.
• Each person’s unique personality is influenced by their dispositions. An individual can be influenced by cardinal, central, or secondary dispositions.
• As the various stages of development influence one’s personality, the unique sense of “me” or “I” that develops should be referred to as the proprium, according to Allport.
• An adult’s motives are independent of their development, something Allport referred to as functional autonomy.
• Allport proposed six aspects of a mature personality: an extended sense of self, personal warmth, emotional security, realistic perceptions, insight and humor, and a unifying philosophy of life.
• In addition to personality tests, Allport valued the observation of expressive behavior and the review of personal documents (when available).
• Allport was a deeply spiritual man, emphasizing the positive role that religion can play in peoples’ lives.
• Allport’s personal faith, and his lifelong commitment to social ethics, led him to write one of the most significant works on prejudice ever published.
• Cattell distinguished between traits and types, the latter being a broader term. Similarly, he distinguished between source traits and surface traits, respectively.
• Using factor analysis, Cattell settled on sixteen factors, or source traits. He developed the 16-PF Questionnaire to measure these factors in individuals.
• Cattell helped to establish the field of psychometry, emphasizing the need for L-data, Q-data, and T-data.
• About the same time as Erikson, Cattell offered a lifespan theory of personality development. He proposed six stages: infancy, childhood, adolescence, maturity, middle age, and old age.
• Eysenck used a second-order factor analysis to identify three superfactors: extraversion, neuroticism, and psychoticism.
• In support of his belief in the biological/evolutionary basis for personality, Eysenck joined Harry Harlow in demonstrating that monkeys appear to have three similar factors underlying their “personalities.”
• Some authors have suggested that Eysenck overstated the role of genetics, even based on his own data. Eysenck acknowledged such concerns, and hopefully anticipated future research that might help clarify the issue.
• Eysenck, like Allport, was interested in practical applications of personality research. He also addressed a wide variety of controversial topics that have, at best, highly questionable evidence supporting them.
• Costa and McCrae expanded on Eysenck’s theory, and proposed five superfactors: extraversion, neuroticism, openness, agreeableness, and conscientiousness.
• They also developed the NEO-PI-R to measure these factors. The NEO-PI-R has proven robust across cultures, and research using the NEO-PI-R has supported the universality of the Five-Factor Model.
• Despite arguments to the contrary, the majority of research shows that personality, as measured by trait theories, is highly consistent throughout adulthood.
• Zuckerman identified a sensation seeking trait, comprised of four aspects: thrill and adventure seeking, experience seeking, disinhibition, and boredom susceptibility.
• Zuckerman offered an alternative to the Five-Factor Model, which is quite similar, but more applicable to a wider variety of species. Once again, this supports a genetic/evolutionary perspective on the development of personality. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/10%3A_Trait_Theories_of_Personality/10.S%3A_Chapter_Summary.txt |
During the evolution of the human species, we appear to have lost the ability to rely on instinctive behavior as we developed extraordinary abilities to learn and adapt to the conditions facing us in our environment. In addition, we can pass on that learning to other members of our social group. This is the basis for culture, and the success of the human species is a testament to the advantages of this approach to survival. However, this transition from instinct to learning and culture has not resulted in the elimination of biological influences on our behavior. Certain groups of people, usually a minority of the population, retain biological predispositions to behave and react in certain distinct ways. To a lesser extent, all of us have some degree of these biological predispositions.
11: Biology and Personality
During the evolution of the human species, we appear to have lost the ability to rely on instinctive behavior as we developed extraordinary abilities to learn and adapt to the conditions facing us in our environment. In addition, we can pass on that learning to other members of our social group. This is the basis for culture, and the success of the human species is a testament to the advantages of this approach to survival. However, this transition from instinct to learning and culture has not resulted in the elimination of biological influences on our behavior. Certain groups of people, usually a minority of the population, retain biological predispositions to behave and react in certain distinct ways. To a lesser extent, all of us have some degree of these biological predispositions.
The purpose of the first half of this chapter is to examine those biological predispositions that are directly reflected in aspects of individual personality. In the second half of the chapter, we will examine the connection between the mind and the body, and some of the ways in which individuals train the mind/body connection in order to achieve a more balanced and healthy lifestyle.
Over 2,500 years ago, Gotama Buddha came to a fascinating understanding of the human mind. The Buddha taught a series of mindfulness exercises to train the mind, and these mindfulness exercises form the basis for many styles of meditations. Today, cutting-edge neurobiologists are using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and other brain imaging techniques to examine brain activity during deep meditation. The goal of these studies is to understand the nature of the human mind, and to examine whether the Buddha (as well as the Rishis and Yogis of ancient India) had discovered a way to actually alter the state of the mind. However, too much time spent in meditation can lead to a weak body. So, the founder of Zen Buddhism, Bodhidharma, when he arrived at the Shao-Lin temple, developed techniques of physical training to strengthen the monks and to help them both defend themselves from bandits and prepare for extended periods of meditation. This was the legendary beginning of the martial arts, formal techniques to train the body and mind. Since the martial arts were developed with noble goals, they have throughout their history had a reputation for developing strong, admirable character traits. In other words, those who practice martial arts with proper discipline also train themselves to conform to a personality style marked by a calm, humble, yet confident demeanor.
Placing Biological and Mind/Body Theories of Personality in Context: Testing Personality Theories Across the Full Range of Human History
This chapter has the broadest context of any chapter in this book. Some 2,500 years ago, Gotama Buddha presented what can be considered the first psychological theory, a theory on the nature of the human mind and how one can work to control it in a mindful way. Doing so can help to lead one toward a more peaceful life, both individually and in relation to others. Today, neurobiologists using cutting edge technology are trying to determine what actually happens to the state of the human mind during the techniques of meditation taught by the Buddha. In addition, the usefulness of meditation and mindfulness in psychotherapy is a popular area of clinical practice and research, as well as a means toward enhancing the cross-cultural perspectives of psychology in general.
Wilhelm Reich, a student and highly respected colleague of Sigmund Freud, was one of the first Western psychologists to consider the connection between body and mind as essential for psychology health. According to Reich, we can be psychologically healthy only if we are able to fully express and satisfy our biological, sexual needs. Reich devoted his career to helping individuals do just that, and in recognizing the role of the body, he anticipated the field of sociobiology. Sociobiology addresses the ways in which our behavior might have been shaped by evolution. In other words, behaviors are naturally selected if they provide an advantage for our genetic reproduction (having children, grandchildren, etc.).
Whereas Reich and the sociobiologists focus on the expression and pursuit of our biological desires, Eastern tradition taught ways to train the body and mind to control these desires. Indeed, the Buddha taught that through mindfulness training we could detach ourselves from these needs, and live a life in which we acknowledge desires, but feel no attachment to them. Such mental discipline, however, requires practice. As monks became physically weak from spending all their time meditating, the founder of Zen Buddhism, Bodhidharma, developed the first formal techniques of Kung Fu. Since the martial arts arose out of the desire to remain healthy during meditation practice, they have always been associated with a spirituality devoted to nonviolence and mental discipline.
The popularity of martial arts, meditation, Yoga, and a variety of Eastern philosophies and practices in the United States today tells us that there is a strong interest in combing the traditions of East and West. The interest of cognitive neuroscientists in the brain’s changes during meditation shows us that Eastern philosophy need not stand in opposition to our tradition of formal scientific inquiry in the West. And so, Buddhist mindfulness, somatic psychology, behavior genetics, sociobiology, evolutionary psychology, and the martial arts all seem to fit together as a grand theory of the nature of body and mind and their inherent connection. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/11%3A_Biology_and_Personality/11.01%3A_Chapter_Introduction.txt |
When talking about the role of biology in behavior, the natural starting point is the genetic makeup of each person. Our specific genetic blueprint is what distinguishes each of us as a unique individual, except for identical twins. However, since humans no longer rely on instinctive behavior, there are no aspects of personality that are specifically determined by genetics. Instead, it is more appropriate to say that our genetic makeup determines ranges within which we might develop, and our environment then determines where we fall within that range. The topics of greatest interest in the biology of personality are those topics that appear to be under a relatively greater influence of genetics than environment. But how do we determine the relative contributions of genetics and environment? Psychologists have relied mostly on twin and adoption studies.
Twin Studies, Adoption Studies, Family Studies
Twin studies have a long and interesting history in the field of psychology. Sir Francis Galton (1822-1911) studied mental abilities and is recognized as being the first to utilize twin studies. His use of identical twins, in the mid to late 1800s, is generally recognized as the first use of an experimental control group (Diamond, 1977/1997; Jensen, 1998), and the use of identical vs. fraternal twins continues to be recognized as a natural control condition by psychologists and sociobiologists (Kagan, Kearsley, & Zelazo, 1978; Wilson, 1978). Twin studies were also of interest to psychologists in the former Soviet Union (Cole & Maltzman, 1969). While Anna Freud and Melanie Klein were applying psychoanalysis to the study and treatment of children, the American physician and psychologist Arnold Gesell was comparing the achievement of fundamental developmental milestones between twins (Lomax, Kagan, & Rosencrantz, 1978), and Wayne Dennis was conducting an astonishing experiment on a pair of twins. Dennis and his wife raised the twins under conditions of minimal social and sensory stimulation. This research had a noble goal: to understand the basis for the detrimental effects of institutionalized care that was being recognized in overcrowded orphanages. However, one of the twins ended up showing signs of mental retardation (though this was attributed to an early head injury; Lomax, Kagan, & Rosencrantz, 1978). Obviously such an experiment would never be approved today, due to the ethical guidelines and oversight that have become a common part of psychological research, but twin studies done in reasonable and ethical ways continue to be an important part of psychological research.
What makes identical twins important is that they share 100 percent of their genetic material, whereas fraternal twins (like any other siblings) share an average of 50 percent of their genetic material. By extending this to families, and finally to people who have no biological relationship, we have a continuum of genetic relatedness from complete to none. This allows us to address the issue of heritability, or the degree of individual variance on some measure of behavior or personality that can be attributed to genetics. It is important to remember, however, that heritability is measured in populations (see Kagan, 1994; Sternberg, Grigorenko, & Kidd, 2005). It makes no sense to suggest, for example, that a 5-foot tall person is 54 inches tall due to genetics and then grew another 6 inches thanks to good nutrition. Adoption studies add an interesting twist to this research, since adopted children take the genetic contributions of their parents into different environmental situations, making adoption studies a useful tool for comparing the environmental contributions to the genetic contributions. However, these studies remain challenging. For example, intelligence is perhaps the most widely studied trait in terms of whether and how much it is genetic. Some of this research has been very controversial. Sir Francis Galton, who was mentioned above, believed that his research confirmed that certain races were superior to others, and that superior races had an obligation to selectively breed their best individuals for the good of future generations, as had been done (and continues to be done today) with certain breeds of dogs and horses (Galton, 1869/1997). Despite this controversial beginning to the study of genetics and intelligence, the topic has remained widely studied, but elusive nonetheless. Estimates on the heritability of intelligence range from approximately 65 to 85 percent (Gould, 1982; Jensen, 1998). However, at very early ages the genetic and environmental influences are closer to 50-50, decrease with age, and by adulthood the genetic component is almost entirely responsible for the correlation of intelligence between related individuals (Gould, 1982; Jensen, 1998). Further complicating the situation for studying children, when a wider range of extended family members are considered and cultural factors are separated from non-transmissible environmental factors, it appears that genetics, culture, and environment all play roughly equal roles (Boyd & Richerson, 1985). Indeed, culture can have profound effects on intelligence, including our definition of intelligence itself (Sternberg, 2004). Finally, returning to the controversial perspective of Galton and other proponents of the eugenics movement (the belief that superior races and classes should not mix with inferior groups), research today has demonstrated that no legitimate connection can be made between race and intelligence (Sternberg, Grigorenko, & Kidd, 2005; also see Loehlin, 1997; Williams & Ceci, 1997), and when it comes to education, IQ isn’t even the best predictor of academic performance (Duckworth & Seligman, 2005).
Another important point is the issue of family studies. Usually, we think of the family as providing genetic similarity, since children inherit their genes from their parents. Second, we tend to think that families provide a common environmental situation for each of their children, particularly in small families. However, this is not always true. In the Russian literature there was a well-known case in which the first-born girl was always treated as the elder sister, even though her younger identical twin was only minutes younger. The result of the differential treatment was that the “older” girl reached most developmental milestones before her sister (Bozhovich, 1969). In a case described by the renowned Russian neuropsychologist A. R. Luria, identical twins with retarded speech had begun to develop their own autonomous language. Once separated into different classes in nursery school, however, the autonomous language disappeared (Luria, 1969). Thus, the family can have a very dramatic environmental influence, whether intentional or not, that goes against the genetic similarity due to biological relationships or even identical twinship. What then, can we conclude regarding the heritability of personality traits in humans? Certainly genetic factors play an important role, but the complexity of the human organism and its sociocultural environment makes it difficult to draw definite conclusions about exactly how much of an influence our unique genetic profile has on our individual personality. Nonetheless, psychologists have continued to pursue this important question.
Genetically Determined Dispositions
Behavior genetics is the term most commonly used to refer to studies on the influence of genetics on behavior. Most of these studies have relied on comparing identical twins to fraternal twins, other siblings, and unrelated individuals, including when possible twins who have been reared apart. These studies are often conducted in European countries that have thorough records of family histories, but one major, longitudinal study ongoing here in the United States has been the Minnesota Twin Family Study conducted at the University of Minnesota since 1983. These various sources of data, in addition to other research procedures, have helped psychologists come to some understanding of the role played by genetics in determining behavior and personality.
Psychologist Jerome Kagan is well known for his early studies on the nature of temperament. Temperament is perhaps the most salient characteristic of personality. It has been loosely described as the emotional component of our personality, as stable behavioral and emotional reactions that appear early in life and are influenced by genetic factors (Kagan, 1994). Kagan further describes temperamental categories as qualities that (1) vary among individuals, (2) are moderately stable over time and in different situations, (3) are partly determined by genetics, and (4) appear early in life. In part because they were easy to observe, the most popular temperamental qualities that have been studied are activity, irritability, and fearfulness, or as Kagan describes them: watchful inhibition vs. fearless exploration. About 10 percent of children exhibit extreme inhibition to nonthreatening, but unfamiliar, events (Kagan, 1984). Although this behavior can seemingly be altered by parental influence, subtle signs of the behavioral inhibition can be seen as the child grows, and they tend to continue into adulthood. Similarly, with uninhibited children, it is extremely unlikely that they will ever become inhibited children. Further studies on twins have helped to confirm that being inhibited or outgoing is influenced by genetics (Kagan, Kearsley, & Zelazo, 1978). Similar results have also been found with Guatemalan and Chinese children (Kagan, Kearsley, & Zelazo, 1978). As important as our emotional reactions are (see, e.g., the work of Daniel Goleman, 1995, 1998), they still do not necessarily dominate our personality:
Figure \(1\)
An even temperament leads to stable behavioral and emotional reactions.
…it is wise to state explicitly that many differences among children may have little to do with temperament…Our current knowledge indicates that the motivation to perform well in school, the willingness to help a friend, loyalty to family, tolerance toward others, and a host of other motives and beliefs are minimally influenced by temperament. (pg. 77; Kagan, 1994)
Recently, Thomas Bouchard, Jr. (2004) offered a concise review of the heritability of psychological traits. With regard to the “Big Five” personality traits, they all exhibit heritability in the range of 42 to 57 percent. If one considers the alternative known as the “Big Three,” the range is 44 to 52 percent (Bouchard, 2004). Thus, genetics make a significant contribution to the nature of basic personality, but at the same time there is at least as much of an environmental contribution (though that certainly includes a variety of factors). There is also significant heritability of psychological interests (such as being realistic, artistic, social, etc.), social attitudes, and psychiatric illness (especially schizophrenia; Bouchard, 2004; see also Bouchard, 1994; Bouchard & McGue, 1990; Bouchard et al., 1990; Kety, 1975; Mendlewicz, Fleiss, & Fieve, 1975; Shields, Heston, & Gottesman, 1975). Even such complex personality variables as well-being, traditionalism, religiosity, and criminality have been found to be highly influenced by our genetic make-up (Crowe, 1975; Kagan, 1994; Kessler, 1975; Tellegen et al., 1988; Waller et al., 1990). To put it simply, virtually all psychological factors are significantly influenced by our genetic makeup, but none are specifically determined by genetics. This led Danielle Dick and Richard Rose (2002) to question whether the field of behavior genetics has completed what it can reasonably hope to accomplish. They argue that there is much more to be studied, particularly in the area of gene-environment interactions. In such interactions, individuals experience the same environment in different ways due to their genetic predispositions.
In Galen’s Prophecy, Kagan (1994) describes the role that he believes the amygdala plays in mediating responses to anxiety-producing stimuli. Eight percent of children demonstrate highly reactive responses to such stimuli, which animal research has shown is associated with increased activity in the amygdala and, consequently, a behavioral inhibition system. As a result, these children either freeze or withdraw from unfamiliar people and situations. In other words, they seem shy and withdrawn. Approximately 18 percent of children demonstrate low reactivity, their amygdala and the behavioral inhibition system are not activated, and they are likely to approach unfamiliar people and situations with curiosity. These simple patterns of behavior can have profound effects on personality. Kagan (1994) has found that high reactive infants, those who become anxious as a result of unfamiliarity, tend to become dour, serious, and fearful as they grow. In contrast, the low reactive infants, those who may respond to unfamiliarity with curiosity and interest, become more joyful and fearless as they grow up. However, these tendencies are by no means guarantees, because the environment plays a significant role. If mothers are firm and set strict limits on the child’s behavior, if they are supportive but do not always hold the child when it is upset (i.e., they hold the child when it needs help, but not when the child does not need help), then a high reactive child has a much better chance of overcoming its tendency to become an anxious and withdrawn person. One explanation, according to Kagan, is that these mothers require their children to meet her socialization demands; they must learn to deal with the uncertainty of unfamiliar situations. As for overprotective parents:
…It appears that mothers who protect their high reactive infants from frustration and anxiety in the hope of effecting a benevolent outcome seem to exacerbate the infant’s uncertainty and produce the opposite effect. This result is in greater accord with the old-fashioned behavioristic view than with the modern emphasis on the infant’s need for a sensitive parent. (pg. 205; Kagan, 1994)
In support of Kagan’s studies, Fox and his colleagues have demonstrated a specific gene-environment interaction that predicts behavioral inhibition in children aged 14 and 84 months (young 1 year-olds and 7 year-olds; Fox et al., 2005). Although it is difficult to describe such studies in simple terms, suffice it to say that children with a combination of the short 5-HTT allele (a gene for the molecule that transports the neurotransmitter serotonin) and low social support are at an increased risk for behavioral inhibition. When the children were 1 year old, behavioral inhibition was measured in terms of the latency to approach novel objects and unfamiliar adults, and when the children were 7 years old it was measured in terms of their disconnection from a group of children at play. The short allele of the 5-HTT gene has been associated with increased anxiety, negative emotionality, and relatively strong coupling with the amygdala. Therefore, in the absence of social support, children with the short allele are more likely to experience stress in the presence of novelty and strangers (Fox et al., 2005). Moffitt, Caspi, and Rutter have written an excellent review of how psychologists and other scientists approach this important new field of gene-environment interactions, and in that review they suggest that it is most likely that such interactions are common in psychopathology (Moffitt et al., 2006).
Discussion Question \(1\)
Jerome Kagan studied temperament, and found that approximately 10% of children are shy and inhibited and approximately 20 percent of children are curious and adventurous, and these temperaments are most likely to continue into adulthood. Consider the people you know. Have their basic temperaments remained constant throughout their lives? What about you?
Sociobiology and Evolutionary Influences on Behavior
Sociobiology is a relatively new field of study that applies evolutionary biology to social behavior (Barash, 1977; Wilson, 1975). Although much of the research underlying sociobiology has been conducted with non-human animals, the value of this research and its applications to understanding human behavior and personality should not be underestimated. Samuel Gosling and his colleagues have demonstrated that a wide variety of other animal species have personality traits similar to those of humans (Gosling, 2001; Gosling & John, 1999; Gosling, Kwan, & John, 2003; Gosling & Vazire, 2002; Jones & Gosling, 2005; Mehta & Gosling, 2006). When the ethologists Nikolaas Tinbergen, Konrad Lorenz, and Karl von Frisch shared the Nobel Prize in 1973 it was the first Nobel Prize awarded for the study of behavior. Sociobiology, a field similar to ethology, has offered valuable new perspectives on human behavior, perspectives on behaviors that do not always seem logical at first. As an aside, sociobiology also allows us to address an exciting variety of human behaviors, including the apparent evolutionary and neurobiological bases for laughter (see Panksepp, 2005).
The fundamental concept underlying sociobiology is that of inclusive fitness. Inclusive fitness refers to the advantages of behaviors that increase the likelihood of an individual’s genetic survival through the survival of genetically related kin (Barash, 1977; Wilson, 1975). Therefore, in looking at the evolution of human social behavior, we must not consider only the ways in which behaviors contribute to individual survival (which is a traditional Darwinian perspective on survival of the fittest), but rather on how behaviors contribute to the survival of our children, family, and perhaps even our community.
Sociobiologists have looked at several major topics regarding the evolution of human behavior, but we will only take a brief look at three behaviors: mate selection, parenting, and religion. In Chapter 2 we discussed male/female differences as a matter of fact. This has become commonly accepted in the popular media, and evidence suggests that men and women are inclined to essentialize their differences (Prentice & Miller, 2006). In contrast, Janet Shibley Hyde has provided compelling evidence that men and women are actually much more alike than they are different (Hyde, 1996, 2005; also see Spelke, 2005; Stewart & McDermott, 2004). So which is it? When it comes to mate selection, sociobiology suggests that men and women should be different, because the roles they will need to play in eventual child rearing require them to be different. It is a biological fact that men need to contribute very little to the birth of a child, whereas women become pregnant for nine months and, from an evolutionary perspective, must then breast-feed the child for one or two years. Thus, a man can improve his inclusive fitness by seeking multiple relationships with women in their prime child-bearing years and exhibiting physical characteristics indicative of good reproductive health. Unfortunately, other men are looking for the same women, so competition can become fierce. Women, on the other hand, should be inclined to seek men who have already won those competitions, demonstrating that they can provide and protect resources for their offspring, usually by commanding a territory or a privileged place in society (Barash, 1977; Wilson, 1975, 1978). So it is not uncommon for women to be inclined to marry older men, particularly men who are above them on the socioeconomic scale (Barash, 1977). Women would also be inclined to select men who make some commitment in terms of child rearing (Barash, 1979). So, men who were inclined to make only the minimum commitment necessary to the sexual act did not improve their inclusive fitness, since they were not selected by discriminating females.
When parenting is discussed in introductory psychology courses, the most common topic is parenting styles and their influence on personality development. In sociobiology, however, the most relevant issues are the survival of the offspring and how taxing it is on the parents to help their offspring survive. We are just beginning to understand some aspects of the biological basis for attachment from the offspring’s perspective (Hofer, 2006), but understanding the attachment of the parent to the offspring remains elusive. Obviously, raising a child requires a considerable amount of effort on the parent’s part, but typically more on the part of the mother. Thus, close social bonding is important, and this may form the basis of love as an added emotional component to sex, as well as the growing love that parents feel for their children (Barash, 1977; Wilson, 1978). Older women are particularly more sensitive to the needs of first-born children, since the child may well represent the only opportunity for the mother to reproduce. Nature is full of well-known examples of female animals vigorously defending their young, even if their own life is endangered (Barash, 1977, 1979). Of peculiar interest is the behavior of grandparents, since a parent is really only successful in reproducing if they eventually become grandparents. Barash (1977) discusses two interesting situations. When a child is born, it is most likely that the mother’s parents come to help. But if a young couple chooses to live with parents, it is most likely the father’s parents. These may simply seem to be cultural artifacts, but they have a basis in biological fitness. Only a mother can be sure that she has made a genetic contribution to a child (at least in the past, when our behaviors were evolving). So, when a woman has a baby, only her parents are sure that they have become grandparents. The man’s parents serve their own interests best if they can watch over the woman, to make sure that she does not stray from her relationship with their son (Barash, 1977). All of this may sound cold and calculating, but it is logical nonetheless, and if we believe in an unconscious mind, then people don’t need to be aware of exactly what they are doing.
Religion has been a profound influence throughout the history of the human species. It has been suggested that children naturally seek a divine explanation for the existence of a world they cannot comprehend (Kelemen, 2004). According to sociobiologist E. O. Wilson:
The predisposition to religious belief is the most complex and powerful force in the human mind and in all probability an ineradicable part of human nature…It is one of the universals of social behavior, taking recognizable form in every society from hunter-gatherer band to socialist republics…At Shanidar, Iraq, sixty thousand years ago, Neanderthal people decorated a grave with seven species of flowers having medicinal and economic value, perhaps to honor a shaman. Since that time, according to the anthropologist Anthony F. C. Wallace, mankind has produced on the order of 100 thousand religions. (pg. 169; Wilson, 1978).
But what evolutionary advantage might religion serve? This question is difficult to answer, in part because religion appears to be unique to the human species. Many of the principles of sociobiology were determined by working with lower animals, especially the social insects. Without other species to use for comparison, it is not easy to understand our own species. According to Wilson, the best avenue for understanding the advantage conferred by religion to inclusive fitness is the ability to conform to the expectations of society. Humans seem to seek indoctrination. As we became more intelligent, more capable of making individual choices, perhaps we evolved the behavioral predispositions necessary to continue remaining within our tribe. As a result, the rules and rituals that developed to codify this behavior enhance the survival of our group, and it is this group-selection that sociobiologists recognize as the evolutionary advantage resulting from religion (Boyd & Richerson, 1985; Wilson, 1975, 1978). This is not unlike the role ascribed to religion by Sigmund Freud, except that sociobiologists propose an underlying genetic basis, whereas Freud proposed an underlying psychodynamic basis.
One of the most common negative reactions to sociobiology is resistance to the idea that we are still animals being driven by our genes and evolution. The simple logic provided by sociobiologists, and the clear parallels between human behavior and the behavior of other animals is not enough to sway the minds of some people. Culture definitely plays a significant role in our lives, gene-culture co-evolution may underlie human cooperation and altruism (Henrich, et al., 2006), and separating genetics from culture on a topic such as mate selection is difficult (Buss, 2003; Miller, Putcha-Bhagavatula, & Pedersen, 2002). But is culture something different than evolution? Richard Dawkins, in his profound book The Selfish Gene (1976), has proposed that the human mind has evolved to a point where it can create self-replicating units of culture, which he called memes. Memes can be transmitted from person to person, and they can evolve faster than genes. Thus, human culture has been able to outpace genetic evolution, creating many of the challenges we face today when we try to separate culture from genetics in order to understand complex human behaviors. As examples, let us consider two potential memes: belief in God, and belief in life after death. As mentioned above, children appear to be inclined to believe in a supernatural creator of the world that they, as children, simply cannot understand. And religion is a cultural universal. Not every religion, however, believes in life after death, and even fewer believe in heaven or hell. So religion appears to be a very successful meme, whereas belief in life after death is somewhat less successful, but successful enough to still be prevalent. One of the most fascinating aspects of memes is that they may actually increase the likelihood that you can have a very long lasting effect on the world. As Dawkins points out, Queen Elizabeth II of England is a direct descendant of William the Conqueror, but the odds are very low that she has even a single gene descended from him. So, immortality cannot really be achieved through reproduction:
But if you contribute to the world’s culture, if you have a good idea, compose a tune, invent a sparking plug, write a poem, it may live on, intact, long after your genes have dissolved in the common pool. Socrates may or may not have a gene or two alive in the world today…but who cares? The meme-complexes of Socrates, Leonardo, Copernicus, and Marconi are still going strong. (pg. 214; Dawkins, 1976)
discussion Question \(2\)
According to Richard Dawkins, the true path to immortality is found through cultural contributions to society, by virtue of cultural units he called memes. What memes do you think are important in your life and in your community? Has that changed during your life and, if so, why?
Evolutionary Psychology
The field of evolutionary psychology is a direct application of sociobiology to psychology, and appears to have begun with the publication of The Adapted Mind (Barkow et al., 1992). In this landmark book, a collection of authors were brought together with the purpose of addressing three major premises: (1) that there is a universal human nature, but that it is based on evolved psychological mechanisms as opposed to culture, (2) that these psychological mechanisms were adaptations constructed by natural selection, and (3) that these adaptations fit the way of life of our ancient ancestors, and may not fit our modern circumstances. Similar to the sociobiologists, evolutionary psychologists examine how evolution shaped human behavior and cognition in ways that helped individuals to pass on their genes to future generations, covering topics such as cooperation, mate preference, parental care, the development of language and perceptual abilities, the individual need to belong, helping and altruism, and the universality of emotions (Barkow et al., 1992; Buss, 1999; Larsen & Buss, 2005).
One of the best known psychologists studying evolutionary phenomena is David Buss, and he has paid particular attention to how we choose and attempt to keep our mates. In The Evolution of Desire, Buss (2003) describes how biological differences between males and females leads to different mating strategies, and that this should lead to inevitable conflict. Thus, according to Buss, conflict in a marriage is the norm, not the result of choosing the wrong person. As a result of this conflict, and for a variety of reasons underlying it, the possibility always exists that a man or woman in a marriage (or other committed relationship) will engage in other sexual relationships outside of the marriage. In order to defend against this potential loss of a committed mate, it was an advantage for people to evolve the emotion of jealousy. In The Dangerous Passion, Buss (2000b) argues that jealousy is just as important as love and sex. Passion is necessary for us to have motivation (consider Jung’s description of the shadow archetype). But with jealousy:
…Jealousy can keep a couple committed or drive a man to savagely beat his wife. An attraction to a neighbor’s spouse can generate intoxicating sexual euphoria while destroying two marriages. (pg. 2; Buss, 2000b)
Indeed, the competition that accompanied the desire to obtain and hold onto a mate in our distant past was so intense that we also evolved the psychological mechanisms necessary to kill people. Although this psychological mechanism may be maladaptive in our society today, its effectiveness in the prehistoric past remains hidden just below the surface of our minds. As a result, it can come out suddenly, explaining why the majority of murderers seem to be normal individuals until the day they kill someone (often someone they know and care about; Buss, 2005).
We have a tendency to think of things such as marital conflict, marital infidelity, jealousy, and murder as abnormal situations. Evolutionary psychologists suggest instead that such behaviors are the result of natural adaptations. However, as noted above, these adaptations were appropriate for our ancient ancestors, and may not fit within our society today (murder is illegal). Yet, these behaviors and emotions are common, suggesting that we can’t simply dismiss them. Since evolution typically takes a very long time, it is hard to say whether different adaptations will occur in the future of our species, given the cultural changes that have occurred through history. Perhaps the best we can hope for now is a continued development of our understanding of personality, through a variety of theoretical perspectives.
Connections Across Cultures: The Somatic Psychology of Wilhelm Reich
Wilhelm Reich (1897-1957) was a respected student and colleague of Sigmund Freud, a political activist, and eventually a convicted criminal in the United States whose books and journals were burned by the American government. But he left behind a legacy of focusing on the body and mind as deeply interrelated. In Germany in the 1930s, Reich devoted extraordinary effort to programs addressing sex education, sex hygiene, access to birth control, etc. He gave up his psychoanalytic practice, because he felt that sex education programs had the potential to be more helpful to more people by preventing sexual and psychological difficulties. Despite the so-called sexual revolution of the 1960s, many of these issues still plague society today. Reich’s description of the phases involved in the experience of an organism (first studied in the 1920s and 1930s) anticipated the famous research of Masters and Johnson (1966), and incorporated a psychoanalytic view of mindsets occurring during sexual activity (Reich, 1973). His work on somatic psychology relates to physical approaches to psychotherapy that continue today. These contributions and controversies earned Reich a place in the marvelous history of the study of mental illness entitled Masters of the Mind (Millon, 2004).
Raised on a farm, Reich was interested in animal husbandry, and conducted extensive studies of animal sexual behavior. As a young child, he witnessed one of the family’s maids having intercourse with her boyfriend. When he asked the maid if he could “play” the lover, she obliged. When he was 12 years old, he caught his mother having an affair with one of his tutors. In a classic example of the Oedipus complex, he considered using the information to blackmail his mother into allowing him to have sexual intercourse with her! Instead, he turned again to one of the family maids. He then told his father, whom Reich had witnessed beating his mother in the past, and shortly thereafter his mother committed suicide. For the rest of his life, Reich was tormented by the thought that he may have been responsible for his mother’s death. His father died when Reich was 17 years old, and Reich took over the family farm until it was destroyed in World War I.
While attending medical school at the University of Vienna, Reich joined the Vienna Psychoanalytic Society, where he began studying with Sigmund Freud. Reich and Freud were deeply impressed with one another. Reich eventually held several important positions in Freud’s training clinic, including Director of the Seminar for Psychoanalytic Therapy, and his work on character analysis was widely respected. Indeed, Reich was so involved with the society, Freud, and the clinic that many people thought of him as “Freud’s pet” (Higgins, 1973; Sharaf, 1983).
However, Reich fell out of favor with the psychoanalytic society. In 1930, he moved to Germany, joined the communist party, and became active in a variety of sex education and sex hygiene programs. But the communists opposed progressive sex education, because they hoped to gain the favor of the Catholic Church, in opposition to the growing threat of the Nazis. Reich stepped right into this dangerous controversy, often relating one particular story of how moved he was when a young pregnant girl sought his help, help she had not received from the Hitler Youth (Sharaf, 1983). In 1933, he published The Mass Psychology of Fascism, a book subsequently banned by the Nazis (Reich, 1933/1970). Eventually, Reich was excluded from both the Communist Party and the psychoanalytic society.
Reich left Germany for Denmark, and then moved to Norway, where his life and work began to take a strange turn. He became convinced that he had discovered a primordial cosmic energy, orgone energy, which provided the underlying energy for all life. He believed that orgone energy streams created hurricanes and galaxies. He built orgone energy accumulators, and began studying how it might be used for such diverse goals as treating cancer and controlling the weather. He was compelled to leave Norway, and in 1939 moved to the United States. Eventually, however, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) sought an injunction in federal court to put an end to Reich’s work on orgone energy. Reich refused to appear in court, and the injunction was issued in default (see Greenfield, 1974). Reich was accused and found guilty of criminal contempt, and sentenced to two years in federal prison. The FDA destroyed much of Reich’s equipment, and burned tons of his papers and books. In 1957, Reich suffered a heart attack and died in the Federal Penitentiary at Lewisburg, Pennsylvania.
Somatic Psychology
Reich’s psychoanalytic work emphasized three important topics: the intimate relationship between body and mind, the character of the individual, and the value of precise diagnosis. By the 1920s, Freud and his colleagues had stopped paying much attention to the concept of libido. In contrast, Reich became more and more interested in this sexual energy, which he associated directly with sexual activity. While working with his patients, Reich was impressed by their descriptions of feeling an “emptiness” in their genitals. This was an especially interesting point regarding women, since Reich himself considered the sexual inhibition experienced by many women as something appropriate to their development. However, as Reich pursued these ideas, he began to question the completeness and accuracy of Freud’s theories. Reich developed what became known as the orgasm theory, and he proposed the concept of orgastic potency:
Orgastic potency is the capacity to surrender to the streaming of biological energy, free of any inhibitions; the capacity to discharge completely the dammed-up sexual excitation through involuntary, pleasurable convulsions of the body… (pg. 29; Reich, 1973)
Reich considered the ability to enjoy sexual release as a critical aspect of normal and healthy personal development. This perspective demands a direct link between the body and the mind, since only through physical satisfaction can psychological and emotional satisfaction be achieved. When discussing neurotic symptoms, he described orgastic impotence as the “somatic core of the neurosis…” (Reich, 1933/1972). To further emphasize the point, Reich did not merely consider the ability to have meaningful sexual relations as important, he believed that they needed regular satisfaction:
…I maintain that every person who has succeeded in preserving a certain amount of naturalness knows that those who are psychically ill need but one thing - complete and repeated sexual gratification… (pp. 23; Reich, 1973)
Reich’s most widely respected work within the psychoanalytic community centered on character analysis, in which he emphasized character armoring and character resistance. Both of these constructs can be viewed as defense mechanisms, but they are deep and secondary fragmentations of the ego. Thus, they define the very character of the patient, and must be removed before traditional psychoanalysis can be effective. In keeping with the term somatic psychology, Reich addressed the physical manifestation of character armoring as muscular armor. Individuals who are actively character armoring demonstrate what Reich described as a chronic, frozen, muscular-like bearing. He believed that the visible muscular rigidity was the natural consequence of inhibiting aggression, and that it could be understood on the basis of only one principle: “the armoring of the periphery of the biopsychic system” (Reich, 1933/1972). In other words, the body physically responds to what the mind is doing; if the mind is defending itself, the body prepares to defend itself. This muscular tension is by no means easy to remove. If the analyst tries to get the patient to relax, the muscular tension is replaced by restlessness. Based on his theories, Reich described two basic types of character: the genital character and the neurotic character. The genital character refers to individuals who are relatively healthy in terms of their psychological development, and their capacity to enjoy life is uninhibited. The neurotic character is governed by rigid armor of both body and mind.
Many psychologists and a variety of practitioners in other areas have made the connection between body and mind an important part of their studies and their lifestyle. For example, we often “talk” with our hands (Goldin-Meadow, 2006), forced stereotypic movement leads to stereotypic thoughts about others (Mussweiler, 2006), young infants integrate their body movement and their attention (Robertson, Bacher, & Huntington, 2001), physical movement is more important than visual information for effective navigation (Ruddle & Lessels, 2006), and members of different cultures actually perceive the physical environment in different ways (Miyamoto, Nisbett, & Masuda, 2006). Yoga has become very popular in the United States, particularly the physical aspect of Hatha Yoga, and Yoga practitioners talk about understanding and respecting the body (e.g., Scaravelli, 1991; Stewart, 1994). This is particularly true as we age, since “we all die sooner or later, but what we must do is not allow the body to degenerate while living” (Scaravelli, 1991).
Reich referred to a “genetic differentiation of character types” and the “genetic-dynamic theory of the character” long before other psychologists were talking about the heritability of personality or gene-environment interactions. Reich went on to say that the social and economic/political factors that play such an important cultural role in personality development would not be as influential as they are if not for the likelihood that they “must first have impinged upon and changed human needs before these transformed drives and needs could begin to have an effect as historical factors” (Reich, 1932/1972). This sounds very much like sociobiology: the selection of behaviors, behaviors that are determined genetically, as adaptable to the relevant human condition. If indeed this idea does reflect the same basic premise as sociobiology, then Reich was thinking about a new field of research into human behavior that was still over 40 years in the future. In his discussion of muscular armor, Reich referred to three primary emotions that influence human behavior: sexuality, anxiety, and anger or hate (Reich, 1932/1972). Gotama Buddha (who most people think of as the Buddha) described three root causes of human suffering: desire, delusion, and hatred. What is sexuality but the greatest desire in human life? According to sociobiologists, particularly Dawkins (1976), life is about ensuring the propagation of individual genes, and in our case that means sexual reproduction. In addition, both Reich and the Buddha acknowledged hatred as key, and Buddhists typically see hatred as the antithesis of desire. Thus, Wilhelm Reich, once regarded as Freud’s “pet,” had incorporated both ancient Eastern philosophies and the as-yet unknown field of sociobiology into a cohesive theory of human character, while still in his mid-thirties. One can only imagine what he might have accomplished had he not pursued the odd theory of orgone energy, which led to his being ostracized and, ultimately, to the federal prison where he died.
Discussion question \(3\)
Wilhelm Reich believed that an active and uninhibited sexual life was essential for healthy development. He also believed that one’s ability to experience that healthy sexuality, their orgastic potency, was in important measure of psychological health. Do you agree with this perspective, and do you think society agrees with this perspective? | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/11%3A_Biology_and_Personality/11.02%3A_Biology_and_Personality.txt |
This page was auto-generated because a user created a sub-page to this page.
11.03: Ancient and Modern Approaches to Training the Mind
Wilhelm Reichwas by no means the first person to consider the connection between the body and the mind as something of essential importance to understanding the nature of the human experience. Gotama Buddha had developed just such a system approximately 500 years B.C. (see Chapter 17 for a more detailed discussion of Buddhism). The Buddha did more, however, than simply describe the nature of the human mind. He offered a few ways to begin quieting the mind, so that one could become a more peaceful, aware, and content individual. In the following section, we will consider his four techniques of mindfulness meditation.
Buddhism and Mindfulness
Andrew Olendzki (2003, 2005), a scholar of early Buddhist tradition and executive director of the Barre Center for Buddhist Studies in Massachusetts, has done a marvelous job of trying to put the teachings of the Buddha into a perspective understandable to Western psychologists. In very simple terms covering only a small part of what the Buddha taught, when a sense object that we are capable of detecting is, indeed, detected by one of our sensory systems, we become aware of the experience. For example, when a sound is detected by our ear, we become aware of hearing a sound. Consciousness is an emergent phenomenon of each of these individual moments of contact, i.e., the moment of contact between the sense object, the sensory organ, and the awareness of the object. Since we are constantly encountering different moments of contact that arise and then fall out of consciousness, from all of our various senses, the Buddhist concept of consciousness is not a continuous one (this is in contrast to the stream of consciousness perspective of America’s preeminent psychologist William James). Since consciousness is not continuous, neither is the self. Our sense of self as continuous and real is an illusion, and it is because we cling to that illusion that we inevitably suffer (the first noble truth in Buddhism). In order to alleviate our suffering, and to understand the true nature of our self, the Buddha taught a series of mindfulness meditations to help us see ourselves as we really are.
There are four mindfulness trainings: mindfulness of body, mindfulness of feeling, mindfulness of mind, and mindfulness of mental objects (Olendzki, 2005; Thanissaro Bhikkhu, 1996). When meditating mindfully on the body, it is common to focus on the breath. This can be done in a variety of positions: sitting, standing, lying down, or walking. One can also become very mindful of the body by performing certain martial arts as moving meditation, particularly Tai Chi Chuan or Qigong (Khor, 1981). When meditating mindfully on feelings, one considers the pleasant or unpleasant quality of each experience. For example, after sitting for a while, pain or discomfort may arise in a knee or hip. There is nothing wrong with this pain, and with practice one can experience it as a sensation without the negative or unpleasant feeling that we describe as pain. This is, of course, not easy. All forms of meditation require time and practice. Still, it is important to remember that if there is a real problem, such sitting on a sharp rock, you may want to move in a slow and mindful manner until comfortable again. When meditating mindfully on the mind itself, one takes notice of the thoughts arising during meditation. One should pay particular attention to whether the thoughts are related to one of the three root causes of suffering: greed, hatred, or delusion.
…In any given moment, the mind is either caught up by one or more of these or it is not, and this is something of which one can learn to be aware. Greed and hatred are the two polarities of desire, the intense wanting or not wanting of an object, while delusion is a strong form of the basic misunderstanding that gives desire its power over us. (pg. 255; Olendzki, 2005)
One does not pass judgment on these thoughts, mindfulness teaches us only to become aware of our thoughts and to recognize their presence and reality. Finally, there is mindfulness of mental objects (or mental qualities), a deep understanding of the content of mental experience that arises as one masters mindfulness meditation (Olendzki, 2005; Thanissaro Bhikkhu, 1996). Mindfulness of mental objects involves focusing on the nature of desires as they arise in relation to the five hindrances: desire, aversion, indolence, restlessness and doubt.
This conservative and traditional understanding of mindfulness may seem rather esoteric, but it is proving to be very influential in psychology today. To be sure, meditation has been described as “now one of the most enduring, widespread, and researched of all psychotherapeutic methods” (Walsh & Shapiro, 2006). A mindfulness-based stress reduction program has been developed and popularized by Jon Kabat-Zinn (1990, 1994, 2005), and a similar therapeutic technique, called Focusing, had previously been developed in the late 1970s (Gendlin, 1990). Mindfulness has also been incorporated into psychotherapeutic approaches to dealing with anxiety, depression, and feelings of unworthiness and insecurity (Brach, 2003; Brantley, 2003; McQuaid & Carmona, 2004), and it has provided new perspectives on the treatment of addiction and anger issues (Aronson, 2004; Dudley-Grant, 2003). Of particular interest to students, mindfulness has proven to be helpful in alleviating the stress associated with studying psychology in graduate school (Borynski, 2003)! In addition, Janet Surrey, one of the founding members of the Stone Center group, has studied comparisons between mindfulness and relational therapy (Surrey, 2005). Likewise, Trudy Goodman, who studied with Jean Piaget and now also teaches insight meditation, has utilized mindfulness in therapy with children (Goodman, 2005).
This traditional approach to mindfulness is usually associated with Southeast Asia, particularly the Thai forest monks. Jack Kornfield, a former Buddhist monk and currently a clinical psychologist, practiced with the renowned Ajahn Chah. Ajahn Chah’s teachings have been translated into English (Ajahn Chah, 2001), and another of his students has written two books in English (Ajahn Sumedho, 1987; 1995). Thanissaro Bhikku is another interesting individual dedicated to offering the teachings of the Buddha, known as the Dhamma. In conjunction with Dhamma Dana Publications, he has written his own book (Thanissaro Bhikkhu, 1993), translated the works of Buddhist monks and nuns (Ajaan Fuang Jotiko, 2005; Upasika Kee Nanayon, 1995), and translated with commentary some of the Pali Canon, the first written record of the teachings of the Buddha (Thanissaro Bhikkhu, 1996). Dhamma Dana Publications is committed to the free dissemination of these teachings and their books, sending many copies to people in prison who wish to better their lives. This is, of course, an active application of the Buddha’s teachings, and a way to help improve our society.
discussion question \(1\)
The Buddha proposed a method for alleviating the suffering associated with our desires and distresses: the four mindfulness trainings. Have you ever tried meditating, particularly the form of mindfulness meditation taught in the Theravadan tradition? Has it been helpful, or if you haven’t tried it, do you think it might be helpful?
The Neurobiology of Mindfulness
We began this chapter by looking at genetics and biology. We then transitioned into Buddhist mindfulness techniques that are thousands of years old. Today, these two disciplines have come together in some fascinating research. Neurobiologists and psychologists are working together with advanced meditators and respected Buddhist monks (including His Holiness the Dalai Lama) to study the activity of the brain, in real time, during meditation. These studies may also help to advance our understanding of the nature of the mind, but that may still be somewhat beyond our technical abilities. The interest of the field of psychology, and academia in general, is clearly evidenced by articles that have been written about these studies in venues such as the prestigious journal Science (Barinaga, 2003), the popular The Chronicle of Higher Education (Monastersky, 2006), and the Monitor on Psychology published by the American Psychological Association (Winerman, 2006).
Cognitive neuroscience has taken advantage of many technical advances in brain imaging, such as functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), and positron emission tomography (PET) to study the activity of the brain during mental tasks. Initially, these studies focused on identifying brain regions involved in very specific tasks. More recently, however, some investigators have become interested in using these techniques to study broad questions, such as the nature of the mind. Since we don’t know what the nature of the mind is, we don’t exactly know what to look for in these brain imaging studies. So, the investigators pursuing this research must creatively examine the brain during meditation (as well as under other conditions). It has been shown that meditation activates neural structures involved in attention and arousal (Lazar et al., 2000, 2005a; Newberg, 2001), alterations in sensory processing and the sense of space (Lazar, 2005a; Newberg, 2001), and a dramatic increase in synchronization of neural activity (Lutz et al., 2004). In perhaps the most striking of these studies, Lazar and her colleagues have demonstrated that long-term meditation practice is associated with increased cortical thickness in brain regions associated with attention and sensory processing (Lazar, 2005a). These effects were most pronounced in the older subjects, suggesting that meditation may have beneficial effects in terms of offsetting age-related declines in cortical thickness. Given these dramatic changes in brain function as a result of meditation, perhaps it should come as no surprise that meditation and mindfulness have proven to be useful adjuncts to therapy for a wide variety of psychological and medical disorders (for reviews see Lazar, 2005b and Newberg & Lee, 2005; see also Cozolino, 2002; Germer et al., 2005; Siegel, 2007).
Figure \(1\)
PET scan images of the author’s brain on the anti-Parkinson’s Disease drug l-DOPA (for research).
The use of these brain imaging techniques to study the mind during meditation raises the possibility that they may be useful in studying other altered states of consciousness. Indeed, Amir Raz and his colleagues (2005) have utilized fMRI and electrical scalp recording of event-related potentials to demonstrate that hypnotic suggestion reduces the activity of cortical regions in the brain that have been associated with conflict monitoring. In other words, when hypnosis is used to alter the behavior and cognition of individuals, there are recognizable changes in brain function. When the study of hypnosis is combined with the data obtained on alterations in brain function during meditation and under the influence of mind-altering drugs (see Mathew, 2001), it seems clear that the mind, either in its normal state or in various altered states, is reflected in unique states of neural activity. We may be a long way from fully understanding the details of the relationship between the mind and neural activity, and there may indeed be more to the mind than simply the neural activity itself, but this is certainly a fascinating field of study on the nature of who we are as individuals.
discussion question \(2\)
Cognitive neuroscientists have begun to identify changes in brain activity associated with meditation, and similar changes occur during hypnosis. What do you think this says about the mind?
Martial Arts
When we think of the martial arts, most of us think of East Asia. The different forms are typically associated with the countries where they developed: Kung Fu in China, Taekwondo in Korea, and Karate and Judo in Japan. Actually, Karate was developed on the island of Okinawa, and, although it is part of Japan today, its martial arts history has been influenced more by Chinese settlers than by the Japanese (Chesterman, 2003; Hornsey, 2002; Johnson, 2003a; Lewis, 1993; Ribner & Chin, 1978). Today, however, the martial arts are popular worldwide. There are many forms in addition to those listed above, including Capoeira, a martial art developed in Brazil by African slaves (Atwood, 1999). Capoeira is a particularly complex martial art, involving play, dance, and music. As some slaves escaped, they banded together to fight Portuguese soldiers and help other slaves to escape. More recently, Capoeira was one of the inspirations for break dancing, an African American dance style that developed in the 1970s and 1980s (Atwood, 1999). Although the Western world certainly has its equivalent forms of armed and unarmed combat, such as wrestling, boxing, and fencing (e.g., see Styers, 1974), they are not typically thought of as belonging to the Asian forms of fighting known as the martial arts.
It is estimated that as many as 18 million people in America alone practice some form of the martial arts (Nathan, 2005), and martial arts films have proven very popular. From Bruce Lee to Jackie Chan, and more recently Chow Yun Fat (star of Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, which won four Academy Awards [Lee, Ling, Schamus, & Jung, 2000]), we have seen examples of the classic good-guy, an honorable individual defending those who are abused by others. The famous American martial artist and movie star Chuck Norris, in cooperation with former President George H. W. Bush, has established a national program called KICKSTART to introduce martial arts to “at risk” middle school students to raise their self-esteem (Nathan, 2005). Although the martial arts are often seen as an opportunity for athletic young men to engage in disciplined and/or ritualized combat, there are also programs for children of all ages, general physical conditioning, and people with disabilities (Chaline, 2003; Johnson, 2003b; McNab, 2003). There is also a rich history of women practicing the martial arts (Atkinson, 1983; Chaline, 2003b). Indeed, Bruce Lee first studied the Wing Chun style of Kung Fu, a style developed some 400 years ago by a Buddhist nun named Ng Mui and her student Yim Wing Chun, who was also a nun. It was later that Lee developed his own technique, known as Jeet Kune Do or “the way of the intercepting fist” (Lee, 1975; see also Johnson, 2003a; Lewis, 1993; Little, 1998; Ribner & Chin, 1978).
What sets the martial arts apart is the balanced approach to both physical exercise and spiritual/mental discipline. Although the martial arts certainly existed farther back in ancient times, it is accepted by many that they were first formalized in the Shao-Lin temple by the founder of Zen Buddhism, Bodhidharma. When Bodhidharma first arrived at the Shao-Lin temple in China, after leaving his home in India, he found the monks in very poor physical condition. He developed a series of eighteen exercises that helped the monks to achieve a good level of physical fitness, something necessary for their self-defense as well as for extended periods of sitting in meditation (Johnson, 2003a; Lewis, 1993; Red Pine, 1987; Ribner & Chin, 1978). These exercises established the first formal practice of Kung Fu. It is important to note the role of Bodhidharma, a highly spiritual monk who had left his home to help spread the teachings of the Buddha. Since one of the basic tenets of Buddhism is to not harm any other living being, the martial arts have always emphasized mental discipline and the intention that the fighting skills should only be used in self-defense or in the defense of others who cannot defend themselves. Non-combative forms of the martial arts have developed around the concept of mindfulness of the body, which can be used as forms of moving meditation. Examples of such forms are Tai Chi Chuan and Qigong (Johnson, 2003a,c; Lewis, 1993; Khor, 1981; Ribner & Chin, 1978). There are also more traditional forms of martial arts, such as Aikido and Hapkido (Hapkido being “the way of harmony”; Chesterman, 2003), which emphasize the soft style of defending oneself that is advocated in the Tao Te Ching (Lao Tsu, c600 B.C./1989). As with the regular martial arts, these soft, meditative, defensive martial arts originated in the countries with the strongest histories in the more aggressive forms: Tai Chi Chuan and Qigong originated in China, Aikido in Japan, and Hapkido in Korea.
Figure \(2\)
Samuel demonstrating an excellent side kick on the way to earning his black belt in Taekwondo.
When the martial arts are approached properly, as a means to health, strength, and a calm state of mind, we can refer to the practice as the Martial Way, a means to living one’s life in a virtuous manner (Chu, 2003). Because martial arts training can prepare one to injure others it must be approached with the right attitude:
This concept of power as the cornerstone of personal freedom lies at the bottom of all martial arts philosophy. The recognition that power emanates from physical force and martial capability cuts both ways; it can be channeled toward constructive uses or abused as a means of destruction. This is the reason why martial arts training must always be directed toward the cultivation of the higher ideals of discipline, humility, benevolence and responsibility. (pg. 29; Chu, 2003)
Continuing to emphasize the role that the martial arts can play in helping people to live a more satisfying life, Chu goes on to say:
The demands of work, family, finances, as well as fatigue, neglect and health all distract the martial artist from his best intentions. Even the devoted student may be disappointed if he expects martial arts training to neatly bring his physical and spiritual condition into working order. Nevertheless, regular training can serve as a constant, to discipline him to develop his best self even as the daily routine pulls him in different directions. The strategies underlying training can be effectively applied not just in life threatening situations but to daily life. (pgs. 44-45; Chu, 2003)
In order to help martial artists pursue and maintain this virtuous Way, various codes and tenets have been devised. My family practices Taekwondo, so we have been taught to follow the five tenets of Taekwondo: courtesy, integrity, perseverance, self-control, and indomitable spirit. These principles were set forth by General Choi Hong Hi, who re-established the modern forms of Taekwondo when Korea regained its independence after World War II. He believed that if Taekwondo students lived their lives according to these principles they would become better people and help to make the world a better place (Chesterman, 2003; Lewis, 1993). Perhaps the most famous of the martial arts codes is the Bushido code of the Japanese Samurai. It can sometimes be difficult to translate Asian languages into English, but generally the Bushido code contains seven essential principles: making right decisions, bravery, compassion, taking right actions, honesty, honor, and loyalty. Although these principles seem to include states of mind, or conscious intentions, it is through the physical practice, through the body and the unconscious mind, that Bushido becomes a way of life (Deshimaru, 1982). Only after many years of practice does this become a natural way of life, without the need for continued attention to one’s practice. Then many more years of practice are necessary before one finally becomes a true master. The consciousness, or mindfulness, necessary for this combined practice of body and mind can be found in Zen Buddhism, which is closely intertwined with Budo, the Japanese way of the warrior (Deshimaru, 1982). As with the tenets of Taekwondo, the principles of the Bushido code helped warriors to restrain themselves from violent aggression in their daily lives (Chu, 2003). According to Chu (2003), it is the higher ideals of spirituality in codes like Bushido and the tenets of Taekwondo that separates the warrior from the predator.
Despite having emphasized the balance between physical and spiritual aspects of the martial arts, we must still consider that they can play a most important role in self-defense. It is an unfortunate reality that there are many people in this world who don’t follow virtuous principles such as the tenets of Taekwondo or the Bushido code. I am fortunate to know a martial artist and special education teacher named David Schied, who wrote a most interesting book combining martial arts, Eastern philosophy, and basic techniques of self-defense in all aspects of one’s life (Schied, 1986). Many people live timid lives, some live in outright fear. It has been suggested that as many as 160,000 children miss school every day out of fear that they will be bullied by other students (Nathan, 2005). This fear can seriously disrupt our ability to function in our daily world:
Most of us don’t see ourselves as unified human beings (people who can call forth all our resources and use our total capabilities at will). We tend not to give our all to the situation at hand (even when nothing less will do). Instead of giving our best we give “enough” which rarely is enough. Left to our own means most of us respond to life’s demands in a fragmented fashion. Instead of reacting to the challenges of everyday life by focusing and directing our energies to the task at hand, we respond haphazardly and incompletely. (pg. iv; Schied, 1986)
By studying the martial arts and other techniques of self-defense and security, and by learning strategies to become aware of and deal with our emotional responses to danger, we can not only resolve our fears in those dangerous situations, but we can also remain calm and in control of other aspects or our lives (Schied, 1986). In addition to simply preparing for danger by learning how to avoid it or how to fight when one can’t avoid it, the age-old Eastern techniques of meditation and mindfulness can help to calm one’s nerves before, during, and after facing a crisis. As peace of mind becomes your usual emotional state, you become more open to living your own life and enjoying your relationships with others in a loving and compassionate way. Then, when faced with danger from another:
The opening of yourself to life with love will enable you not only to take proper measures for the extension of your life (surviving) in an attack, but also to greet your attacker as everyone else you meet - with an open hand and an open mind. You will begin to see an infinite number of ways to share love with those who mean you bodily harm. By giving to another that love which is so plentiful within you, you will help instead of hurt him. This is the ultimate self-defense. (pg. 208; Schied, 1986)
discussion question \(3\)
The martial Way refers to integrating the physical, spiritual, and mental aspects of the martial arts into your daily life. Have you ever practiced a martial art? If yes, how seriously did you take the spiritual philosophy of your particular martial art or the martial arts in general?
Final Note
This chapter may seem to have an odd assortment of topics, but if we look closely we can better understand the meaningful connections. We have covered: 2,500 year-old Buddhist teachings on mindfulness, 1,500 year-old techniques in the martial arts, 100-year-old Victorian era theories on somatic psychology, recent theories in sociobiology and evolutionary psychology, and cutting-edge brain imaging of real-time changes in mental states! How can all of this possibly fit together? The answer is actually quite simple. For as long as people have been able to wonder, they have wondered about the two things in our lives that cannot be denied: the fact that we have a body, and the fact that we are aware of it. Conscious awareness of our own existence, and the body that is the physical manifestation of that existence, is something that all people, all races and all nationalities, have shared throughout time. These topics are the most thoroughly cross-cultural topics in psychology.
Finally, when Bruce Lee’s famous movie Enter the Dragon was first released in the United States, they cut one of the opening scenes in which he is tested by his master on his understanding of fundamental Buddhist/Daoist philosophy as it pertains to the martial arts. In the twenty-fifth anniversary special edition, Warner Brothers studios apparently decided that American audiences would now appreciate this dialogue, so they put the scene back into the movie (Clouse & Allin, 1998). | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/11%3A_Biology_and_Personality/11.03%3A_Ancient_and_Modern_Approaches_to_Training_the_Mind/Body_Connection.txt |
An Evolutionary Perspective on the Development of Pathological Personality Patterns
In the Appendix, there is a brief presentation of Theodore Millon’s alternative classification scheme for personality disorders, as compared to the DSM-IV (Millon, 1996; Millon & Grossman, 2005). This perspective is based on Millon’s belief that personality disorders represent patterns of thought and behavior that are adaptive, albeit under abnormal conditions, and therefore have been selected for through the process of evolution. Millon believes that it is necessary for psychology to draw upon related fields of science in order to strengthen the entire discipline:
Much of psychology as a whole remains adrift, divorced from broader spheres of scientific knowledge, isolated from deeper and more fundamental, if not universal, principles…we have failed to draw on the rich possibilities that may be found in both historic and adjacent realms of scholarly pursuit. (pg. 333; Millon & Grossman, 2005)
Millon and Grossman acknowledge the contributions of sociobiology to our understanding of human behavior, and they offer a sociobiological perspective on personality. Personality, they argue, can be thought of as the distinctive style of adaptive functioning that an individual exhibits as they relate to their typical range of environments. Personality development is healthy when the individual encounters average or relatively normal environments and is effective in adapting to them. Personality disorders arise when the individual relies on maladaptive functioning that can be traced to psychic deficiencies, trait imbalances, or internal conflicts that occur when relating to their environment. In other words, when individuals adapt to abnormal environments (e.g., an abusive home), their personality style may then prove to be maladaptive in situations outside of their typical environment.
Millon proposes that every person, indeed every organism, must accomplish four basic goals, each of which has two polarities: they must exist (seek pleasure and avoid pain), they must adapt (respond actively or remain passive), they must reproduce (focus on self or focus on others), and they must deal with unexpected or abstract situations (rely on thinking or react to feelings). These four demands correspond to four neurodevelopmental stages: sensory attachment associated with life enhancement (seeking pleasure) or life preservation (avoiding pain), sensorimotor autonomy associated with modifying the environment (active) or accommodating to the environment (passive), pubertal genital identity associated with propagating oneself (self-oriented) or nurturing children (other-oriented), and finally intracortical integration associated with intellect (thinking-oriented) or emotion (feeling-oriented). It should be clear that these stages cover the range of development from birth to young adulthood. In contrast to theories that focus on critical points in development as key times when psychological problems occur:
…the quality or kind of stimulation the youngster experiences is often of greater importance. The impact of parental harshness or inconsistency, of sibling rivalry or social failure, is more than a matter of stimulus volume and timing. Different dimensions of experience take precedence as the meaning conveyed by the source of stimulation becomes clear to the growing child. (pg. 361; Millon & Grossman, 2005)
While it is difficult to clearly define what constitutes normal vs. abnormal personalities, in simple terms individuals who are relatively normal are able to shift between and balance the demands of each of these polarities as appropriate to the situations they encounter. When examining individuals with pathological personality patterns (a term preferred by Millon & Grossman, since personality disorder implies a medical condition that might be cured), their behavioral constraints arise primarily from within themselves, due to the abnormal conditions in which they developed. The traits associated with these abnormal personality patterns take on an inner momentum and autonomy, so they are expressed regardless of the external situation. In other words, individuals with pathological personality patterns are not able to appropriately adapt their behaviors to different situations in which they find themselves.
The following is a description of one abnormal personality type, the self-defeating (masochistic) personality:
This disorder stems largely from a reversal of the pain-pleasure polarity. These persons interpret events and engage in relationships in a manner that is not only at variance with this deeply rooted polarity but is contrary to the associations these life-promoting emotions usually acquire through learning. To the self-defeating personality, pain may be a preferred experience, tolerantly accepted if not encouraged in intimate relationships. It is often intensified by purposeful self-denial, and blame acceptance may be aggravated by acts that engender difficulties as well as by thoughts that exaggerate past misfortunes and anticipate future ones. (pp. 376-377; Millon & Grossman, 2005)
As strange as this condition seems, how might it arise? How does a person develop an adaptive strategy that seeks pain, and how can such a strategy actually be adaptive? Imagine an abused child, whose only source of love is the parents who abuse them! In such a terrible situation, the best strategy for the child to adapt might be to reverse the pleasure-pain polarity. This is clearly an extreme response, but one that might make the child’s world easier to endure and less likely to create further abuse. However, when the child grows up and moves on to other relationships, the deeply embedded characteristics of this pathological personality pattern make healthy relationships all but impossible. An important point to make here is that the term adaptive is not always synonymous with our ideas of good psychological health. Adaptation can only be considered within its particular context. And that is exactly the consideration that Millon proposes in his evolutionary perspective on personality development. Each person develops adaptively to their own environment, and as a result they establish persistent characteristics (personality patterns) along the polarities of pain-pleasure, active-passive, self-other, and thinking-feeling. Whether these adaptations are healthy or unhealthy is a matter to be determined after the fact. However, by recognizing how they develop, as psychologists we can attempt to educate others on how to avoid causing these conditions. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/11%3A_Biology_and_Personality/11.04%3A_Personality_Theory_in_Real_Life.txt |
Review of Key Points
• Twin studies, adoption studies, and family studies allow us to examine the heritability of personality traits. Identical twins share 100 percent of the genetic material, and siblings raised in different families following adoption allow for an ideal comparison between genetic and environmental factors.
• As important as genetics are, the environment also plays a significant role in development. Studies on intelligence have shown a strong degree of heritability, but culture also makes a significant contribution.
• Behavior genetics is the term used for the study of the influence of genetics on behavior. Kagan has demonstrated that temperament, the emotional component of personality, appears to be the most salient of inborn characteristics. According to Kagan, approximately 10 percent of children are naturally inhibited, whereas approximately 20 percent of children are naturally more outgoing and adventurous.
• Studies on the heritability of personality traits consistently show that genetics is responsible for approximately 50 percent of the nature of our personality. Genetic factors also play a role in a wide variety of other psychological factors, such as attitudes, interests, and psychological disorders.
• Current studies on the role of genetics in personality tend to focus on gene-environment interactions. Kagan’s research has identified the amygdala, and its role in emotional reactivity to novel situations, as an important neurological structure in the development of a behavioral inhibition system in some people.
• Sociobiology examines the role of evolution in the behavior of humans. Sociobiologists focus on inclusive fitness, the advantage that a given behavior confers on the likelihood of specific genes being passed on to an individual’s offspring or the offspring of their close kin.
• Sociobiology allows for new perspectives on behavior that might otherwise seem illogical or, at least, difficult to explain. Patterns of mate selection, parenting and grandparenting, and religion all offer biological advantages when viewed from this perspective.
• Evolutionary psychology is the field of study in which sociobiology is specifically applied to psychology.
• Richard Dawkins has suggested that cultural units, which he calls memes, are subject to the same rules of evolution as are genes. The transmission of these cultural units may play a critical role in the development of individuals and the human species as a whole.
• Evolutionary psychology is the specific application of sociobiology to the field of psychology.
• Reich’s somatic psychology is focused on the intimate interrelationship between the body and the mind. He believed that psychological health required the fulfillment and release of biological energy through the orgasm. Reich also described the physical presentation of individuals demonstrating muscular armoring, which he considered to be the natural consequence of inhibiting aggression.
• The Buddha described consciousness as arising from moments of contact, the contact between a sense object (stimulus), a sense organ, and awareness of the object.
• Being mindful of these moments of contact involves practicing the four mindfulness trainings: mindfulness of body, mindfulness of feeling, mindfulness of mind, and mindfulness of mental objects.
• Mindfulness training has had a significant impact on Western psychology. Examples include the influential mindfulness-based stress reduction program developed by Jon Kabat-Zinn and Focusing. Mindfulness training has also been extended to working with children and to relational-cultural therapy.
• Cognitive neuroscientists are beginning to demonstrate changes in brain function as a result of deep meditation. Similar changes occur during hypnosis, suggesting the possibility of some inherent function for altered states of consciousness.
• The martial arts provide methods for training the body and mind together. The first formal martial arts program appears to have been developed by the founder of Zen Buddhism, Bodhidharma. He intended to help the monks at the Shao-Lin temple keep their bodies fit as they devoted their lives to meditation. These concepts of keeping body and mind fit together leads to a lifestyle that can be called the martial Way.
• The martial arts include guidelines for balancing physical discipline with spiritual/mental discipline. Examples of these guidelines include the five tenets of Taekwondo and the Bushido code of the Samurai warriors. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/11%3A_Biology_and_Personality/11.S%3A_Chapter_Summary.txt |
Erik Erikson is one of the few personality theorists from a Western perspective who addressed the entire lifespan. He shifted from Freud’s emphasis on psychosexual conflicts to one of psychosocial crises, which have unique manifestations through adulthood and old age. Erikson’s theory has always been popular, but as our society has become increasingly older the need has grown to understand the aged individual, making Erikson’s perspective even more valuable and relevant today than it was when he first proposed it. If, indeed, Erikson’s perspective on the personality changes occurring in adulthood and old age do become more relevant with time, it may result in an interesting change in Erikson’s place in psychology. Although most personality textbooks devote a chapter to Erikson, and he is typically covered in lifespan developmental texts as well, he is not mentioned in most history of psychology textbooks, and those that do mention him do so only briefly. As popular as he is with students of psychology, and most psychology faculty as well, becoming a common topic in the history of his field would be a distinct honor.
It is also important to note that Erikson was first, and foremost, a psychoanalyst, and a child psychoanalyst at that. He did not neglect the importance of childhood as he pursued the psychosocial changes that accompany aging:
One may scan work after work on history, society, and morality and find little reference to the fact that all people start as children and that all peoples begin in their nurseries. It is human to have a long childhood; it is civilized to have an ever longer childhood. Long childhood makes a technical and mental virtuoso out of man, but it also leaves a lifelong residue of emotional immaturity in him. (pg. 12; Erikson, 1950)
12.02: Brief Biography of Erik Erikson
The most curious aspect of Erik Erikson’s life is certainly that his name was not Erikson. No one alive today knows the name of his real father, and he never learned it either. He implored his mother to tell him who his father was, as did his wife Joan, but Erikson’s mother had promised her second husband, Theodor Homburger, the man who raised Erikson and whose name Erikson had been given, that she would never reveal the truth. And she kept that promise. When Erikson and his family moved to the United States, their son Kai was taunted by schoolmates, who called him “hamburger, hamburger.” So, Erikson and his wife turned to the Scandinavian tradition of naming a son after his father, and they called their son Kai Erik’s son, or Kai Erikson. They then adopted the surname themselves, becoming Erik and Joan Erikson. It is also surprising to note that Joan Erikson’s name was not Joan. Her first name was Sarah, and as a child she was called Sally. According to her daughter Sue, she hated both names, and eventually chose to be called Joan (Sue Erikson Bloland, 2005).
Erik Homburger Erikson was born Erik Salomonsen on June 15, 1902, near Frankfurt, Germany. His mother, Karla Abrahamsen, was from a wealthy Jewish family in Copenhagen, Denmark. She had married a man named Valdemar Salomonsen, but her husband left Europe within a day of their marriage and went to North America; she never saw him again and he seems to have had no further relationship with her. A few years later she became pregnant, and in order to avoid scandal, she either left or was sent away from Denmark to Germany, where she would be near relatives. She settled near Frankfurt, and raised Erikson alone. Shortly after Erikson was born, they received word that Valdemar Salomonsen had died, making Erikson’s mother a widow. When, at about the age of 3, Erikson became ill, his mother took him to the local pediatrician, Theodor Homburger. Karla Abrahamsen and Theodor Homburger fell in love, got married, and Homburger helped to raise Erikson as his own son. Erikson was 8 years old when he learned the truth that Homburger was not his father, but he still grew up as Erik Homburger, since his mother never revealed the truth about his actual father’s name (Bloland, 2005; Coles, 1970; Friedman, 1999).
As a child, Erikson was never secure in his relationship with his mother. They were close, and his mother delighted in his intelligence and sensitivity. She shared her passion for philosophy and art with her son, but she had to pay special attention to her new and very proper husband Dr. Homburger. Erikson himself was, by all accounts, deeply traumatized by his mother shifting her attention to this new husband, and by the deception he eventually learned about regarding the fact that Homburger was not his father. Although he was eventually adopted by Homburger, it was more about proper appearances than any close relationship between step-father and step-son. Later in life, Erikson rarely ever mentioned him (Bloland, 2005; Coles, 1970; Friedman, 1999).
Erikson attended a primary school for 4 years, and then went to a very traditional Gymnasium. He studied Latin and Greek, German literature, ancient history, and art. He was not a particularly good student, but he excelled at history and art. Since the Homburger family was rather prestigious, and given his mother’s interest in art, their home was often entertained by many regional artists. Erikson sought formal training as an artist, and was considered quite talented. So, rather than attending college, he spent a year wandering through Europe living a Bohemian lifestyle. However, he was still deeply troubled by his sense of having no identity, no heritage, and by his own account was marginally functional at best. He was able to make ends meet only because his mother secretly sent him money, something his step-father would have been very angry about, because Homburger was becoming openly intolerant of Erikson’s avoidance of social and financial responsibility. After a year, Erikson returned home and entered an art school, and then went to Munich to study at another art school. After 2 years in Munich he moved to Florence, Italy, where he spent most of his time wandering around and studying people. He also made friends with other wandering artists, including a writer named Peter Blos, who had actually been in his graduating class at the Gymnasium and who later became a well-known child psychoanalyst. Eventually, however, Erikson realized he would not be successful as an artist, and he returned home, caught in the grip of a deep depression (Bloland, 2005; Coles, 1970; Friedman, 1999).
Then, in 1927, something most important happened in Erikson’s life. His friend Peter Blos had been privately tutoring the children of Dorothy Burlingham, a wealthy American who had come to Vienna for psychoanalysis and to meet Sigmund Freud. Blos had been living with the Burlinghams, and he also came to know the Freud family well, but he had decided that the time had come to move on. However, Mrs. Burlingham and her close, personal friend Anna Freud did not want to lose a teacher they were so fond of. So, they offered Blos the opportunity to establish a school of his own, and he invited Erikson to help him develop the curriculum and to teach art and history. Blos and Erikson were given a free hand to develop a progressive curriculum, and the two men flourished. The results were astounding. The children had great freedom, and with Erikson they studied art, music, poetry, German history, ancient history, geography, they read about Eskimos and American Indians, and they made tools, toys, and exhibits. The environment in what came to be known as the Hietzing School also provided much food for thought for Anna Freud, as she was just developing her ideas on the psychoanalysis of children (Bloland, 2005; Coles, 1970; Friedman, 1999).
Through his relationship with the Burlingham family and Anna Freud, Erikson became well acquainted with the entire Freud family. He greatly impressed Anna Freud with how quickly he bonded with the children in the Hietzing School. So, he was accepted into psychoanalysis, both as a patient and a psychoanalyst in training. Since his interests in the school had shifted from teaching to studying and observing the children as they lived their lives, Erikson, like Anna Freud, was already interested in becoming a child psychoanalyst. As he pursued his psychoanalytic training, he also pursued training in the Montessori approach to education. He actually became one of only two men in the Vienna Montessori Women’s Teacher Association. As if all this wasn’t enough, in 1929 Erikson met Joan Serson. Born in a small town in Ontario, Canada, she had moved to Vienna to pursue her own studies (she had a Master’s degree in Sociology, and had been working on a Ph.D.). The two met at a masked ball at a palace in Vienna, and before long were living together, and Serson was teaching at the Hietzing School with Erikson and Blos. In the spring of 1930, Serson went to Philadelphia, where her mother was very ill. While there she learned that she was pregnant. She returned to Vienna, only to find that Erikson balked at marrying her. However, a number of his friends urged him to avoid the mistakes of his own father, and that he should not abandon the woman who was carrying his child, let alone the child itself. So, Joan and Erik Erikson were married in 1930. She joined the faculty of the Hietzing School, and there were clearly some happy times:
After our marriage we lived on the Kueniglberg, above the school. When our son Kai was born (after some time out for Joan) we daily carried him between us in a laundry basket to the tiny schoolyard or the Rosenfelds’ back porch. It became routine that the children would tell us during class when he was crying (“Kai weint”), and in the intermission some watched him being nursed. It was enriching for us all to share this experience. (pg. 5; Erikson & Erikson, 1980).
In 1932, however, the Hietzing School closed, in part because some of the children returned to America with their families, and in part because of different opinions on how the school should be run between Mrs. Burlingham and Anna Freud on one hand and Erikson and Blos on the other. Not only did it seem appropriate that Erikson move on from the school in Vienna, the climate in Europe was becoming increasingly hostile as the Nazis took over Germany and the surrounding areas (including Austria). Erikson was concerned about his family (they had two sons by that point). So Erikson moved his young family to America, in order to escape the dangerous conditions brewing in Europe (Bloland, 2005; Coles, 1970; Friedman, 1999).
Considering his illustrious credentials, having been an acquaintance of Sigmund Freud and trained by Anna Freud, Erikson was welcomed into the American psychoanalytic community, despite never having graduated from college (let alone medical school). The Eriksons never really settled anywhere, in many ways his career was one of unending research and clinical experience. In 1933, the Eriksons moved to Boston, Massachusetts, and Erik received appointments at the Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital, and the Judge Baker Guidance Center. He was associated with the Harvard Psychological Clinic, and came to know Henry Murray. In 1936, he accepted a position at Yale University’s Institute of Human Relations, where he met John Dollard. Dollard encouraged Erikson’s interests in cross-cultural research and in extending Freud’s theories to the entire lifespan. Indeed, Dollard may have had a significant influence on Erikson’s eight-stage theory of development (Coles, 1970; Friedman, 1999).
In the summer of 1938, the year that his daughter was born, Erikson joined anthropologist Scudder Mekeel on a trip to the Pine Ridge Reservation in South Dakota to study the children of the Sioux Indians. He was able to make extensive observations of mother-child interactions, and to talk with employees of the Bureau of Indian Affairs. In 1939 the Eriksons moved to California. Erikson practiced psychoanalysis in San Francisco, taught at the University of California, and continued his studies on Native Americans by visiting the Yurok tribe in Northern California. During this time he consolidated his major interests into his most significant book, Childhood and Society (Erikson, 1950), which includes sections on the influence of social life, culture (based on his Native American studies), the use of toys and playing when studying children, the evolution of identity, and the eight stages of development. Erikson also became an American citizen (Coles, 1970; Friedman, 1999).
In 1944, however, a disturbing and tragic event befell the Eriksons, one that they kept secret as much as possible. They had a fourth child, named Neil. When she went to deliver the child, Joan Erikson had been heavily sedated, because of a surgical procedure that had been planned ahead of time (as a result of an earlier pregnancy). Erikson was summoned by the doctors, who told him that his newborn child was a “Mongolian Idiot” (known today as a Down Syndrome child). The case was considered severe, and he was told it was unlikely that the child would live more than a year or two. The medical staff recommended having the child institutionalized. Erikson was not used to making such decisions, it was Joan who ran the household and supported him while he worked. He called a close friend, Margaret Mead. She assured him that the medical staff was right. Another friend, Joseph Wheelwright (a respected Jungian analyst) agreed. Erikson signed the necessary papers, and Neil Erikson was transferred before his mother ever woke up. The decision tormented both of them. Joan felt that she had never been given a chance to participate in the decision, but she also never made any effort to bring Neil home. They told their children that he had died, and many of their friends never knew he had even existed (no mention is made in the 1970 biography by Robert Coles). After a year or two they did tell their oldest son, Kai, but he was strictly forbidden to mention Neil. Making the situation even more tragic was the fact that Neil lived to be 21 years old. Since much less was known about mental retardation at the time, and this occurred well before the prevailing attitude had begun to change, what else might the doctors have been wrong about (Bloland, 2005; Friedman, 1999)?
In 1949, Erikson was appointed as a professor at the University of California at Berkeley. Within a year, however, as McCarthyism gripped America, Erikson refused to sign a loyalty oath. Erikson protested publicly, his statement was read at conferences and published in the journal Psychiatry. He was not a communist, and had never had any interest in communism, but he felt that signing the oath would have made him a hypocrite, as well as being a betrayal of junior colleagues who had refused to sign the oath and were promptly dismissed. Although the tenure committee recommended that he be allowed to remain at the University of California, due in large part to the dismissal of junior colleagues, Erikson resigned his position. He was quickly offered a position at the Austen Riggs Center in Stockbridge, Massachusetts (Coles, 1970; Friedman, 1999).
Erikson was something of a celebrity in Stockbridge. He spent 10 years in Stockbridge, during which he published Young Man Luther (Erikson, 1958), an historical/psychoanalytic biography that brought together two of Erikson’s academic strengths, and that brought him a certain amount of acclaim. He also taught a graduate seminar at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, using Young Man Luther as a model for the course. He was subsequently offered a professorship at Harvard, but not without some controversy. One of the faculty who protested Erikson’s appointment, claiming that he came at too high a price (literally), was David McClelland. Others supported Erikson, and he was eventually appointed as a professor with no particular department. It proved to be a good decision. Erikson used his influence and personal connections to invite renowned guest speakers, ranging from pediatrician Benjamin Spock to anthropologist Margaret Mead and Beat poet Allen Ginsberg. He inspired students such as Howard Gardner, Carol Gilligan, and future congressman, senator, and Vice President of the United States Albert Gore, Jr. (Gore wrote a biography of his father for Erikson’s class). Erikson also continued his interest in historical biography with the publication of Gandhi’s Truth (Erikson, 1969), following a 3-month visit to India in 1962/1963. Gandhi’s Truth won a Pulitzer Prize and the National Book Award. Always afraid that he would not be recognized for his accomplishments, Erikson hoped that he would also win the Nobel Prize for Literature, and he was disappointed when it did not happen (Bloland, 2005; Coles, 1970; Friedman, 1999).
Erikson retired in 1970, and he and Joan returned to California. Erikson continued writing for a number of years, focusing on issues related to personality changes that accompany old age. Eventually, however, time began to catch up with him. In 1987, as his health deteriorated, he and Joan returned to Cambridge, Massachusetts to live with two young professors who could help Joan care for her husband. He died in 1994 (Bloland, 2005; Coles, 1970; Friedman, 1999).
Joan Erikson missed her husband terribly, but managed to spend some time on her own writing. She wrote several chapters that were added as an addendum to The Life Cycle Completed, in which she proposed a ninth stage of development (Erikson & Erikson, 1997). She spoke to their daughter Sue regularly as Sue followed her father’s footsteps and became a psychoanalyst. Sue Erikson Bloland was deeply concerned, however, since Lawrence Friedman was about to publish his biography on Erikson, which included extensive coverage of the Erikson’s son Neil. Fortunately, perhaps, Joan Erikson died in 1997, and never had to face the public reaction to Friedman’s biography (Bloland, 2005).
Special Biographical Note: While preparing his biography on Erikson, Lawrence Friedman tried his best to identify Erikson’s father. He went to Copenhagen to review historical documents and interview relatives, particularly in the Abrahamsen family. There was a persistent rumor that Erik Erikson had been named after his real father, who had been a court photographer. According to historical records of the appropriate time period, there were two court photographers in Copenhagen named Erik: Erik Strom and Erik Bahnsen. However, little evidence supports that either of these men could have been Erikson’s father. Thus, Friedman concluded that this mystery will never be solved (Friedman, 1999).
discussion question \(1\)
Erikson never knew who his father was, so he never knew his heritage (at least on one side of his family). What do you know of your heritage? In what way, if any, has it influenced your personal development?
Placing Erikson in Context: Psychodynamic Challenges Across the Lifespan
Erik Erikson is well-known and popular, and he was highly respected by most of his colleagues. He knew Sigmund Freud personally, and he was trained in psychoanalysis by Anna Freud. And yet, it is difficult to place Erikson in context. He believed that he had remained true to Freud’s theories, but his shift from psychosexual stages to psychosocial crises, and his extension of them throughout the lifespan, was something that Anna Freud found objectionable, and she dismissed his work as “not much… designed to make my father’s work palatable to Harvard freshman” (cited in Bloland, 2005). Erikson was always bothered by this rejection, even when the importance of his place in psychoanalytic theory was assured by others.
Erikson also stands apart from most other theorists with his emphasis on the continuation of psychodynamic processes throughout the lifespan. Although Jung had discussed the importance of middle age, his theorizing was based on Eastern perspectives, not on psychodynamic theory. A number of other analysts emphasized sociocultural factors in adulthood, including Adler and Horney, but only Erikson proposed a continuous, single theory from birth to old age, a theory based on traditional psychodynamic perspectives.
Erikson was not unique in his emphasis on cross-cultural studies, but other theorists typically looked to confirm their psychodynamic theory after the fact. Erikson’s studies on the childhood of the Sioux and the Yurok helped him form his psychosocial theory, since those studies were part of his experience during the time his theory was forming in his mind.
And finally, Erikson was one of the few theorists who addressed personality changes in old age. As life expectancy continues to rise in America, there are many more elderly people today than ever before. And they are healthier at older ages as well. Thus, our understanding of the unique aspects of the elderly person will become increasingly more relevant, not only to psychology, but to all of society as well. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/12%3A_Erik_Erikson/12.01%3A_Chapter_Introduction.txt |
Erikson is well known for his theory on the eight stages of development. He did not simply theorize these stages, of course. He drew upon Sigmund Freud’s basic theories, Anna Freud’s explorations in the psychological development of children, and his own experience as a teacher and, later, as a child psychoanalyst. In addition, he attempted to repeat many of his observations in different cultures, particularly in two Native American tribes, the Sioux and the Yurok. These basic principles and observations form the foundation upon which Erikson built his stage theory of development.
The Epigenetic Principle and Psychosocial Crises
Epigenesis is a biological term referring to the development of an embryo, and ultimately an adult organism, from an undifferentiated egg. Similarly, Erikson viewed psychological development as a series of predictable stages in each individual. We begin life without having faced or resolved any of these stages. Only the experience of our life can result in moving us along. This aspect of Erikson’s theory is identical to Freud’s. Where they differ, however, is on the matter of what are the critical factors that drive the process of these stages. For Sigmund Freud, it was psychosexual development, and each stage is based on the region of the body from which the child gains sexual satisfaction (first the mouth, then the anus, then the genitals, etc.). In contrast, Erikson proposed that the underlying framework for the developmental stages is a series of psychosocial crises. Erikson used the term psychosocial crises to refer to turning points, or crucial moments, in a person’s development, which contain within them the potential for abnormal development and the failure to reach one’s development.
In other words, we face predictable, yet critical, developmental tasks as we move through our lives. We cannot experience one aspect of a crisis without also experiencing the opposite aspect. Our goal, or task, is to achieve a greater degree of the favorable aspect of the crisis (such as being more trusting than distrusting; see below), within the context of our social and cultural environments (Erikson, 1950, 1954, 1968a).
Observing Children at Play
Erikson borrowed Freud’s famous line regarding dreams as the royal road to the unconscious mind, saying instead that play is the royal road to understanding the young child’s ego and identity development (Erikson, 1950). With very young children there is a unique challenge for both experimental psychologists and therapists: the child’s limited language development. Not only does observing play allow for insight into ego development, it can also show us the capacity for the ego to find recreation and to cure itself, if necessary. This makes play useful in the therapeutic setting, as we saw when examining the contributions of Melanie Klein and Donald Winnicott.
Erikson studied childhood play extensively, publishing articles that included clinical notes on how and why children build things or choose the toys they play with (Erikson, 1937), psychological factors behind and effects of disruptions in play (Erikson, 1940), gender differences in play (Erikson, 1955), and ethnic, racial, nationality, and socioeconomic status differences in play (Erikson, 1972). Ultimately, Erikson published Toys and Reasons (Erikson, 1977), in which he argued that childhood play provides a basis for ritualizing our life experiences, and that ritualization continues throughout the stages of life. Whether play serves to help master and resolve traumatic experiences, or provides catharsis for pent-up emotion or surplus energy, or whether it has a functional role in which a child can exercise new faculties and potentials in preparation for the future, Erikson argued that play is an act of renewal and self-expression, one that can be an expression of inventiveness and abandon. Play provides a means for connecting with others, in order to cope with the challenges of life (Erikson, 1977).
discussion question \(1\)
Have you ever watched children play? What has it told you about the individual child, and is it always consistent with who you think that child is? What sort of games or sports do you like to play, and do you like to play with children?
The Value of Cross-Cultural Studies
The value of studying other cultures was summarized rather succinctly by Erikson in an interview with Richard Evans:
The interesting thing was that all the childhood problems which we had begun to take seriously on the basis of pathological developments in our own culture, the Indians talked about spontaneously and most seriously without any prodding. They referred to our stages as the decisive steps in the making of a good Sioux Indian or a good Yurok Indian…And “good” meant whatever seemed “virtuous” in a “strong” man or woman in that culture. I think this contributed eventually to my imagery of basic human strengths. (pg. 62; Erikson cited in Evans, 1964)
So, it was actually on the basis of cross-cultural comparisons that Erikson felt confident in proposing his eight stage theory of psychosocial development.
Erikson was deeply indebted to two anthropologists, H. Scudder Mekeel and Alfred Kroeber, who introduced him to the Sioux and Yurok tribes they had been studying. Through their introductions, Erikson was able to gain the confidence of the individual Sioux and Yurok who provided Erikson with invaluable evidence on their traditional ways of life and their child-rearing practices. But it is important to note that Native Americans were not the only other cultural groups that Erikson studied. He studied the childhood myths of Hitler and the Bolshevik myth of Maxim Gorky’s youth, in an attempt to understand the terrible political events that occurred in Nazi Germany and Communist Russia. He also examined the factors influencing Black identity in America. He suggested that one of the greatest struggles for Blacks in this country, after the Civil War had ended slavery, was the mostly false promise of a better life in the North. As they left behind their successful identity as slaves (Note: successful only means that it was a clear identity, not that it was moral or justified) for a fragmented identity of supposedly free people, though prejudice and discrimination were still rampant, even in the North. Erikson made some interesting comparisons between Blacks and Native Americans in terms of their attempts to identify their place in American society:
I have mentioned the fact that mixed-blood Indians in areas where they hardly ever see Negroes refer to their full-blood brothers as “niggers,” thus indicating the power of the national imagery which serves to contrast the dominant ideal images and the dominant evil images in the inventory of available prototypes. No individual can escape this opposition of images which, in a great variety of syndromes, is all-pervasive in the men and in the women, in the majorities and in the minorities, and in all the classes of a given national or cultural unit. (pg. 215; Erikson, 1950)
Individuals try to resolve their identity crises in as simple and straightforward a way as possible. Every group within a society is somewhat familiar with the stereotypical identity attributed to other groups, and these factors play an important role, even when they are expressed in negative ways, such as mixed-blood Native Americans calling full-blooded Native Americans “niggers.” Erikson later noted that full-blooded Sioux on the Pine Ridge Reservation turn around and call their half-blooded brothers “white trash” (Erikson, 1980a). These factors also tell us something about the place different groups occupy in the minds of members of other groups, and how that might influence the individuals within those groups. We will return to the concept of identity after examining Erikson’s stages of development.
discussion question \(2\)
Erikson believed that his theories had been confirmed in different cultures, such as the Sioux and the Yurok. Do you think his theories apply to all cultures? If not, what problems do you see with his work? | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/12%3A_Erik_Erikson/12.03%3A_Basic_Concepts_Underlying_the_Study_of_Development.txt |
Many people are familiar with Erikson’s eight stages of life, but what is less well known is that each stage is tied to specific, basic social institutions and is also associated with a particular strength, which Erikson believed gave the individual a “semblance of instinctive certainty in his social ecology” (Erikson, 1968a; see also Erikson, 1950). Each stage can also be viewed as awakening a specific sense of estrangement, which can become the basis for psychopathology. As we are about to see, the first stage is basic trust vs. basic mistrust. If a child develops basic trust, they will also develop the basic strength of hope. Then, as they progress through life, they will likely encounter situations in which people cannot be trusted, but the person can remain hopeful. In contrast, hopelessness is a term closely identified with depression, and it is easy to see how a person who learns from the beginning of life that the people around them, indeed the whole world (as they perceive it), is a threatening and untrustworthy place. As each of the eight stages is introduced, the title will begin with the general age at which the stage occurs, the psychosocial crisis experienced during that stage, and finally, the primary human strength that is associated with the successful resolution of the crisis.
Infancy - Basic Trust vs. Basic Mistrust - Hope: The primary relationship (or social institution) of this first stage is the mother. The infant needs to be fed (and traditionally this was only breast-feeding), comforted, and protected. As we have seen in earlier chapters, the child does not necessarily recognize that the mother is a separate person, so the bond between them is extraordinarily intimate. It is inevitable, however, that the child will experience discomfort and pain, and that the mother will not be able to immediately attend to every need. In such times of distress, the child who mostly trusts in the care of their mother will be able to hope that the care is coming.
Figure \(1\)
As a young child develops a sense of autonomy, they begin to do more for themselves.
Early Childhood - Autonomy vs. Shame, Doubt - Will: At this stage, both parents become the primary social institution. As young children develop the ability to walk and talk they begin to do many things for themselves. However, their actions often lead to restrictions, as they experience the categorical rules of “yes and no,” “right and wrong,” or “good and bad.” Shame is the consequence of being told that one is bad or wrong. Doubt arises when the child is unsure. As they develop their will power, i.e., their exercise of free will, they may not be sure what to do in a certain situation. A child who has been supported in exercising their autonomy will develop the will power to restrain themselves without experiencing shame or doubt. For example, they will learn not to run out into the busy street, and even feel good about their ability to take care of and protect themselves. It is often fascinating to watch a young child demonstrate this protectiveness when they interact with an even younger child. One can easily see the satisfaction in understanding rules and guidelines as, say, an eight-year old looks after a two-year old cousin.
Play Age - Initiative vs. Guilt - Purpose: The entire family (e.g., siblings, grandparents, etc.) provides the social context for this developmental stage. As the child of age three or four years old becomes able to do much more, and to do so more vigorously, they begin to realize something of what is expected of them as adults. So, they being to play with other children, older children, and to play games that mimic things done by adults. This helps them to develop a sense of purpose, and to pursue valued goals and skills. Excessive initiative, especially when combined with autonomy, can lead to problems such as rivalry and jealousy, especially with younger siblings. It can also lead to aggressive manipulation or coercion. Consequently, the child can begin to feel guilty about their actions, especially if they are punished.
Figure \(2\)
As children grow a little older, they begin to mimic what they see being done by older children and adults.
School Age - Industry vs. Inferiority - Competence: The social institutions relevant to this stage now move outside the family, including the neighborhood, community, and schools. It is one thing to play adult roles, such as in the previous stage, but in this stage the child actually begins the process of preparing to be a caretaker and provider for others, such as their own children. In all cultures, according to Erikson, at this age (beginning at 5 to 6 years old) children receive some form of systematic training, and they also learn eagerly from older children. Unfortunately, some children are not as successful as others, particularly in the restrictive learning environment of schools. Keep in mind that Erikson was trained in the Montessori style of education, which emphasizes free exploration and active learning, at each child’s own pace (Lillard & Jessen, 2003; Spietz, 1991). If children are indeed successful, if they are given the freedom to learn, they will develop a sense of competence, which will help them to persevere when faced with more challenging tasks.
Adolescence - Identity vs. Role Diffusion, Confusion - Fidelity: The family finally loses its place of primacy as a social institution, as peer groups and outgroups become the most significant social institutions. According to Erikson, childhood comes to an end when a person has developed the skills and tools to proceed into adulthood. First, however, there is the period in which one’s body changes from a child to an adult: puberty. Known psychologically as adolescence, it is a period in which each person must determine how they will fit their particular skills into the adult world of their culture. This requires forming one’s identity. The fidelity that Erikson speaks of refers to the ability to remain true to oneself, and to one’s significant others. This period is easiest for children who are gifted and well trained in the pursuit of clear goals, and also for children who receive a good deal of affirmation from their peers.
The pursuit of one’s identity can be quite challenging, and we will examine identity in more detail in the next section. But first, one way to cope with the challenge of forming one’s identity is to stop doing it for a while, something Erikson called a psychosocial moratorium (Erikson, 1959). A moratorium is a break that one takes in life before committing oneself to a career. Some people serve in the military or the Peace Corps before coming home and taking their place in the community. Some travel, and try to “see the world,” before starting college. Erikson considered the moratorium to be a natural and, in many cases, quite productive activity. To cite one of Erikson’s examples, a young Charles Darwin, who had been training for the ministry, left England on a 5-year voyage on a ship called the Beagle in order to participate in geological studies (he was also studying geology). It was during that trip that he made the initial observations of animals and fossils that ultimately led to his theory of evolution.
Young Adulthood - Intimacy vs. Isolation - Love: With the onset of adulthood, the most significant social factors become partners in friendship, sex, competition, and cooperation. Once an individual has consolidated their own identity, they are capable of the self-abandonment necessary for intimate affiliations, passionate sexual unions, or inspiring encounters. According to Erikson, sexual encounters prior to fulfilling this stage are of the identity-confirming kind, rather than the truly intimate sexual relationships based on love. Love is the mutual devotion of two people. Individuals who are unsuccessful in making intimate contacts are at risk for exaggerating their isolation, which brings with it the danger of not making any new contacts that might lead to the very intimate relationship they are lacking.
Adulthood - Generativity vs. Stagnation, Self-Absorption - Care: The family household, including divided labor and shared household duties, becomes the primary social institution of adulthood. Erikson also referred to adulthood as maturity, and he considered this stage to be reciprocal. A mature person needs to be needed, and it is their very maturity that guides them to care for the needs of others. So, generativity is the concern with helping to establish and guide the next generation. It is psychosocial because it includes productivity and creativity, not just procreation. When the potential enrichment to be found in generativity fails, the consequences are often seen in the estrangements of the next generation. In other words, the children of stagnant, self-absorbed parents may have great difficulty forming their own identities and achieving intimacy in their relationships.
Old Age - Integrity vs. Despair - Wisdom: The social concerns for those approaching the end of life include “Humanity” and “Family.” Wisdom allows one to maintain and convey the integrity of one’s lifetime of experience, despite the gradual physical decline of the body. Wise people are able to pass on an integrated heritage to the next generation. For those who have failed to integrate their life’s experiences, despair arises as the fear of death, death being the time limit on their opportunity to achieve integrity. Erikson described wisdom as “a detached and yet active concern with life in the face of death” (Erikson, 1968a).
Is there a ninth stage? After Erikson died, Joan Erikson wrote a few short chapters that were added to The Life Cycle Completed (Erikson & Erikson, 1997). Erikson had suggested that his wife was an important contributor to all of his theories, throughout his career, so it was not surprising that she offered these additions after his death. Indeed, they are most likely the result of her observations regarding his death, something he could then no longer write about.
Very Old Age - Despair vs. Gerotranscendence: Unlike the earlier stages, Joan Erikson felt that the negative aspect of this stage should be placed first. People who make it to 90 years old, and beyond, are close to death. Their bodies are steadily deteriorating, most, if not all, of their friends have died, some of their children may have died, their spouse has likely died, and the despair they face is quite real. The despair experienced in the eighth stage involves looking back at one’s life, but in the ninth stage it involves looking squarely at one’s present reality, and passing once again through life’s stages. People who are very old can no longer trust their own capabilities, and they may need to be cared for, thus losing some of their autonomy. Their sense of purpose is dulled, and they lose the urgency and energy necessary to be industrious. Likewise, their identity may become unclear once again, and they can become isolated and self-absorbed. However, some very old people hold a special place in their families and/or communities, and may withdraw only by choice, in order to contemplate and be at peace with their life. Joan Erikson refers to this choice as a dance with life:
With great satisfaction I have found that “transcendence” become very much alive if it is activated into “transcendance,” which speaks to soul and body and challenges it to rise above the dystonic, clinging aspects of our worldly existence that burden and distract us from true growth and aspiration.
To reach for gerotranscendance is to rise above, exceed, outdo, go beyond, independent of the universe and time. It involves surpassing all human knowledge and experience. How, for heaven’s sake, is this to be accomplished? I am persuaded that only by doing and making do we become. (pg. 127; Erikson & Erikson, 1997)
discussion question \(1\)
Joan Erikson proposed a ninth stage, when death is imminent. Do you agree with this stage; do you hope it is possible to achieve gerotranscendence? Have you known anyone who was very old and facing death, and what was it like for them? | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/12%3A_Erik_Erikson/12.04%3A_Erikson%27s_Eight_Stages_of_Development.txt |
The developmental crisis that Erikson focused much of his career on was that of developing one’s identity. From the beginning of publishing his theories, he emphasized that a lot of the psychological distress and pathological symptoms seen in childhood can be interpreted as the child expressing their right to find an identity in the world, and neurosis typically results from the loss of one’s identity (Erikson, 1950). Erikson returned to this theme repeatedly in books such as Identity and the Life Cycle (Erikson, 1980a; originally published in 1959), Identity: Youth and Crisis (Erikson, 1968b), and Dimensions of a New Identity (Erikson, 1974). He also published A Memorandum on Identity and Negro Youth at the height of the Civil Rights Movement in America (Erikson, 1964). The importance of identity, and the stage of identity vs. role-diffusion and confusion, is that only upon completion of the first four stages of life is the ego fully mature, the point at which a person is ready to be an adult. But the entire period, the entire psychosocial crisis, is a critical time of transition:
Adolescents have always been especially open to conversion or to what is now called consciousness-expansion in the direction of physical, spiritual, and social experience. Their cognitive capacities and social interests are such that they want to go to the limit of experience before they fit themselves into their culture and fit their culture to themselves. (pg. 37; Erikson cited in Evans, 1964)
A General Definition of Identity
Since Erikson labeled his fifth stage of development identity vs. role diffusion and/or confusion, it is common to think that identity formation is something that occurs during adolescence. Actually, identity formation begins at birth, and continues throughout the lifespan. It is only in adolescence that the individual finally has the material around which to form an integrated identity that can remain somewhat stable, hence the psychosocial crisis that arises during that process of integration and more stable identity formation. Thus, a child will have some sense of self, but it is not until adolescence that it becomes a crisis. So what is that sense of self that forms the identity? Erikson himself turned to two great men, whom he described as “bearded and patriarchal founding fathers of the psychologies on which our thinking on identity is based:” William James and Sigmund Freud (Erikson, 1968).
A man’s character is discernible in the mental or moral attitude in which, when it came upon him, he felt himself most deeply and intensely active and alive. At such moments there is a voice inside which speaks and says: “This is the real me!” (pg. 19; William James in a letter to his wife, cited in Erikson, 1968)
Moving beyond James’ very personal description, Freud spoke of his Jewish identity as something that provided a cultural context in which he lived his life, even though he was never religious, and openly despised religion. He felt that he shared a Jewish cultural nature, which offered an explanation for, as well as a justification for, aspects of his personality that defied any other obvious explanation.
Based on these perspectives by James and Freud, Erikson described identity as a process rooted in the core of the individual, yet also rooted in the core of their communal culture. This complicated process involves both judging oneself in light of how others judge you, as well as judging the judgments others make about you. Eventually, the interplay between psychological and social factors results in an identity based on psychosocial relativity (Erikson, 1968). In other words, one’s identity is very much influenced by where a person sees themselves fitting into their world. Consequently, a person may develop a healthy identity, or they can just as easily develop a negative identity (see below).
The term identity crisis was first used by Erikson during World War II, to describe a particular psychological disorder. They encountered patients, who had been fighting in the war, who had become severely disturbed. However, they could not be described in the typical ways, such as being “shell-shocked” or just faking mental illness to escape combat. Instead, they had lost a sense of personal sameness and historical continuity. Erikson proposed that they had lost the central control over that part of their self that psychoanalysts could only describe as the ego. Thus, he described these patients as having lost their “ego identity.” Since World War II, Erikson felt that he and his colleagues were observing the same fundamental disorder in many severely conflicted young patients. These disturbed individuals were, in a sense, waging a war within themselves and against society. An identity crisis of this sort can affect groups as well as individuals (Erikson, 1968). In an interesting, and somewhat amusing example of group identity crisis, we can look at the reaction of the psychoanalytic community to the theories of Carl Jung. In Erikson’s view, the psychoanalytic community reacted to Jung’s proposal of the collective unconscious and archetypes as a threat to scientific approach advocated by Freud. Consequently, the majority of the psychoanalytic community ignored Jung’s reasonable observations as well as his somewhat less scientific interpretations (Erikson, 1980a).
Obstacles to the Development of Identity
Erikson talked about two obstacles to the development of identity: ratio and negative identity. Ratio refers to the balance between the opposite poles of each psychosocial crisis: trust vs. mistrust, autonomy vs. shame, etc. Although it may be best for the ratio to favor trust, autonomy, and so on, it is unreasonable to expect a person to develop without any experience of trust being misplaced or without any feelings of shame. This helps to ground the person in the real world, particularly as it is appropriate to the customs of their culture (see Evans, 1964). Indeed, Erikson felt that identity could be viewed as being that subsystem within the ego that is closest to social reality, based on the integrated self-representations formed during the psychosocial crises of childhood. Thus, identity:
…could be said to be characterized by the more or less actually attained but forever-to-be-revised sense of the reality of the self within social reality; while the imagery of the ego ideal could be said to represent a set of to-be-strived-for but forever-not-quite-attainable ideal goals for the self. (pg. 160; Erikson, 1980a)
Negative identity is often expressed as an angry and snobbish rejection of the roles expected by one’s family, community, or even society. It is a profound reaction to the loss of identity that typically arises when identity development has lost the promise of wholeness that one expects to obtain from their identity. The consequences can be severe, for both individuals and groups of young people. Erikson worked with young people who were beginning to make choices in life that could easily lead them toward their vindictive fantasies of becoming prostitutes or drug addicts (an extreme way of rebelling against their parents). As such disturbed young people gather together, they can form gangs, drug rings, sex clubs, and the like (Erikson, 1968b, 1980a). Society, according to Erikson, often makes the mistake of enhancing this maladaptive behavior:
If, for simplicity’s sake or in order to accommodate ingrown habits of law or psychiatry, they diagnose and treat as a criminal, as a constitutional misfit, as a derelict doomed by his upbringing, or indeed as a deranged patient a young person who, for reasons of personal or social marginality, is close to choosing a negative identity, that young person may well put his energy into becoming exactly what the careless and fearful community expects him to be - and make a total job of it. (pg. 196; Erikson, 1968b)
Erikson believed that women and minorities (indeed, oppressed people in any situation) face special problems in the formation of their identity. Erikson considered men and women to be fundamentally different, but more importantly, he believed that only women could ensure the future of humanity. According to Erikson, men try to solve problems with “bigger and better wars.” And now, with the advent of nuclear bombs, men have nearly reached the limit of their ability to destroy each other. The future, therefore, requires the feminine aspects of personality, including realistically caring for the home, responsibly raising the children, being resourceful in peacekeeping, and devotion to healing:
The question arises whether such a potential for annihilation as now exists in the world should continue to exist without the representation of the mothers of the species in the councils of image-making and decision. (pg. 261; Erikson, 1968b)
For Blacks in America, the identity crisis has been one of being separated from their African heritage, and yet also separated from the White American heritage that surrounds them. Erikson recounts both clinical examples and folklore that emphasize the value placed on being White by Blacks themselves (Erikson, 1950, 1964, 1968, 1980a). The result is often psychological distress and depression, such as that seen in the classic study by Kenneth and Mamie Clark, in which Black children considered identification with their race as bad. Using Black and White dolls, some of the young Black children actually cried when asked to point to the doll they looked most like (Clark & Clark, 1947). Perhaps the most dramatic example of Erikson’s theory in action occurred during the 1960s. Disenfranchised Blacks adopted a negative identity and opposed many aspects of the American society that had oppressed Black’s for so long (Note: Negative identity is used here only as Erikson’s term, not to imply that the fight for racial equality was, in any way, something negative). With Malcolm X and the Nation of Islam, and Huey Newton and the Black Panthers, some young Black men opposed both the Christianity and the Democracy that formed so much of the American national identity. Those who did not, found themselves at odds with their own people, as we will see with Brian Copeland, author of Not a Genuine Black Man (see Chapter 16; Copeland, 2006). It should be noted, however, that the seemingly contradictory perspective of rejecting a society that gives one the very right to oppose it is not alien to the African psyche:
…the African gods south of the Sahara always had at least two heads, one for evil and one for good. Now people create God in their own image, what they think He - for God is always a “He” in patriarchal societies - what He is like or should be. So the African said, in effect: I am both good and evil; good and evil are the two parts of the thing that is me… (pg. 24; Huey Newton, recorded in Kai Erikson, 1973)
The idea that Black Americans might have been adopting a negative identity was more than just an academic theory for Erikson. In 1971, both Erikson and Huey Newton (who was then known as Supreme Commander of the Black Panther Party) presented talks to the students of Yale University. A short time later, they met again for a series of conversations in Oakland, California, which also included the Black sociologist J. Herman Blake and Erikson’s son, Kai Erikson, also a sociologist (see K. Erikson, 1973). Among many topics, Newton described the revolutionary actions of Black activists at that time as a process, a contradiction between old ways and new ways. Any change, he argued, might be viewed as revolutionary at a particular point in time. Newton went on to describe how the Black community expected him to hate all White people, and how the Black community rejected many of its own because they had too many Caucasian features (such as relatively light skin). He rebelled against this discrimination, just as he did against the oppression that was so inherent in American society. Erikson, for his part, talked mostly about just how difficult it is for people of different backgrounds to understand each other’s perspective. Most important, however, is the act of searching for some basis for understanding one another (K. Erikson, 1973).
In his autobiographical book Revolutionary Suicide (the preparation of which was assisted by J. Herman Blake; Newton, 1973), Newton begins with a tribute to a comrade who was killed in a shootout with the police, while seeking nothing more than what Newton considered the right of all men: dignity and freedom. He then offers a poem, which sounds very much like Taoist philosophy, as well as a search for a greater identity:
By having no family,
I inherited the family of humanity.
By having no possessions,
I have possessed all.
By rejecting the love of one,
I received the love of all.
By surrendering my life to the revolution,
I found eternal life.
Revolutionary suicide.
Huey P. Newton, in Revolutionary Suicide (1973)
discussion question\(1\)
Erikson described the adoption of a negative identity as a serious rejection of one’s expected place in life. Has there been a time in your life when you adopted a negative identity? Do you feel that sometimes it is necessary to adopt a negative identity in order to change the world we live in?
Identity and the Role of the Family - Perspectives from Around the World
Identity is not merely a personal phenomenon, it develops within a cultural context that is passed on through the family. The most important social institutions of the first three stages of development are the mother, then both parents, and finally, the family as a whole. As adults, individuals face not only their own psychosocial crises, but they serve as the parents of the next generation, as their children face the early development crises. Thus, it is important to consider the role that the family plays in general, and the perspectives that can be offered by family psychology.
It is difficult to define the word family, since it includes nuclear families (two-generations, with married parents and their own children), extended families (three or more generations), foster and adoptive families (which may be multi-racial and/or multi-cultural), single-parent families, gay or lesbian couples with or without children, remarried/step families, and others (Kaslow, 2001). Further complicating matters is the role the family plays as a microsystem of a given culture, especially when that culture is dramatically altered. For example, when the former Soviet Union collapsed, the entire economic and political structure of countries like Russia, Poland, East Germany, and Czechoslovakia were wiped out. When Yugoslavia broke apart, ancient ethnic hatred led to brutal, local wars. The role that women play in many cultures has changed in recent years, whereas in some cultures the patriarchal authority has aggressively retained its domination of the culture. The Nobel Peace Prize for 2006 was awarded to Muhammad Yunus and the Grameen Bank for developing micro-credit loans, most of which go to poor women in oppressive societies, in an effort to help these women and their children rise out of poverty.
Family psychology addresses issues as complex as families themselves, including male-female relationships, domestic violence, child-rearing and socialization practices, divorce, the search for identity in a dysfunctional family setting, spirituality, drug addiction, war, crime and violence, homelessness, kidnapping, immigration, etc. (Kaslow, 2001). When the members of a family face any of these problems, or perhaps a number of them, family psychologists can help the individuals to retain their own sense of identity, in part by focusing on reconstructing the social structure of the family (as opposed to focusing on diagnosing individual disorders). Unfortunately, the problems facing families are common throughout the world. However, since the family is the basic social structure within communities across all cultures, family therapy can play an important role in helping to solve these problems. For example, family therapy has been used to study and treat a variety of problems in different countries: conduct disorder in youth from the U.S. Virgin Islands (Dudley-Grant, 2001); community disasters, war stress, and the effects of immigration on Israeli families (Halpern, 2001); and the refusal of some children in Japan to attend school (Kameguchi & Murphy-Shigematsu, 2001). In each of these cultures the family is considered to play a particularly important role in identity formation. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/12%3A_Erik_Erikson/12.05%3A_The_Importance_of_Identity.txt |
Many theories on personality and cognitive development end with adolescence. As one enters into adulthood, it is assumed, one has accomplished all of the tasks necessary to be an adult, including one’s identity. And yet, if adolescence ends sometime in the late teens, many people can reasonably expect to live another 60 to 80 years. Does it really make any sense to propose that nothing meaningful happens during those years? Of course, Erikson described development stages throughout adulthood and old age, but what about other psychologists? Srivastava, et al. (2003) examined changes in the Big Five personality traits across the years of adulthood. They found that conscientiousness and agreeableness increased through early and middle adulthood, whereas neuroticism decreased in women, but not in men. In other words, both men and women become more responsible and cooperative as they grow through adulthood, and women become more stable. One can speculate that these changes fit well within Erikson’s model, in which most adults take on the tasks involved in raising a family. Self-esteem rises steadily throughout adulthood, before dropping sharply in old age (Robins & Trzesniewski, 2005). Similarly, the ability to integrate cognitive and affective components of the self, in order to maintain positive self-development, increases steadily during adulthood until beginning to decline with old age (Labouvie-Vief, 2003). Thus, adulthood does appear to be a time of personality change.
Adulthood, however, means different things in different cultures. In Adulthood (Erikson, 1978), Erikson brought together a collection of authors who examined adulthood from a variety of cultural perspectives. For a Christian adult, growth occurs primarily through social experiences. One encounters Christ in service to others, or in other words, by loving your neighbor. Christ himself serves as the model for adulthood (Bouwsma, 1978). Adulthood in Islam carries with it responsibility for the religious commands and obligations of Islam. One must reconcile the reality of the world with one’s place in it, as willed by Allah. Adulthood then becomes an expression of the inner peace achieved by living in the world in accord with the divinely revealed reality (Lapidus, 1978). In the Confucian tradition, adulthood is the complete process of becoming a person. In this patriarchal model, first a man comes of age, then he marries and has children, then he begins a career as a scholar-official, and that career is expected to be served with distinction (Wei-Ming, 1978). In Japan, adulthood is a time of social responsibility, discipline, and perseverance, in preparation for the integrity and respect typically associated with old age (Rohlen, 1978). India presents a particularly difficult challenge, and it is not really possible to speak of a single adulthood model. The caste system inherent in the India of the past created vastly different life conditions for the people of India (Rudolph & Rudolph, 1978). The problems of language and multicultural populations create unique difficulties for understanding adulthood in Russia and America (Jordan, 1978; Malia, 1978). What is clear across cultures is that adulthood is a time of continued development, it can vary quite dramatically (even within a culture), and it often involves an aspect of anticipating old age. The anticipation of old age, however, can vary dramatically, based on individual and cultural attitudes about old age, as we will see in the next section.
Adulthood can be the most productive and, in some ways, most gratifying years of life. Some of the unique challenges of adulthood have become popular topics in psychology, such as the midlife crisis and the empty nest syndrome. And yet, adulthood is the least studied period of life. One possible explanation for this neglect, according to Smelser (1980a), is that most research is done by adults, and they tend to be more interested in stages of development other than their own. In a second collection of articles, entitled Themes of Work and Love in Adulthood (Smelser & Erikson, 1980), Smelser and Erikson brought together a variety of perspectives on what they viewed as two of the most important life phenomena that dominate the adulthood years. Sigmund Freud is alleged to have said that maturity is to be found in the capacity to love and to work. Throughout one’s life, both of these phenomena follow certain paths, typically involving a period of growing interest and ability, followed by a fairly stable level (which typically lasts for decades), followed by a gradual (as in work) or sudden (as in the death of a spouse) decline (Smelser, 1980a). In examining the relationship between Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung, evident in their letters to one another, Erikson (1980b) found distinctly adult content related to such topics as mutual regard, confidence, affection, intimate concern for their families, both good and bad observations regarding their professional colleagues, and an ongoing debate regarding the important issues in psychodynamic theory and the psychoanalytic movement. There are similarities, but some interesting contrasts, between these letters and the ones Freud had written to Wilhelm Fliess years earlier. In that younger period of adulthood, Freud seemed more in need of a close friend, particularly since he was in the process of creating the field that was becoming well-established by the time Freud met Jung. Perhaps due to Freud being older when he met Jung, it seems that he interacted with Fliess and Jung in different ways: when Freud was young he interacted with his colleague Fliess as a colleague, but when he was older he interacted with Jung in a much more father-son type relationship (and Jung had lost his father years earlier).
Work and love interact, or don’t, depending on the nature of individual cultures. For example, in America we compartmentalize our lives. We tend to have clearly defined career paths, and our personal relationships exist primarily outside of the workplace (Smelser, 1980b). In contrast, the Gusii in Kenya have not traditionally had “careers,” but rather a domestically based economy. They also practice polygyny (each man having many wives, but not vice versa). Thus, a husband must balance the resources at his command between his different wives and their children. As such, although love plays some role in marriage, it can actually become a problem for that man who cannot maintain fair and equitable treatment of each wife and her children. This is handled by maintaining a certain distance from each wife, including having his own house, and visiting each wife on a rotating schedule that is acceptable to everyone (LeVine, 1980). Such a concept of love and marriage is extraordinarily alien to the symbolic and mythic nature of the love ideal that lies at the foundation of American culture: a man and a woman committed to one another in a way that ennobles and transforms them both (Swidler, 1980).
However, the romantic vision of love in American culture is not without its drawbacks. The romantic, passionate, committed love that Americans envision completes one’s identity. In Erikson’s terms, it stands in opposition to isolation. However, it is all too common that most marriages, as well as other long-term relationships, eventually come to an end. What then happens to each person’s identity? Love also provides a basis for rebellion, such as when a person “marries for love” in spite of the objections of one’s family and/or friends. Love can also lead to conformity, such as one sees in the term “settling down” or when women, in particular, are expected to take on the primary responsibility for the household as an expression of their love, even if they also have a job outside of the home as their husband does. When one partner, more so than the other, must engage in self-sacrifice, what happens to their opportunities for self-realization? If it is possible to find fulfillment through the love of another, then self-sacrifice can be self-realization (Swidler, 1980). If not, we might see high divorce rates. And a high divorce rate is the reality in America today.
So, whether love and work are intermingled or separate, whether simple or complex, whether fulfilling or a necessary social expectation, they dominate the years of early and middle adulthood. No one period in adulthood is more likely than another to result in change, as different stressors impact each age differently. Work related stress is particularly likely for the young adult, but older adults face the challenge of preparing (both financially and psychologically) for retirement, and unexpected changes can occur at any age. Love, particularly as it relates to marriage, causes stress throughout adulthood, but in different ways. Younger couples are more likely to experience separation and/or divorce, middle-aged adults experience their children leaving home and possible career transitions, and older couples are more likely to experience illness, disabilities, and perhaps the loss of a spouse. Each of these different forms of stress brings with it a need for coping mechanisms, and if those coping mechanisms fail, the likelihood for psychological distress becomes very real (Pearlin, 1980). Perhaps the most challenging stressor in our lives, one that ultimately cannot be overcome, but that may be transcended and accepted, is old age and our inevitable death.
Connections Across Cultures: Glorifying Youth vs. Valuing the Elderly
We hear a lot in our society about how we value youth, and consider the elderly to be of little worth. The obsession with youth and appearance is such that plastic surgery has become the subject of numerous television shows. But is our society really different than other societies, and if so, what factors might have contributed to the difference? The matter is particularly important today, since the world’s older population is the fastest growing group. One estimate has suggested by the year 2020 the total population of people over 65 years of age will be 690 million (Hillier & Barrow, 1999). Thus, it won’t be long before there are a billion people over the age of 65. But is 65 years old a valid point for declaring someone as old?
Old age can be defined functionally, as in whether or not a person can still do the things expected of them in their culture, it can be defined formally by some external event, such as the birth of the first grandchild, or it can be determined chronologically, as it typically is in the United States (we traditionally use the age of 65 years). Each measure has its advantages and disadvantages, but regardless, when a person is viewed by others as old, the question becomes one of how they will be treated. Generally speaking, the more industrialized a society is, the less likely it is to treat its elderly with respect and dignity. In non-industrialized societies, the elderly play a number of important roles in the traditions and ceremonies emphasized by such cultures, since they know the most about those traditions and ceremonies. Older members of the community function as historians, vocational instructors, and often as doctors and ministers. In agrarian societies they continue to work as long as they are able. As a result, the elderly are still vital, contributing members of the community, and as such, they are naturally treated with the respect they deserve (Hillier & Barrow, 1999).
There are, however, variations even within non-industrialized societies. For example, nomadic societies have few resources, and often live in harsh climates. Their geographic mobility favors youth and vigor, as well as individual autonomy, all elements that fade with advanced age. Even with minor advances in technology, the important roles that elders played in many cultures have faded with time. Among the Aleuts in Northern Russia there were always one or two old men who educated the children. However, the availability of printed material has largely eliminated the need for this type of education. In places such as Turkey and Nepal, the elderly have lost their place in the workforce with the urbanization and industrialization of the country. The Igbo of Nigeria once held their elders in high regard, but mass migrations have diminished their authority, and formal education in schools has supplanted their spiritual roles (Hillier & Barrow, 1999). Many more examples can be found of changes in how communities, societies, and cultures treat the elderly more poorly than they have in the past.
As a result, many older people want to look and feel younger. Studies have shown that one’s attitude about their body image is positively correlated with their self-esteem, and that this holds true throughout the lifespan. In other words, people with high self-esteem feel good about their bodies, but people with low self-esteem feel bad about their bodies. People who are treated without respect or dignity, who feel that they are being discarded by society, are likely to experience lowered self-esteem, and with it a lower regard for their body image. These people become easy targets for fraudulent cures for arthritis, cancer, weight-loss, and sexual aids. It is estimated that Americans spend as much as \$27 billion dollars a year on quack medical products or services (Hillier & Barrow, 1999). There are also many products that do help people look younger, so even more money is spent in a vain effort to pretend that people are younger than they actually are.
Consider your own relationships with people who are much older, or if you are a bit older yourself, with people who are younger than you. Do you even have relationships with people of different ages, or do such relationships tend to make you uncomfortable? How do you feel about the efforts of some people to try looking younger? Has there been an older person in your life, perhaps a grandparent, who has had a dramatic, positive influence on who you are today? Try to imagine your life at 60 or 70 years old, and how your children and grandchildren, or perhaps co-workers and friends, might treat you. Remember, your attitudes and actions toward older people today might have a significant effect on how your family and friends act toward you when the roles are reversed. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/12%3A_Erik_Erikson/12.06%3A_Adulthood.txt |
In Western culture most people seem to focus on youth. Old age and death are to be avoided, even feared. And yet, both are inevitable, unless we die young, something that is even less desirable than eventually dying of old age. What is most curious, however, is that there is nothing in our culture to suggest that death is something bad. Most people believe in life after death, and that good people go to Heaven. So why would we want to avoid that? In many other cultures, death is not viewed with the same finality as it is in Western culture, and ancestors are revered, and even worshipped. Even within Western culture, there are those who embrace the later years in life, and who do not fear death. These are the perspectives we will examine here.
Growing Old: Or Older and Growing?
The title for this section was taken from an essay written by Carl Rogers (1980). Rogers was 75 years old at the time, and he was looking back on the previous 10 years of his life. Rogers was experiencing a number of physical problems associated with the natural deterioration of his body due to advanced age, such as some loss of vision and arthritis in his right shoulder (making it impossible to enjoy playing Frisbee), but he still enjoyed 4 mile walks on the beach and felt physically strong in many ways. As for his career, from the age of 65 to 75 years old he had been very productive, publishing numerous books and articles. He also led many workshops and encounter groups, including some that required him to travel around the world. Professionally he began to take many risks, experimenting with his theories and workshops in ways he might never have considered earlier in his career. As it became necessary for him to rely on others for help, due to his slowing down with age, he also found that he was able to form far more intimate relationships with those colleague/friends who helped him. Even as his wife approached death during those years, he found that the struggle and pain led him to realize just how much he had loved her. Ten years later, as he turned 85 years old, Rogers wrote another essay, On Reaching 85 (Rogers, 1989). Once again, he had been very productive during the 10 years between being 75 and 85 years old, most notably leading a number of peace conferences that led to his nomination for a Nobel Peace Prize. He felt deeply privileged to have lived long enough to see the great international influence of his work. There can be little doubt that when his life ended, which was actually before this essay was published (he wrote the essay, turned 85, and died 1 month later), he had experienced integrity and wisdom:
I hope it is clear that my life at eighty-five is better than anything I could have planned, dreamed of, or expected. And I cannot close without at least mentioning the love relationships that nurture me, enrich my being, and invigorate my life. I do not know when I will die, but I do know that I will have lived a full and exciting eighty-five years! (pg. 58; Rogers, 1989)
Erikson, in contrast, knew something of the despair that contrasts the integrity one hopes for in old age. Never having known his own father, which resulted in an unending identity crisis, he struggled with feelings of having been an inadequate father himself. As famous as he was, he desired the ultimate recognition of a Nobel Prize, and was disappointed that Ghandi’s Truth only won a Pulitzer Prize. He was also very sensitive to criticism in any form. As his own daughter pointed out, it is a tragic irony that individuals such as Erikson do not accept the vast majority of approval as commentary on their real self, but they do experience every shred of criticism as being very real (Bloland, 2005). Erikson himself said that even when a person developed a clear identity following adolescence, significant life events later on can precipitate a renewal of the identity crisis. One can only imagine the terrible psychological burden of sending away their baby Neil to die alone and secretly in a hospital, only to have him live for 21 years. Under such circumstances, Erikson described the search for a new identity as frantic (Evans, 1964).
One of the most interesting, important, and potentially enjoyable consequences of old age is the likelihood that one has grandchildren. All too often in American culture there are challenges to the relationships between grandparents and grandchildren. Families move across the country, they are broken apart by divorce, and, in general, our culture does not place value on the experiences of the elderly. However, only the elderly can provide generational continuity, which can be an important aspect of one’s identity. For the grandparents, they can play a vital role in supporting the emotional development of their grandchildren, especially following a traumatic event such as divorce. They can provide adolescents with hope for continued development and purpose throughout life, a prospect that might seem quite difficult for an adolescent to comprehend on their own. And perhaps most importantly, they can simply spend quality time with their grandchildren, without the burden of being responsible for the day-to-day raising of the child (Erikson, 1959; Erikson & Erikson, 1997; Erikson, Erikson, & Kivnick, 1986). As shared by Joan Erikson, a grandmother and her grandchild can congratulate themselves for doing a marvelous job picking blueberries, while experiencing the reality of the life cycle:
After a while I did need to sit down on a rock and rest a bit, but not he. He continued for a moment or so and then stood up very straight in front of me to clarify essentials. “Nama,” he said, “you are old and I am new” - an unchallengeable pronouncement. (pg. 115; Erikson & Erikson, 1997)
Figure \(1\)
Healthy relationships between grandparents and their grandchildren can benefit everyone in the family. In particular, grandparents provide a generational link that can help young people form their own identities.
While Carl Rogers and Joan Erikson seemed to accept old age and achieve integrity, Erik Erikson struggled with despair, despite his international acclaim and many obvious accomplishments. Thus, it should become clear that an individual’s point of view is an important aspect of one’s identity. In Still Here (Ram Dass, 2000), Ram Dass, a former Harvard University psychologist turned renowned guru of Bhakti Yoga and Kirtan (see Chapter 17), acknowledges the challenges of old age: physical problems, illness, loneliness, embarrassment, powerlessness, loss of role/meaning, depression, and even senility. The suffering associated with these conditions is, however, self-induced, and one can choose mindfully to not suffer. Whether or not one suffers, therefore, and whether or not one approaches the end of life with relative integrity or despair, is in many ways a choice. And that choice will have a dramatic effect on the final stage of life: death.
Death and Dying
It is important to begin by distinguishing between death and dying. Death is the end of life, and as far as scientific psychology is concerned, no one alive has been able to study death itself. Dying is a process that occurs when death is imminent, but does not come immediately. The dying process begins either with old age or the diagnosis of a terminal illness. Elisabeth Kubler-Ross is well-known for her research on the dying process, as are the five stages that she described in On Death and Dying (1969): Denial and Isolation; Anger; Bargaining; Depression; and Acceptance. When diagnosed with a terminal illness, most people naturally respond with the common defense mechanism of denial, but there is more to it. Many psychology textbooks do not address the second aspect of this first stage: isolation. Denial is usually temporary, but the dying person may still not be ready or even able to talk about their death, so they isolate themselves psychologically. Unfortunately, hospital staff members often foster this isolation, because of their own fears and discomfort regarding death. Kubler-Ross and her colleagues found it quite difficult to stop hospital staff members from encouraging the isolation of patients clinging to denial, including such simple tasks as keeping the patient’s door open so that people passing by could look in and vice versa. The final stage of acceptance, according to Kubler-Ross, is one that many patients do not achieve. Many people fear death, and Western culture, due in part to its emphasis on science and medicine, and its movement away from religion, encourages people to challenge death. But for those who fight, struggle, and hope to the very end, even they eventually “just cannot make it anymore” (Kubler-Ross, 1969).
There are, however, many people who do come to accept the inevitability of death, either as a result of illness or old age. Erikson seemed to finally be at peace at the very end of his life, smiling whenever he recognized his wife or daughter:
I was deeply touched on one visit to Dad when a flash of pleasure crossed his face as I entered the room, and he said faintly to himself, Meine Tochter (“my daughter” in his native tongue). (pg. 204; Bloland, 2005)
Carl Rogers was largely unconcerned about death, he seldom thought about it. He was, however, quite interested in the work of Kubler-Ross, particularly after he experienced his wife’s dying process. One night, when his wife was near death, he told her that she should not feel obligated to live, all was well with her family, and that she should feel free to live or die, as she wished. After Rogers left that evening, his wife called for the nurses, thanked them for all they had done, and told them she was going to die. By the next morning she was in a coma, and by the next day she was dead (Rogers, 1980). This experience was profoundly moving for Rogers, and awakened a deep spirituality in him, but with a decidedly unscientific aspect to it. Kubler-Ross joined Carl Jung in believing in synchronicity and the possibility of out-of-body experiences, life after death, and the like (see Kubler-Ross, 1983, 1997). Rogers also came to believe in such possibilities. Helen Rogers reported seeing evil figures and the Devil by her hospital bed, as well as a white light that would come and begin to lift her from the bed. Earlier the two of them had attended sessions with a medium who claimed to be able to contact the dead. Rogers was thoroughly convinced that the medium’s abilities were real, and that she had contacted Helen’s deceased sister, and later Helen Rogers herself. According to Rogers, each event was “an incredible, and certainly non-fraudulent experience” (Rogers, 1980).
For the individual who is, indeed, about to die, what remains of life? Kubler-Ross, Joan Erikson, and Ram Dass all see death itself as a final stage of growth. For Joan Erikson, when hope and trust can no longer sustain the individual, “to face down despair with faith and appropriate humility is perhaps the wisest course,” and one may then strive for gerotranscendence. Indeed, the ninth stage of development proposed by Joan Erikson seems quite similar to the stage of acceptance proposed by Kubler-Ross (Erikson & Erikson, 1997). Ram Dass talks about the different perspective on death in India, and how it helped him to believe that although the body and the mind, as well as their reflection in the ego/self, could die, the soul was something that would exist forever. Accordingly, it is more common in India, and in many other cultures, to prepare for death. The failure to do so in America can have painful consequences:
When I was in my 30s, my mother was diagnosed with a terminal blood disorder. I went to visit her in the hospital, and all the people around her were saying things like, “You look great!” “You’ll be home in no time!” But she looked terrible, and it was likely she’d never come home again. No one - not my father, her sister or the rabbi - would tell her the truth. In that moment I saw just how isolated she was. She was dying and no one would talk to her about death. We spoke about it, Soul to Soul, and she began to relax. (pg. 149; Ram Dass, 2000)
Kubler-Ross examined a variety of cultural perspectives on death, in a collection of essays entitled Death: The Final Stage of Growth (Kubler-Ross, 1975). Among Alaskan Indians the time of death was a choice. As death approaches, if it does not come suddenly, the dying person would call together relatives and friends for a time of storytelling and prayer. The dying person’s life would be celebrated, and their death would be accepted as an inevitable matter of fact (Trelease, 1975). In the Jewish faith, tradition holds that the dying process should be met with efforts to alleviate distress as much as possible, but that death must also be accepted as the decree of human mortality by the Eternal and Righteous Judge (Rabbi Heller, 1975). In Hindu and Buddhist traditions, there is no death, but rather a common belief in rebirth. The circumstances of one’s rebirth, however, are determined by how one lived their most recent life (based on karma). So, one’s life, as well as the preparations preceding the death of one’s body in this life, is an important factor in determining the nature of the next life. Of course, one can transcend this cycle of death and rebirth by attaining enlightenment. Thus, it is common in countries like India and China to practice Yoga or Buddhist meditation, as well as other spiritual practices, in order to either attain nirvana or, at least, a more favorable circumstance in the next life (Long, 1975). Each of these traditions, as well as others, considers death to be an important transition between this life and something beyond. It is in anticipation of something beyond that death and dying should be approached, both in terms of one’s actions and one’s state of mind. In conclusion:
There is no need to be afraid of death. It is not the end of the physical body that should worry us. Rather, our concern must be to live while we’re alive - to release our inner selves from the spiritual death that comes with living behind a façade designed to conform to external definitions of who and what we are. …when you fully understand that each day you awaken could be the last you have, you take the time that day to grow, to become more of who you really are, to reach out to other human beings. (pg. 164; Kubler-Ross, 1975)
discussion question \(1\)
People who have experienced the dying process often report strange occurrences, such as out-of-body experiences, visions of spirits (including angels and demons), or white lights shining down from above and beyond. Do you believe in any of these phenomena? Why do you think they only seem to occur with people who are, indeed, close to death? | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/12%3A_Erik_Erikson/12.07%3A_Old_Age_and_Death.txt |
Arthur Benjamin Niemoller was a fine example of a man who had achieved integrity in old age, which is not to say that his later years were entirely easy. As he prepared to travel from Ohio to Massachusetts for the first graduation of one of his grandchildren from college (me), his wife lapsed into a coma due to a serious blood infection. Knowing it was unlikely that she would survive, or that she would even know if he was there, he chose to attend my graduation. After the ceremony was over, and everyone returned to my mother’s house for a party, the call had come from the doctor. My grandmother had died. I spent the next week in Ohio, helping my grandfather make the funeral arrangements for my grandmother. We had a service in Montgomery, Ohio where they had lived for many years, and then another in Putnam, Connecticut, where there is an old family graveyard. My grandfather made it very clear that he was glad he had attended my graduation, because he was proud of his family and wouldn’t have wanted to miss it.
Figure \(1\)
Arthur Benjamin Niemoller (1912-1998) lived a long and full life. He exemplified dignity during his final years of life.
But the story doesn’t end there. I attended graduate school at Wayne State University in Detroit, which isn’t too far from the Cincinnati area, where Montgomery is located. I began visiting my grandfather regularly, which was quite interesting because I’d had very little contact with him before that (my family has never been close). He was a very active man. He was a Sunday school teacher and church council member at the local Presbyterian church, he belonged to a retired men’s club, he had season tickets to the opera, and he regularly attended the symphony. He had many friends, some of whom had also lost their spouses to old age. Most surprising, however, was that in his late 70s he joined two other men in forming a new company. He was responsible for developing the computer programs that calculated the materials needed and the cost of those materials for building an isolated phase bus (something for carrying industrial strength electrical currents in power plants, I never really understood what he did). He was very proud of his work, and always eager to show me his new computer programs. I was just as proud of him, and I am very pleased to be able to say that he is the only person who attended all three of my college graduations (B.S., M.A., and Ph.D.). We developed a relationship I will always treasure.
The last time I saw my grandfather, he had been given 3 weeks to live. He had been suffering from dementia for several years, and typically wasn’t sure who was visiting him. He thought I was his son Donny, and it didn’t help that my wife and my aunt are both named Donna. On that last day I saw him, he was not the excited man of 80 years old who had a new computer program to show me. In fact, it took a while for me to convince myself he was actually still alive. It is frightening to see what can happen to the human body as a result of what is simply a natural process (old age, that is, dementia is certainly not a given with old age). Before I left, I prayed to God, deeply and sincerely, that my grandfather would finally just die. I was the last person in our family to see him alive. It is even more frightening, though merciful nonetheless, to think that my prayer was answered. I was satisfied that his life had been a good one, and content that his suffering was ended.
Has there been anyone in your life who meant a great deal to you but who has died? Were you able to participate in their dying process, and if so, how difficult was it? Imagine what it might be like to face death yourself, and think about how you might want others to treat you. Do your feelings and expectations fit within the cultural expectations and/or traditions of your family and community?
12.S: Chapter Summary
Review of Key Points
• Erikson never knew who his father was, and his relationship with his mother was never secure. This challenge to his own identity led him to focus much of his career on the development of identity.
• Erikson’s theory was epigenetic, in that he believed people progress through a predictable series of psychological stages.
• At each stage, there is a unique and critical psychosocial crisis.
• Play is the royal road to understanding the young child’s ego, according to Erikson.
• Before fully developing his theory, Erikson confirmed many of his observations in distinct cultures, including two Native American tribes (Sioux and Yurok).
• Erikson described eight stages of development: trust vs. mistrust; autonomy vs. shame/doubt; initiative vs. guilt; industry vs. inferiority; identity vs. role diffusion/confusion; intimacy vs. isolation; generativity vs. stagnation/self-absorption; and integrity vs. despair.
• Each of the eight stages is associated with a particular strength: hope, will, purpose, competence, fidelity, love, care, wisdom.
• Sometimes young adults will take a moratorium during their search for an identity.
• Joan Erikson proposed a ninth stage of development when death is imminent: despair vs. gerotranscendence.
• Identity develops in relation to one’s environment and culture. Thus, it involves psychosocial relativity.
• Individuals who lose a sense of personal sameness and historical continuity may face an identity crisis.
• Both the ratio of where one falls on each continuum of a psychosocial crisis and the possibility of adopting a negative identity are challenges to healthy identity formation.
• Erikson believed that the significant challenges faced by young Blacks trying to find an identity in America, their disconnection from both their African heritage and the White majority in America, led them toward adopting a negative identity. Evidence can be found in the movement of some young Blacks toward the Nation of Islam and the Black Panthers during the 1960s.
• The family is an integral social institution in all cultures. Thus, family psychology can play an important role in helping individuals to recover from identity crises.
• Adulthood is a time of continued psychological development, with its own unique psychosocial crises. The form of these crises, however, varies dramatically from one culture to another.
• In all cultures, the primary activities of adulthood, around which the psychosocial crises revolve, are work and love.
• Very old individuals can still be productive and creative. Old age is also an important time for grandparents to communicate a sense of continuity, a generational link, to their grandchildren.
• Kubler-Ross described five stages that occur during the dying process: denial and isolation, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance. Unfortunately, many people never reach the stage of acceptance.
• When faced with death itself, those who have achieved acceptance can transcend life, and die in peace. Many non-Western cultures have different attitudes regarding death, and are able to facilitate acceptance much more readily. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/12%3A_Erik_Erikson/12.08%3A_Personality_Theory_in_Real_Life-_...and_in_Death.txt |
Carl Jung brought an almost mystical approach to psychodynamic theory. An early associate and follower of Freud, Jung eventually disagreed with Freud on too many aspects of personality theory to remain within a strictly Freudian perspective. Subsequently, Jung developed his own theory, which applied concepts from natural laws (primarily in physics) to psychological functioning. Jung also introduced the concept of personality types, and began to address personality development throughout the lifespan. In his most unique contribution, at least from a Western perspective, Jung proposed that the human psyche contains within itself psychological constructs developed throughout the evolution of the human species.
13: Carl Jung
Jung has always been controversial and confusing. His blending of psychology and religion, as well as his openness to different religious and spiritual philosophies, was not easy to accept for many psychiatrists and psychologists trying to pursue a purely scientific explanation of personality and mental illness. Perhaps no one was more upset than Freud, whose attitude toward Jung changed dramatically over just a few years. In 1907, Freud wrote a letter to Jung in which Freud offered high praise:
…I have already acknowledged…above all that your person has filled me with trust in the future, that I now know that I am dispensable like everyone else, and that I wish for no one other or better than you to continue and complete my work. (pg. 136; cited in Wehr, 1989)
In 1910, hoping that others would also support Jung, Freud wrote to Oskar Pfister:
I hope you will loyally support Jung, I want him to acquire the authority that will entitle him to leadership of the whole movement. (pg. 136; cited in Wehr, 1989)
However, in a dramatic shift just three years later, Freud wrote to Jung:
I suggest to you that we completely give up our private relationship. By this I lose nothing, since for a long time I have been bound to you emotionally only by the thin thread of previously experienced disappointments. … Spare me the supposed “duties of friendship.” (pg. 136; cited in Wehr, 1989)
Later, in 1922, Freud thanked Oskar Pfister for his help in trying to eliminate Jung’s influence on the psychoanalytic community:
With your ever more thorough and ever more clearly demonstrated dismissal of Jung and Adler, you have for a long time given me great satisfaction. (pg. 136; cited in Wehr, 1989)
Who was this man who inspired such profound confidence from Sigmund Freud, only to later inspire such contempt? And were his theories that difficult for the psychodynamic community, or psychology in general, to accept? Hopefully, this chapter will begin to answer those questions. As evidence of his character, and in contrast to Freud, Jung did not turn his back on his former mentor. Following Freud’s death in 1939, and later in 1957, Jung wrote the following:
[Freud’s work was]…surely the boldest attempt ever made on the apparently solid ground of empiricism to master the riddle of the unconscious psyche. For us young psychiatrists, it was a source of enlightenment… (pg. 29; cited in Wehr, 1989)
…Despite the resounding censure I suffered at the hands of Freud, I cannot, even despite my resentment toward him, fail to recognize his importance as a critical analyst of culture and as a pioneer in the field of psychology. (pg. 39; cited in Wehr, 1989) | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/13%3A_Carl_Jung/13.01%3A_Prelude_to_Carl_Jung.txt |
At the beginning of his autobiography, entitled Memories, Dreams, Reflections, Jung (1961) described his life as “a story of the self-realization of the unconscious.” Jung believed that our personality begins with a collective unconscious, developed within our species throughout time, and that we have only limited ability to control the psychic process that is our own personality. Thus, our true personality arises from within as our collective unconscious comes forth into our personal unconscious and then our consciousness. It can be helpful to view these concepts from an Eastern perspective, and it is interesting to note that “self-realization” was used in the name of the first Yoga society established in America (in 1920 by Paramahansa Yogananda).
Carl Gustav Jung was born on July 26th, 1875, in the small town of Kesswil, Switzerland, into an interesting and notable family. His grandfather of the same name had been a physician, and had established the psychiatric clinic at the University of Basel and the “Home of Good Hope” for mentally retarded children. At an early age he had been imprisoned for over a year, for the crime of having participated in a demonstration supporting democracy in Germany. Rumored to be an illegitimate son of the great Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, though there is no convincing evidence, the elder Carl Jung died before his namesake grandson ever knew him. Nonetheless, Jung was greatly influenced by stories he heard about his grandfather. His maternal grandfather, Samuel Preiswerk, was the dean of the Basel (Switzerland) clergy and pastor of a major church. He was one the first people in Europe to suggest a restoration of Palestine to the Jews, thus establishing himself as a forerunner to the Zionists. Samuel Preiswerk also believed that he was regularly surrounded by spirits (or ghosts), something that likely had quite an influence on Jung’s theories (Jaffe, 1979; Wehr, 1989).
Jung’s father, Johann Paul Achilles Jung, married Emilie Preiswerk in 1874. Johann Jung was a scholar of Oriental languages, studied Arabic, and was ordained a minister. In addition to being a pastor at two churches during Jung’s childhood, Johann Jung was the pastor at Friedmatt, the insane asylum in Basel. During Jung’s early childhood he did not always have the best of relationships with his parents. He considered his mother to be a good mother, but he felt that her true personality was always hidden. She spent some time in the hospital when he was three years old, in part due to problems in her marriage. Jung found this separation from his mother deeply troubling, and he became mistrustful of the spoken word “love.” Since his father was a pastor, there were often funerals and burials, all of which was very mysterious to the young Jung. In addition, his mother was considered a spiritual medium, and often helped Jung with his later studies on the occult. Perhaps most troubling of all, was Jung’s belief that his father did not really know God, but rather, had become a minister trapped in the performance of meaningless ritual (Jaffe, 1979; Jung, 1961; Wehr, 1989).
An only child until he was 9, Jung preferred to be left alone, or at least he came to accept his loneliness. Even when his parent’s guests brought their children over for visits, Jung would simply play his games alone:
…I recall only that I did not want to be disturbed. I was deeply absorbed in my games and could not endure being watched or judged while I played them. (pg. 18; Jung, 1961)
He also had extraordinarily rich and meaningful dreams, many of which were quite frightening, and they often involved deeply religious themes. This is hardly surprising, since two uncles on his father’s side of the family were ministers, and there were six more ministers on his mother’s side. Thus, he was often engaged in religious discussions at home. He was particularly impressed with a richly illustrated book on Hinduism, with pictures of Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva (the Hindu trinity of gods). Even at 6 years old, he felt a vague connection with the Hindu gods, something that once again would have an interesting influence on his later theories. These dreams led Jung into deep religious speculations, something he considered to be a secret that he could not share with anyone else (Jaffe, 1979; Jung, 1961; Wehr, 1989).
Jung’s school-age years were a mixture of experiences. He enjoyed school, in the sense that it was easy for him and he found other children to play with. However, he also began studying Latin with his father and taking divinity classes. He found the classes on religion terribly boring, and the more he got to know his father, the less he believed that his father understood either God, religion, or spirituality. It didn’t help that he was well-aware of the continued turmoil in his parent’s marriage. In a cave in the garden he tended a fire that he meant to keep burning forever, and although he allowed other children to help gather the wood, only Jung himself could tend the fire. At the age of 11 he began attending the Gymnasium in Basel (something like an advanced high school). The other children were quite wealthy, and Jung became aware of how poor they were. Although this led him to feel some compassion for his father, the Gymnasium created a number of problems. Jung simply did not understand mathematics, his divinity classes became unbearably boring, and so, school itself became boring. This led to a severe neurosis at the age of 12 (Jaffe, 1979; Jung, 1961; Wehr, 1989).
Jung had been knocked down by another boy on the way home from school. He hit his head on a rock, and was nearly knocked out. He was so dizzy that others had to help him, and he suddenly realized that he did not have to go to school if he was ill. Consequently, he began having fainting spells any time he was sent to school or to do his homework. He missed 6 months of school due his psychological problems, and Jung loved the opportunity to spend his days exploring the world in any way he wished. He was eventually diagnosed with epilepsy, though Jung himself knew the diagnosis was ridiculous. One day he heard his father expressing great fear to a friend about what would become of Jung if he were unable to earn his own living. The reality of this statement was shocking to Jung, and “From that moment on I became a serious child.” He immediately went to study Latin, and began to feel faint. However, he consciously made himself aware of his neurosis, and cognitively fought it off. He soon returned to school, recognizing “That was when I learned what a neurosis is” (Jaffe, 1979; Jung, 1961; Wehr, 1989).
As he continued through school, his personal life continued to be quite strange. He began to believe that he was two people, one having lived 100 years earlier. He also had heated religious debates with his father. Fueling his courage during these debates was his belief that a vision had led to his understanding of true spirituality:
One fine summer day that same year I came out of school at noon and went to the cathedral square. The sky was gloriously blue, the day one of radiant sunshine. The roof of the cathedral glittered, the sun sparkling from the new, brightly glazed tiles. I was overwhelmed by the beauty of the sight, and thought: “The world is beautiful and the church is beautiful, and God made all this and sits above it far away in the blue sky on a golden throne and …” Here came a great hole in my thoughts, and a choking sensation. I felt numbed, and knew only: “Don’t go on thinking now! Something terrible is coming, something I do not want to think, something I dare not even approach. Why not? Because I would be committing the most frightful of sins. What is the most terrible sin? Murder? No, it can’t be that. The most terrible sin is the sin against the Holy Ghost, which cannot be forgiven. Anyone who commits that sin is damned to hell for all eternity. That would be very sad for my parents, if their only son, to whom they are so attached, should be doomed to eternal damnation. I cannot do that to my parents. All I need do is not go on thinking.” (pg. 36; Jung, 1961)
However, Jung was not able to ignore his vision. He was tormented for days, and spent sleepless nights wondering why he would have to think something unforgivable as a result of praising God for the beauty of all creation. His mother saw how troubled he was, but Jung felt that he could not dare confide in her. Finally, he decided that it was God’s will that he should face the meaning of this vision:
I thought it over again and arrived at the same conclusion. “Obviously God also desires me to show courage,” I thought. “If that is so and I go through with it, then He will give me His grace and illumination.”
I gathered all my courage, as though I were about to leap forthwith into hell-fire, and let the thought come. I saw before me the cathedral, the blue sky. God sits on His golden throne, high above the world - and from under the throne an enormous turd falls upon the sparkling new roof, shatters it, and breaks the walls of the cathedral asunder. (pg. 39; Jung 1961)
Jung was overjoyed by his understanding of this vision. He believed that God had shown him that what mattered in life was doing God’s will, not following the rules of any man, religion, or church. This was what Jung felt his own father had never come to realize, and therefore, his father did not know the “immediate living God.” This conviction that one should pursue truth, rather than dogma, was an essential lesson that returned when Jung faced his dramatic split with Sigmund Freud.
When Jung decided to enter medical school, he did not leave his interest in strange spiritual matters behind. His cousin Helene Preiswerk led séances in which she would fall into a trance and channel strange spirits. The climax of these trances was often a mandala (a mandala is a geometric figure that represents wholeness, completeness, and perfection), which she would dictate to Jung, and then attempt to translate what was told to her by the spirits. Eugen Bleuler urged Jung to publish his studies on occult phenomena (remember that Bleuler defined schizophrenia), which Jung did, under the title On the Psychology and Pathology of So-called Occult Phenomena. Another important event that occurred early during Jung’s medical training was the death of his father. The church had no provisions for the family of a deceased minister, but one of his uncles loaned Jung the money he needed to continue his studies. Upon completing medical school, he joined Dr. Bleuler in Zurich at the Burgholzli Mental Hospital, and soon became the first assistant physician. The Burgholzli clinic was a renowned institution. Bleuler was considered one of the two most influential psychiatrists of the day, and the clinic had come to prominence under his predecessor Auguste Forel, who was the first person to formally publish the theory that neurons communicate through synaptic junctions (though just how was not well understood at the time; Finger, 1994). Jung worked hard at Burgholzli, as Bleuler expected nothing less. He also spent some time in France, at the internationally recognized Salpetriere hospital, where he met Pierre Janet. Janet is a curious figure in the history of psychoanalysis. He claimed that he developed everything good in psychoanalysis, and that everything Freud developed was bad. Janet also apparently suggested that only the corrupt city of Vienna could be the source of a theory that traces the development of personality to sexual urges (Freud, 1914/1995). Jung spoke favorably of what he learned from Janet; Freud soundly rejected Janet’s claims, but did grudgingly acknowledge that Janet did some important work on understanding neuroses (Freud, 1914/1995; Jung, 1961).
In 1906, Jung sent Freud a copy of his book The Psychology of Dementia Praecox (an earlier term for schizophrenia), which Freud found quite impressive. The two met in February, 1907, and talked for nearly 13 straight hours. According to Jung, “Freud was the first man of real importance I had encountered…no one else could compare with him.” Very quickly, as evidenced in the letters quoted at the beginning of this chapter, Freud felt that Jung would become the leader of the psychoanalytic movement. In 1909, Jung’s psychoanalytic practice was so busy that he resigned from the Burgholzli clinic, and he traveled to America with Freud. During this trip the two men spent a great deal of time together. It quickly became evident to Jung that he could not be the successor that Freud was seeking; Jung had too many differences of opinion with Freud. More importantly, however, Jung described Freud as neurotic, and wrote that the symptoms were sometimes highly troublesome (though Jung failed to identify those symptoms). Freud taught that everyone was a little neurotic, but Jung wanted to know how to cure neuroses:
Apparently neither Freud nor his disciples could understand what it meant for the theory and practice of psychoanalysis if not even the master could deal with his own neurosis. When, then, Freud announced his intention of identifying theory and method and making them into some kind of dogma, I could no longer collaborate with him; there remained no choice for me but to withdraw. (pg. 167; Jung, 1961)
Clearly Jung could not accept a dogmatic approach to psychoanalysis, since he believed that God Himself had told Jung not to follow any rigid system of rules. Even worse, this was when Jung first published his “discovery” of the collective unconscious. Freud wholly rejected this concept, and Jung felt that his creativity was being rejected. He offered to support Freud in public, while extending honest opinions in so-called “secret letters.” Freud wanted none of it. Almost as quickly as their relationship had grown, it fell apart (Jaffe, 1979; Jung, 1961; Wehr, 1989).
The loss of his relationship with Freud, following the loss of his father, led Jung in a period of personal crisis. He resigned his position at the University of Zurich, and began a lengthy series of experiments in order to understand the fantasies and dreams that arose from his unconscious. The more he studied these phenomena, the more he realized they were not from his own memories, but from the collective unconscious. He was particularly curious about mandala drawings, which date back thousands of years in all cultures. He studied Christian Gnosticism, alchemy, and the I Ching (or: Book of Changes). After meeting Richard Wilhelm, an expert on Chinese culture, Jung studied more Taoist philosophy, and he wrote a glowing foreword for Wilhelm’s translation of the I Ching (Wilhelm, 1950). These extraordinarily diverse interests led Jung to seek more in-depth knowledge from around the world. He traveled first to North Africa, then to America (to visit Pueblo Indians in New Mexico), next came East Africa (Uganda and Kenya), and finally India. Jung made every effort to get away from civilized areas, which might have been influenced by other cultures, in order to get a more realistic impression of the local culture, and he was particularly successful in this regard in meeting gurus in India (Jaffe, 1979; Jung, 1961; Wehr, 1989).
Through it all, he continued his work in psychology. He had developed his concept of psychological types, one of his most significant contributions, and published his work shortly after the break with Freud. He continued to develop his own form of psychoanalysis. Jung’s family was also an important part of his life. He had married Emma Rauschenbach in 1903. They had four daughters and one son, followed by nineteen grandchildren and many great-grandchildren. Emma Jung was very supportive of her husband, especially during the more turbulent periods of his career (including the break with Freud), and she was no stranger to his work. She had done some analytical work with Freud herself, she wrote essays on Jung’s concept of anima and animus, and she was the first president of the Psychological Club of Zurich. When his wife Emma died in 1955, Jung wrote in a letter that the loss had taken a lot out of him, and that at his age (80 years old) it wasn’t easy to recover. Yet two years later, he began dictating his autobiography to Aniela Jaffe. Looking ahead to the end of his life, Jung said:
The world into which we are born is brutal and cruel, and at the same time of divine beauty. Which element we think outweighs the other, whether meaninglessness or meaning is a matter of temperament. If meaninglessness were absolutely preponderant, the meaningfulness of life would vanish to an increasing degree with each step in our development. But that is - or seems to me - not the case. Probably, as in all metaphysical questions, both are true: Life is - or has - meaning and meaninglessness. I cherish the anxious hope that meaning will preponderate and win the battle.
When Lao-tzu says: “All are clear, I alone am clouded,” he is expressing what I now feel in advanced old age. Lao-tzu is the example of a man with superior insight who has seen and experienced worth and worthlessness, and who at the end of his life desires to return into his own being, into the eternal unknowable meaning. The archetype of the old man who has seen enough is eternally true. (pp. 358-359; Jung, 1961)
Carl Jung died at home in 1961, in Kusnacht, Switzerland, at the age of 85. As psychologists today examine more deeply the relationship between Eastern and Western perspectives, it may be that Jung’s legacy has yet to be fulfilled.
discussion question \(1\)
Even as a child, Jung had vivid dreams that he believed were giving him insight and guidance for the future. Have you ever had dreams so vivid, dreams that left such a powerful impression on you, that you felt they must have some special meaning? How did you respond, and what consequences, if any, followed your responses?
Placing Jung in Context: A Psychodynamic Enigma
Carl Jung holds an extraordinary place in the histories of psychiatry and psychology. Having already been an assistant to the renowned psychiatrist Eugen Bleuler, he went to Vienna to learn more about the fledgling science of psychoanalysis. He became Freud’s hand-picked heir to the psychoanalytic throne, and was one of the psychiatrists who accompanied Freud to America. Later, however, as he developed his own theories, he parted ways with Freud. Freud eventually came to describe Jung’s theories as incomprehensible, and Freud praised other psychiatrists who also opposed Jung’s ideas.
The most dramatic contribution that Jung made to psychodynamic thought was his concept of the collective unconscious, a mysterious reservoir of psychological constructs common to all people. Jung traveled extensively, including trips to Africa, India, and the United States (particularly to visit the Pueblo Indians in New Mexico), and he studied the cultures in those places. He also observed many basic similarities between different cultures. Those similarities led Jung to propose the collective unconscious. How else could so many significant cultural similarities have arisen within separate and distant lands? Jung did not reject the concepts already developed by Freud and Adler, including the dynamic interaction between the conscious mind and the personal unconscious, but he extended them in order to connect them with his own theory of our underlying collective unconscious. As strange as this theory seemed to Freud, and Freud wondered whether it even made sense to Jung, such a concept is not difficult to understand from an Eastern perspective.
Initially Jung’s theories had more influence on art, literature, and anthropology than they did on psychiatry and psychology. More recently, however, cognitive-behavioral theorists have begun to explore mindfulness as an addition to more traditional aspects of cognitive-behavioral therapies. As psychologists today study concepts from Yoga and Buddhism that are thousands of years old, Jung deserves the credit for bringing such an open-minded approach to the modern world of psychotherapy. Many famous and influential people admired Jung’s work, including psychiatrist Viktor Frankl, psychologist Erich Fromm, the authors Hermann Hesse and H. G. Wells, and Nobel Laureate (Physics) Wolfgang Pauli (for a number of interesting testimonials see Wehr, 1989). In addition, Jung’s discussion of how the libido has transformed throughout the evolution of the human species sounds very much like sociobiology, which was not an established field until the 1970s. Clearly Jung did not simply dabble in a wide range of ideas, but rather, he had an extraordinary vision of the complexity of the human psyche. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/13%3A_Carl_Jung/13.02%3A_A_Brief_Biography_of_Carl_Jung.txt |
In order to distinguish his own approach to psychology from others that had come before, Jung felt that he needed a unique name. Freud, of course, had chosen the term “psychoanalysis,” whereas Alfred Adler had chosen “individual psychology.” Since Jung admired both men and their theories, he chose a name intended to encompass not only their approaches, but others as well. Thus, he chose to call his approach analytical psychology (Jung, 1933).
Analytical psychology, as presented by Jung, addresses the question of the psyche in an open-minded way. He laments the overly scientific approach of the late 1800s and efforts to explain away the psyche as a mere epiphenomenon of brain function. Curiously, that debate remains with us today, and is still unanswered in any definitive way. Jung did not accept the suggestion that the psyche must come from the activity of the brain. This allowed him to consider the possibility of a collective unconscious, and fit well with his acceptance of the wisdom of Eastern philosophers. Indeed, Jung suggests that psychology will find truth only when it accepts both Eastern and Western, as well as both scientific and spiritual, perspectives on the psyche (Jung, 1933).
Dynamic Psychic Energy
Jung believed in a dynamic interaction between the conscious and unconscious minds, in a manner quite similar to that proposed by Freud. However, as we will examine below, his concept of the psyche included elements of an unconscious mind that transcends the individual, and may be considered a combination of the spirit, or soul, and one’s thoughts and sensations. This inner psychic realm is capable of affecting the brain and its functions and, therefore, can influence one’s perception of external reality. In addition, Jung thought of the libido somewhat differently than Freud. Although Jung considered sexuality to be an important aspect of the libido, primarily he thought of libido as a more generalized life energy (Douglas, 1995; Jarvis, 2004). Jung believed that as the human species evolved, the nature of sexual (or survival) impulses transformed. For example, early in human evolution we needed, as do other species, to be able to attract mates for procreation. Over time, these attraction behaviors generalized to behaviors such as art or music. Thus, a Freudian might say that creating music is a sexual act, but according to Jung “it would be a poor, unaesthetic generalization if one were to include music in the category of sexuality” (Jung, 1916/1963).
An important element of Jung’s conception of the psyche and libido is found in the nature of opposites. Indeed, all of nature is composed of opposites:
…The concept of energy implies that of polarity, since a current of energy necessarily presupposes two different states, or poles, without which there can be no current. Every energic phenomenon…consists of pairs of opposites: beginning and end, above and below, hot and cold, earlier and later, cause and effect, etc. The inseparability of the energy concept from that of polarity also applies to the concept of libido. (pg. 202; Jung, 1971)
…opposites are the ineradicable and indispensable preconditions of all psychic life… (pg. 170; Jung, 1970)
In accordance with this view, Jung felt that the psyche sought balance, much like the concept of entropy from the field of physics. Entropy, in simple terms, is a thermodynamic principle that all energy within a system (including the universe) will eventually even out. Jung applied this principle to motivation, believing that we are driven forward through our lives in such a way that we might reduce the imbalance of psychic energy between opposing pairs of emotions (such as love and hate; Jarvis, 2004; Jung, 1971). Borrowing concepts from physics was certainly not a strange thing for Jung to do. As mentioned in Chapter 3, Freud’s theories were motivated in part by advancements in science and Darwin’s theory of evolution. Jung was personally acquainted with the Nobel Prize winning physicist Wolfgang Pauli, and the two published essays blending psychology and physics in a book entitled The Interpretation of Nature and the Psyche (Jung & Pauli, 1955). However, entropy and motivation are focused forward in time. Such an orientation toward the future marks another distinction between the theories of Freud and Jung.
Jung did not simply study symbolism, such as that in dreams, to uncover evidence of past repression. Jung believed that dreams could guide our future behavior, because of their profound relationship to the past, and their profound influence on our conscious mental life. Jung proposed that dreams can tell us something about the development and structure of the human psyche, and that dreams have evolved with our species throughout time. Since consciousness is limited by our present experience, dreams help to reveal much deeper and broader elements of our psyche than we can be aware of consciously. As such, dreams cannot easily be interpreted. Jung rejected the analysis of any single dream, believing that they belong within a series. He also rejected trying to learn dream analysis from a book. When done properly, however, dream analysis can provide unparalleled realism (see Jacobi & Hull, 1970; Jung, 1933):
…I cannot prove in every case that dreams are meaningful, for there are dreams that neither doctor nor patient understands. But I must regard them as hypothetically meaningful in order to find courage to deal with them at all…We must never forget in dream-analysis, even for a moment, that we move on treacherous ground where nothing is certain but uncertainty…When we take up an obscure dream, our first task is not to understand and interpret it, but to establish the context with minute care. What I have in mind is not a boundless sweep of “free associations” starting from any and every image in the dream, but a careful and conscious illumination of those chains of associations that are directly connected with particular images. (pp. 11-12; Jung, 1933)
In the final analysis, there is a particular challenge to understanding what dreams point to, and that is the situation under which a therapist typically learns of someone’s dreams: in therapy. Jung suggested that if therapists could continue to observe the journey of one’s dreams after therapy was successful, then the therapist, and possibly the client as well, might begin to more clearly understand the meaning and direction of the dreams. Still, dreams themselves are about both health and sickness, in keeping with Jung’s principle of opposites. As such, Jung wrote that “dreams are the natural reaction of the self-regulating psychic system.” The theory of entropy allows for an imbalance of energy in a closed-system. We may think of our conscious mind as just such a closed system. When we dream, however, the ongoing effort of our psyche to balance itself takes over, and the dreams counteract what we have done to imbalance our psychological selves. Thus, it is within the context of dreams, not the details, that meaning is to be found (Jung, 1959a, 1968).
discussion question \(1\)
Jung believed that the source of our motivation was a psychological drive to achieve balance (the effect of entropy on the psyche). Have you ever felt that you were being pushed or pulled in the wrong direction, or in too many directions at once, and simply wanted to achieve some balance in your life? In contrast, have there been times that your life was unfulfilling, and you needed something more in order to feel whole?
The Unconscious Mind
Perhaps Jung’s most unique contribution to psychology is the distinction between a personal unconscious and a collective unconscious. The personal unconscious is not entirely different than that proposed by Freud, but is more extensive. In addition to repressed memories and impulses, the personal unconscious contains undeveloped aspects of the personality and material arising from the collective unconscious that is not yet ready for admission into conscious awareness. The personal unconscious is revealed through clusters of emotions, such as those resulting in a particular attitude toward one’s father or other father figures, which Jung referred to as a complex (Douglas, 1995; Jarvis, 2004). In this sense, a complex is not synonymous with a psychological problem, as the term is often used today, but rather any general state of mind common to certain situations. In this context, it is quite similar to the schemas discussed by cognitive theorists.
Jung arrived at his theory of complexes as a result of his research into schizophrenia, under the direction of Dr. Bleuler. Bleuler had assigned Jung the task of studying the Word Association Test, a test in which a list of 100 words is read to the patient, and the therapist watches for evidence of emotional arousal, such as pauses, failures to respond, or physical acts. In addition, Jung noticed that even with schizophrenic patients, the patterns of word association were often centered on a particular theme. That theme could then be regarded as a complex (which, again, could be either positive or negative). Sometimes, complexes remain unresolved, such as one’s feelings about parents, if the parents have died. In relatively healthy individuals, these unresolved complexes could result in dreams, visions, or similar phenomena pertaining to the object(s) of the unresolved complex. These complexes might even become personified. In the extreme situation of personified complexes, such as in a person suffering from schizophrenia, the patient cannot distinguish the personification of the unresolved complex from the seeming reality of being another person. Hence, the schizophrenic “hears” voices in their head, “spoken” by someone else. As Jung further investigated the nature and themes of complexes in psychiatric patients, he found common themes that could not always be attributed to the patient’s personal history. And so, he began to form his concept of the collective unconscious (Douglas, 1995; Jarvis, 2004; Jung, 1959b, 1961; Storr, 1983).
…from the standpoint of the psychology of the personality a twofold division ensures: an “extra-conscious” psyche whose contents are personal, and an “extra-conscious” psyche whose contents are impersonal and collective. The first group comprises contents which are integral components of the individual personality and could therefore just as well be conscious; the second group forms, as it were, an omnipresent, unchanging, and everywhere identical quality or substrate of the psyche per se. This is, of course, no more than a hypothesis. But we are driven to it by the peculiar nature of the empirical material…
Whereas the contents of the personal unconscious are acquired during the individual’s lifetime, the contents of the collective unconscious are invariably archetypes that were present from the beginning. (pp. 7-8; Jung, 1959c)
Thus, according to Jung, the collective unconscious is a reservoir of psychic resources common to all humans (something along the lines of psychological instinct). These psychic resources, known as archetypes, are passed down through the generations of a culture, but Jung considered them to be inherited, not learned. As generation after generation experienced similar phenomena, the archetypal images were formed. Despite cultural differences, the human experience has been similar in many ways throughout history. As such, there are certain archetypes common to all people. According to Jung, the most empirically valid archetypes, and therefore the most powerful, are the shadow, the anima, and the animus (Jung, 1959c).
Jung described the shadow as “the inferior and less commendable part of a person,” and “a moral problem that challenges the whole ego-personality” (Jung, 1940, 1959c). It encompasses desires and feelings that are not acceptable to society or the conscious psyche. With effort the shadow can be somewhat assimilated into the conscious personality, but portions of it are highly resistant to moral control. As a result, we tend to project those thoughts, feelings, or emotions onto other people. When they have moved beyond one’s control, such as when we lose our temper, these projections isolate the individual from their environment, since they are no longer approaching situations realistically. Jung described the circumstance as tragic when people continue to ruin their lives, and the lives of others, because they cannot see through the illusion of how their shadow has been projected, and consequently interfered with their ability to live a healthy life (Jung, 1959c).
The shadow is not, however, entirely evil. Rather, Jung described it as un-adapted and awkward, much like a child trying to function in the company of adults. Trying to entirely suppress the shadow is not the appropriate solution, since the shadow is driving us forward in our efforts to achieve balance between the unconscious and conscious realities. In other words, just as a child may act inappropriately while trying to grow up, the shadow may cause inappropriate behavior in opposition to the accepted rules of society. Nonetheless, it is important for us to have that driving force pushing us toward self-development (and the development of the human species), so that we don’t simply live a life of passivity and/or reaction to outside events. It is the shadow that pushes us forward (Jacobi & Hull, 1970; Jung, 1961).
Although many people emphasize the differences between men and women, psychologically their common traits can readily be observed. Jung described the anima as the female aspect of the male psyche, and the animus as the male aspect of the female psyche. Jung intentionally addresses this difficult concept in mythological terms, but he also makes it clear that this is a natural phenomenon for each person, and not a substitute for one’s mother (in the case of the anima) or father (in the case of the animus). While the presence of a feminine aspect within the male psyche and the presence of a masculine aspect within the female psyche have some positive benefits, such as making it possible for men and women to relate to one another, the unfortunate reality is often the opposite. In 1959(c), Jung described the difficulties that men and women have relating to family and friends of the opposite sex, due to fundamental differences in style. Although men may contain the anima, they are still primarily masculine, whereas women, despite the animus, are still primarily feminine. As with the shadow, relationship problems can arise from the anima or animus when we allow our archetypal image to be projected onto others. As Jung himself noted, many men project a desired image onto a woman that would require her to be a sexually vivacious virgin, something of a contradiction in terms. Thus, over time, such a man’s relationships may suffer as a result of his learning more about the real life of his companion, even though she has done nothing but be herself (Jung, 1940, 1959c).
Jung did not place a limit on the number of possible archetypes, and he described quite a few in his writings. It did not matter to Jung whether archetypes were, in fact, real. In a perspective quite similar to cognitive theorists, he wrote that “insofar as the archetypes act upon me, they are real and actual to me, even though I do not know what their real nature is” (Jung, 1961). One of the more important archetypes is the self, which represents the integration of the whole personality. Indeed, Jung described the self as the goal of all psychic development. A special type of image often associated with the self, and with Jung himself, is the mandala. A mandala is a geometric figure that represents wholeness, completeness, perfection (Jung, 1958). They also tend to be symmetrical, representing the natural balance of opposites. Although they typically have religious or spiritual significance, it is not required. Jung was very interested in mandalas, and from 1916 to 1918 he draw a new one every morning (Wehr, 1989). Mandalas can appear in dreams as an image of wholeness, or in times of stress they may appear as compensatory images (Douglas, 1995). Their potential healing ability stems from their connection between the uniqueness of our present consciousness and the depths of our primordial past:
…The psyche is not of today; its ancestry goes back many millions of years. Individual consciousness is only the flower and the fruit of a season, sprung from the perennial rhizome beneath the earth; and it would find itself in better accord with the truth if it took the existence of the rhizome into its calculations. For the root matter is the mother of all things. (pg. xxiv; Jung, 1956)
It is important to note that archetypal images are considered to be ancient. Although we talk about them as if they are still forming, and that may well be possible, the fact is that there were countless human generations long before recorded history. Jung has referred to archetypes as primordial images, “impressed upon the mind since of old” (Jung, 1940). Archetypes have been expressed as myths and fables, some of which are thousands of years old even within recorded history. As the eternal, symbolic images representing archetypes were developed, they naturally attracted and fascinated people. That, according to Jung, is why they have such profound impact, even today, in our seemingly advanced, knowledgeable, and scientific societies.
Table \(1\): Common Archetypes in Jung’s Theory of the Collective Unconscious*
Self
Integration and wholeness of the personality, the center of the totality of the psyche; symbolically represented by, e.g., the mandala, Christ, or by helpful animals (such as Rin Tin Tin and Lassie or the Hindu monkey god Hanuman)
Shadow
The dark, inferior, emotional, and immoral aspects of the psyche; symbolically represented by, e.g., the Devil (or an evil character such as Dracula), dragons, monsters (such as Godzilla)
Anima
Strange, wraithlike image of an idealized women, yet contrary to the masculinity of the man, draws the man into feminine (as defined by gender roles) behavior, always a supernatural element; symbolically represented by, e.g., personifications of witches, the Greek Sirens, a femme fatale, or in more positive ways as the Virgin Mary, a romanticized beauty (such as Helen of Troy) or a cherished car
Animus
A source of meaning and power for women, it can be opinionated, divisive, and create animosity toward men, but also creates a capacity for reflection, deliberation, and self-knowledge; symbolically represented by, e.g., death, murderers (such as the pirate Bluebeard, who killed all his wives), a band of outlaws, a bewitched prince (such as the beast in “Beauty and the Beast”) or a romantic actor (such as Rudolph Valentino)
Persona
A protective cover, or mask, that we present to the world to make a specific impression and to conceal our inner self; symbolically represented by, e.g., a coat or mantle
Hero
One who overcomes evil, destruction, and death, often has a miraculous but humble birth; symbolically represented by, e.g., angels, Christ the Redeemer, or a god-man (such as Hercules)
Wise Old Man
Typically a personification of the self, associated with saints, sages, and prophets; symbolically represented as, e.g., the magician Merlin or an Indian guru
Trickster
A childish character with pronounced physical appetites, seeks only gratification and can be cruel and unfeeling; symbolically represented by, e.g., animals (such as Brer Rabbit, Wile E. Coyote or, often, monkeys) or a mischievous god (such as the Norse god Loki)
*For more information read The Integration of the Personality (Jung, 1940), Aion: Researches Into the Phenomenology of the Self (Jung, 1959c), and Man and His Symbols (Jung, et al., 1964).
discussion question\(2\)
What is your impression of the concept of archetypes? Think about mythic heroes and gods, or concepts of motherhood or being a father. Can you identify commonalities between different cultures, now or throughout time, which seem to suggest themes that are common to all people?
Connections Across Cultures: Symbolism Throughout Time and Around the world
Near the end of Jung’s life, he was asked to write a book that might make his theories more accessible to common readers. Jung initially refused, but then he had an interesting dream, receiving advice from his unconscious psyche that he should reconsider his refusal:
…He dreamed that, instead of sitting in his study and talking to the great doctors and psychiatrists who used to call on him from all over the world, he was standing in a public place and addressing a multitude of people who were listening to him with rapt attention and understanding what he said… (pg. 10; John Freeman, in his introduction to Man and His Symbols, Jung et al., 1964)
Jung then agreed to write the book that became known as Man and His Symbols, but only if he could hand-pick the co-authors who would help him. Jung supervised every aspect of the book, which was nearly finished when he died. Written purposefully to be easily understood by a wide audience, the book presents an astonishingly wide variety of symbolism from art, archaeology, myth, and analysis within the context of Jung’s theories. Many of the symbols were represented in dreams, and symbolic dreams are the primary means by which our unconscious psyche communicates with our conscious psyche, or ego. It is extraordinary to see how similar such symbolism has been throughout time and across cultures, even though each individual example is unique to the person having the dream or expressing themselves openly.
Symbols, according to Jung, are terms, names, images, etc. that may be familiar in everyday life, but as symbols they come to represent something vague and unknown, they take on meaning that is hidden from us. More specifically, they represent something within our unconscious psyche that cannot ever be fully explained. Exploring the meaning will not unlock the secrets of the symbol, because its meaning is beyond reason. Jung suggests that this should not seem strange, since there is nothing that we perceive fully. Our eyesight is limited, as is our hearing. Even when we use tools to enhance our senses, we still only see better, or hear better. We don’t comprehend the true nature of visual objects or sounds, we only experience them differently, within our psychic realm as opposed to their physical reality. And yet, the symbols created by our unconscious psyche are very important, since the unconscious is at least half of our being, and it is infinitely broader than our conscious psyche (Jung et al., 1964).
Jung believed that the symbols created in dreams have a deeper meaning than Freud recognized. Freud believed that dreams simply represent the unconscious aspects of one’s psyche. Jung believed, however, that dreams represent a psyche all their own, a vast and ancient psyche connected to the entire history of humanity (the collective unconscious). Therefore, dreams can tell a story of their own, such as Jung’s dream encouraging him to write a book for a common audience. Thus, his dream did not reflect some underlying neurosis connected to childhood trauma, but rather, his unconscious psyche was pushing him forward, toward a sort of wholeness of self by making his theories more readily accessible to those who are not sufficiently educated in the wide variety of complex topics that are typically found in Jung’s writings. By virtue of the same reasoning, Jung considered dreams to be quite personal. They could not be interpreted with dream manuals, since no object has any fixed symbolic meaning.
What makes the symbolism within dreams, as well as in everyday life, most fascinating, however, is how common it is throughout the world, both in ancient times and today. In their examination of symbols and archetypes, Jung and his colleagues offer visual examples from: Egypt, England, Japan, the Congo, Tibet, Germany, Belgium, the United States, Bali, Haiti, Greece, Switzerland, Spain, Italy, Cameroon, Java, France, Kenya, India, Sweden, Russia, Poland, Australia, China, Hungary, Malaysia, Borneo, Finland, the Netherlands, Rhodesia, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Scotland, Ireland, Brazil, Monaco, Burma, Bolivia, Cambodia, Denmark, Macedonia, and Peru, as well as from Mayan, Celtic, Babylonian, Persian, Navaho, and Haidu cultures. There are also many Biblical references. It would be safe to say that no one else in the history of psychology has so clearly demonstrated the cross-cultural reality of their theory as is the case with Carl Jung.
Of course, as with dreams, many of these symbols are unique to the culture in which they have arisen. Therefore, it takes a great deal of training and experience for a psychotherapist to work with patients from different cultures. Nonetheless, the patterns represent the same basic concepts, such as self, shadow, anima, animus, hero, etc. Once recognized in their cultural context, the analyst would have a starting point from which to begin working with their patient, or the artist would understand how to influence their audience. One important type of art that relies heavily on cultural images and cues is advertising. Cultural differences can create problems for companies pursuing global marketing campaigns. Jung’s theory suggests that similarities in how we react to certain archetypal themes should be similar in different countries, but of course the images themselves must be recognizable, and we may still be a long way from understanding those fundamental images:
…Our actual knowledge of the unconscious shows that it is a natural phenomenon and that, like Nature herself, it is at least neutral. It contains all aspects of human nature – light and dark, beautiful and ugly, good and evil, profound and silly. The study of individual, as well as of collective, symbolism is an enormous task, and one that has not yet been mastered. (pg. 103; Jung et al., 1964)
Personality Types
One of Jung’s most practical theories, and one that has been quite influential, is his work on personality types. Jung had conducted an extensive review of the available literature on personality types, including perspectives from ancient Brahmanic conceptions taken from the Indian Vedas (see below) and types described by the American psychologist William James. In keeping with one of Jung’s favorite themes, James had emphasized opposing pairs as the characteristics of his personality types, such as rationalism vs. empiricism, idealism vs. materialism, or optimism vs. pessimism (see Jung, 1971). Based on his research and clinical experience, Jung proposed a system of personality types based on attitude-types and function-types (more commonly referred to simply as attitudes and functions). Once again, the attitudes and functions are based on opposing ways of interacting with one’s environment.
The two attitude-types are based on one’s orientation to external objects (which includes other people). The introvert is intent on withdrawing libido from objects, as if to ensure that the object can have no power over the person. In contrast, the extravert extends libido toward an object, establishing an active relationship. Jung considered introverts and extraverts to be common amongst all groups of people, from all walks of life. Today, most psychologists acknowledge that there is a clear genetic component to these temperaments (Kagan, 1984, 1994; Kagan, Kearsley, & Zelazo 1978), a suggestion proposed by Jung as well (Jung, 1971). Of course, one cannot have an orientation to objects without consciousness, and consciousness cannot exist without an ego. For Jung, the ego is a complex, so it is associated with both the conscious psyche and the personal unconscious. According to Jung, “it is always in the center of our attention and of our desires, and it is the absolutely indispensable centre of consciousness” (Jung, 1968).
Jung’s four functions describe ways in which we orient ourselves to the external environment, given our basic tendency toward introversion or extraversion. The first opposing pair of functions is thinking vs. feeling. Thinking involves intellect, it tells you what a thing is, whereas feeling is values-based, it tells what a thing is worth to you. For example, if you are trying to choose classes for your next semester of college, perhaps you need to choose between a required general education course as opposed to a personally interesting course like Medical First Responder or Interior Design. If you are guided first by thinking, you will probably choose the course that fulfills a requirement, but if you are guided by feeling, you may choose the course that satisfies your more immediate interests. The second opposing pair of functions is sensing vs. intuition. Sensing describes paying attention to the reality of your external environment, it tells you that something is. In contrast, intuition incorporates a sense of time, and allows for hunches. Intuition may seem mysterious, and Jung freely acknowledges that he is particularly mystical, yet he offers an interesting perspective on this issue:
…Intuition is a function by which you see round corners, which you really cannot do; yet the fellow will do it for you and you trust him. It is a function which normally you do not use if you live a regular life within four walls and do regular routine work. But if you are on the Stock Exchange or in Central Africa, you will use your hunches like anything. You cannot, for instance, calculate whether when you turn round a corner in the bush you will meet a rhinoceros or a tiger - but you get a hunch, and it will perhaps save your life… (pg. 14; Jung, 1968)
The two attitudes and the four functions combine to form eight personality types. Jung described a so-called cross of the functions, with the ego in the center being influenced by the pairs of functions (Jung, 1968). Considering whether the ego’s attitude is primarily introverted or extraverted, one could also propose a parallel pair of crosses. Jung’s theory on personality types has proven quite influential, and led to the development of two well-known and very popular instruments used to measure one’s personality type, so that one might then make reasoned decisions about real-life choices.
Figure \(1\)
Jung proposed a “cross of the functions,” in which the ego sits at the center of the opposing pairs of functions (Jung, 1968). When the attitudes of introversion and extraversion are included, one can represent Jung’s view as parallel crosses of the functions.
Discussion question\(3\)
Jung described two attitudes (introversion-extraversion) and four functions (thinking-feeling, sensing-intuition) as the primary basis for psychological types. Think about yourself and/or some of your close friends and family members. Can you use the eight types described by Jung to get a reasonable impression of the people you know, or does Jung’s theory seem to fall short?
In 1923, Katharine Briggs and her daughter Isabel Briggs Myers learned of Jung’s personality types and became quite interested in his theory. After spending 20 years observing individuals of different types, they added one more pair of factors based on a person’s preference for either a more structured lifestyle, called judging, or a more flexible or adaptable lifestyle, called perceiving. There were now, according to Briggs and Myers, sixteen possible personality types. In the 1940s, Isabel Myers began developing the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) in order to help people learn about their personality type. To provide just one example of an MBTI profile, an individual who is extraverted and prefers sensing, thinking, and judging (identified by the initials ESTJ) would be described as: “Practical, realistic, matter-of-fact. Decisive, quickly move to implement decisions. Organize projects and people to get things done…Forceful in implementing their plans” (Myers, 1993; Myers & McCaulley, 1985; see also the website for the Myers & Briggs Foundation, at www.myersbriggs.org). While it is relatively easy to find shortcut tests or variations of the MBTI online, if one plans to make any meaningful decisions based on their personality type they should consult a trained MBTI administrator. What sort of decision might one make? The MBTI has become a popular tool for looking at career choices and workplace relationships. A number of popular books, such as Do What You Are (Tieger & Barron-Tieger, 2001) and Type Talk at Work (Kroeger, Thuesen, & Rutledge, 2002), are available that provide information intended to help people choose satisfying careers and be successful in complex work environments. In addition to its use in career counseling, the MBTI has been used in individual counseling, marriage counseling, and in educational settings (Myers, 1993; Myers & McCaulley, 1985; Myers & Myers, 1980). Another popular instrument, based once again on Jung’s theory and compared directly to the MBTI, is the Keirsey Temperament Sorter. David Keirsey uses plain language in an effort to make personality types easy to comprehend. Setting aside introversion vs. extraversion, he has identified eight character portraits: mentors, organizers, monitors, operators, advocates, engineers, conservators, and players. When Keirsey adds extraversion and introversion back into the mixture, he can identify one’s personality type even more clearly: monitors become either supervisors (E) or inspectors (I), players become performers (E) or composers (I), engineers become inventors (E) or designers (I), etc. As with the MBTI, Keirsey provides concrete recommendations regarding how one might use the results of his temperament sorter to make decisions about one’s choices in life (Keirsey, 1987).
Table \(2\): Jung’s Eight Personality Types*
Introverted Thinking Focused on own internal thoughts and ideas, do not communicate well, can be highly conflicted and will lash out at critics, generally stubborn and do not get along well with others
Introverted Feeling Tend to be silent, inaccessible, and melancholy, have deep emotions but hide them and appear cold and reserved on the surface, tend to be suspicious of others, most are women
Introverted Sensing Guided by subjective impression of real-life objects, often express their sensations through artistic endeavors, the objective world may seem make-believe and comical
Introverted Intuitive Tend to be peculiar and lack contact with reality, may be completely misunderstood even by those who are close to them, may seem like a mystical dreamer and seer on one hand but just a cranky person on the other, may have vision but lack convincing power of reason
Extraverted Thinking Seek intellectual conclusions based on objective reality, seek to influence others, suppress emotion, can be rigid and dogmatic (tyrannical when others penetrate their power province)
Extraverted Feeling Feelings harmonize with objective situations, can be highly emotional, will avoid thinking when it proves upsetting, most are women
Extraverted Sensing Immersed in realism and seek new experiences, whole aim is concrete enjoyment, most are men
Extraverted Intuitive Always seek new opportunities, may seize new opportunity with enthusiasm and just as quickly abandon it if not promising, has vision, often found among business tycoons and politicians, but have little regard for welfare of others
*For more information read Psychological Types (Jung, 1971). | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/13%3A_Carl_Jung/13.03%3A_Basic_Concepts.txt |
Jung believed that “everyone’s ultimate aim and strongest desire lie in developing the fullness of human existence that is called personality” (Jung, 1940). However, he lamented the misguided attempts of society to educate children into their personalities. Not only did he doubt the abilities the average parent or average teacher to lead children through the child’s personality development, given their own personal limitations, he considered it a mistake to expect children to act like young adults:
It is best not to apply to children the high ideal of education to personality. For what is generally understood by personality - namely, a definitely shaped, psychic abundance, capable of resistance and endowed with energy - is an adult ideal…No personality is manifested without definiteness, fullness, and maturity. These three characteristics do not, and should not, fit the child, for they would rob it of its childhood. (pp. 284-285; Jung, 1940)
This is not to suggest that childhood is simply a carefree time for children:
No one will deny or even underestimate the importance of childhood years; the severe injuries, often lasting through life, caused by a nonsensical upbringing at home and in school are too obvious, and the need for reasonable pedagogic methods is too urgent…But who rears children to personality? In the first and most important place we have the ordinary, incompetent parents who are often themselves, all their lives, partly or wholly children. (pg. 282; Jung, 1940)
So, if childhood is a critical time, but most adults never grow up themselves, what hope does Jung see for the future? The answer is to be found in midlife. According to Jung, the middle years of life are “a time of supreme psychological importance” and “the moment of greatest unfolding” in one’s life (cited in Jacobi & Hull, 1970). In keeping with the ancient tradition of the Vedic stages of life, from Hindu and Indian culture, the earlier stages of life are about education, developing a career, having a family, and serving one’s proper role within society:
Man has two aims: The first is the aim of nature, the begetting of children and all the business of protecting the brood; to this period belongs the gaining of money and social position. When this aim is satisfied, there begins another phase, namely, that of culture. For the attainment of the former goal we have the help of nature, and moreover of education; but little or nothing helps us toward the latter goal... (pg. 125; Jung, cited in Jacobi & Hull, 1970)
So where does one look for the answers to life? Obviously, there is no simple answer to that question, or rather, than are many answers to that question. Some pursue spiritual answers, such as meditating or devoting themselves to charitable causes. Some devote themselves to their children and grandchildren, others to gardening, painting, or woodworking. The answer for any particular individual is based on that person’s individuation.
Individuation is the process by which a person actually becomes an “individual,” differentiated from all other people. It is not to be confused with the ego, or with the conscious psyche, since it includes aspects of the personal unconscious, as influenced by the collective unconscious. Jung also described individuation as the process by which one becomes a “whole” person. To some extent, this process draws the individual away from society, toward being just that, an individual. However, keeping in mind the collective unconscious, Jung believed that individuation leads to more intense and broader collective relationships, rather than leading to isolation. This is what is meant by a whole person, one who successfully integrates the conscious psyche, or ego, with the unconscious psyche. Jung also addresses the Eastern approaches, such as meditation, as being misguided in their attempts to master the unconscious mind. The goal of individuation is wholeness, wholeness of ego, unconscious psyche, and community (Jung, 1940, 1971):
Consciousness and the unconscious do not make a whole when either is suppressed or damaged by the other. If they must contend, let it be a fair fight with equal right on both sides. Both are aspects of life…It is the old play of hammer and anvil: the suffering iron between them will in the end be shaped into an unbreakable whole, the individual. (pg. 27; Jung, 1940)
Figure \(1\)
Jimmy Carter was a successful farmer, Governor of Georgia, and President of the United States. As president he brokered a peace treaty between Egypt and Israel that earned him a Nobel Peace Prize nomination. Despite such an illustrious life to that point, he has, perhaps, done even more good since then. After devoting himself to a wide variety of social and political activities focusing on peace and justice, including personally building houses with Habitat for Humanity, the Honorable Mr. Carter received a well-earned Nobel Peace Prize in 2002.
discussion question \(1\)
Jung identified the first half of life as a time to take care of the biological needs of the species (e.g., raising children). It is in the second half of life, according to Jung, that one looks within oneself for the guidance and motivation to fulfill the needs of society and one’s culture. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/13%3A_Carl_Jung/13.04%3A_Personality_Development.txt |
Jung was deeply moved by his ability to help patients, and he took the process of analysis very seriously. This is not to say, however, that he considered a specific process to be necessary. He was suspicious of theoretical assumptions, he focused on each individual in therapy, and was just as likely to adapt Adlerian techniques as he was to adapt Freudian techniques. In fact, he considered general professional experience to be an important aspect of one’s ability to be a good analyst. He did consider training to be very important, and that it should include medical training. He was not opposed to lay analysts (those with a Ph.D., rather than an M.D.), but felt that they should be supervised by a psychiatrist (Jung, 1961).
He built his general system of psychotherapy on four tenets: the psyche is a self-regulating system, the unconscious has creative and compensatory components, the doctor-patient relationship is crucial, and personality growth takes place throughout the lifespan. In addition, the process of psychotherapy involves four stages: confession, elucidation, education, and transformation (see Douglas, 1995). The confession and elucidation stages involve the patient recounting elements of their personal history, dreams, and fantasies, followed by the analyst bringing attention to symptoms, transferences, and attempting to help the patient gain insight on both intellectual and emotional levels. The education stage then involves moving the patient into the realm of an individual, hopefully as an adapted social being. Education focuses mostly on the persona and the ego, whereas confession and elucidation serve the role of exploring the personal unconscious. The education stage also involves trying to provide the patient with realistic options for changing their behavior. The final stage, transformation, was described by Jung as being similar to self-actualization. Also like self-actualization, not every patient (or person) makes it to this stage. Addressing the archetypal image of the self, the image of wholeness, requires working with the whole range of the conscious, personal unconscious, and collective unconscious psyches. The final goal is to inspire the patient to become a uniquely individual self without losing a sense of responsible integrity (the collectiveness inherent in the collective unconscious; see Douglas, 1995).
Since Jung did not want to be tied to any specific technique(s), he incorporated a variety of techniques as appropriate for each patient. Like Freud, Jung experimented with hypnosis early in his career, but discarded the technique as ineffective. He used dream analysis regularly, but did not consider each dream to be necessarily important. Instead, he looked for patterns in dreams over time, particularly recurring dreams. Jung taught his patients to get in touch with their own unconscious psyche through an active imagination technique. This meditative imagery procedure is somewhat similar to that of the Buddhist mindfulness techniques taught by Gotama Buddha some 2,600 years ago, but involves much more active cognition. Jung’s active imagery technique was also extended into actual physical activity. Jung found it helpful, especially with particularly withdrawn patients, to have them act out their thoughts and feeling. Jung would even mimic their movements to help himself better understand what his patients were trying to communicate (Douglas, 1995). The importance of physical states, as reflective of psychological states, was developed in more detail in the somatic psychology theories of Wilhelm Reich. In addition, Jung extended his therapeutic approach to group therapy, family and marital therapy, art therapy, child therapy, and the recurrent nightmares of patients suffering from post-traumatic stress. Through it all, Jung paid special attention to complexes, as representative of the psychic processes of the patient. Once an analyst understands both the symptoms and the complexes of the patient, Jung believed, the analyst has found the key to treatment (Douglas, 1995).
Like Freud, Jung felt that analytical psychology could serve a greater purpose beyond just helping individuals, so he turned his attention to society in several of his books. In Modern Man in Search of a Soul (Jung, 1933), Jung addressed the spiritual problems of our times. A modern person, according to Jung, is one who is whole, aware of their conscious psyche and their unconscious psyche (both personal and collective). Though such people are few and far between, Jung believed he saw evidence of a need for understanding the unconscious psyche. One obvious piece of evidence was the rise of psychology as a discipline at the beginning of the twentieth century. However, in contrast to Jung’s personal preference, psychology has largely moved away spiritual pursuits, with its preference for a scientific evaluation of the human mind. Religion, in Jung’s opinion, has also moved away from spirituality, in favor of the dogma of human rules and regulations. Jung believed that we can learn a great deal from Yoga and Buddhism in terms of blending psychology and spirituality in order to understand the whole nature of human beings. In The Undiscovered Self (Jung, 1957), Jung continues this argument in a more personal way. He suggests that modern psychological approaches to “self-knowledge” are at best superficial, and don’t address the real psychic processes that lead to individuality. As a general condemnation of our obsession with science, he questions any theory based on statistical averages, since those averages say very little at all about the unique units being studied, whether they are people or some other object. In Civilization in Transition (Jung, 1964), the tenth volume of Jung’s collected works, he addresses the problems of American psychology, and what all Westerners can learn from the ancient wisdom of India about studying our own unconscious psyche. The importance of understanding the true and complete nature of our psyche is that until we do we cannot live our lives to the fullest:
Our souls as well as our bodies are composed of individual elements which were all already present in the ranks of our ancestors. The “newness” in the individual psyche is an endlessly varied recombination of age-old components…Once the past has been breached, it is usually annihilated, and there is no stopping the forward motion. But it is precisely the loss of connection with the past, our uprootedness, which has given rise to the “discontents” of civilization and to such a flurry and haste that we live more in the future and its chimerical promises of a golden age than in the present, with which our whole evolutionary background has not yet caught up. (pp. 235-236; Jung, 1961)
13.06: A Final Note on Carl Jung
It can be something of a challenge to view Jung’s work as psychological. It lends itself more readily to, perhaps, the study of the humanities, with elements of medieval pseudo-science, Asian culture, and native religions (an odd combination, to be sure). With titles such as Aion: Researches into the Phenomenology of the Self (Jung, 1959c) and Mysterium Conjunctionis: An Inquiry into the Separation and Synthesis of Psychic Opposites in Alchemy (Jung, 1970), Jung is not exactly accessible without a wide range of knowledge in areas other than psychology. Alchemy was of particular interest to Jung, but not in terms of turning base metals into gold (alchemy is a strange mixture of spirituality and chemistry). Rather, Jung believed that psychology could find its base in alchemy, and that it was the collective unconscious that came forth in the ongoing human effort to understand the nature of matter (Jaffe, 1979; Jung, 1961; Wehr, 1989). He even went so far as to write about flying saucers, the astrological seasons of time, and the prophesies of Nostradamus (Jung, 1959c; Storr, 1983).
And yet, Jung addressed some very important and interesting topics in psychology. His theory of psychological types is reflected in trait descriptions of personality and corresponding trait tests, such as Cattell’s 16-PF and the MMPI. The value Jung placed on mid-life and beyond, based largely on the ancient Vedic stages of life, suggests that one is not doomed to the negative alternative in Erikson’s final psychosocial crises. So Jung’s personal interests, and his career as a whole, straddled the fence between surreal and practical. He may always be best-known for his personal relationship with Freud, brief as it was, but the blending of Eastern and Western thought is becoming more common in psychology. So perhaps Jung himself will become more accessible to the field of psychology, and we may find a great deal to be excited about in his curious approach to psychodynamic theory. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/13%3A_Carl_Jung/13.05%3A_Jungian_Analysis.txt |
Synchronicity - Coincidence or an Experience with Mystical Spirituality?
Many people are deeply religious and many others consider themselves to be just as deeply spiritual, though not connected to any specific religion. As important as religion and spirituality are in the lives of many people, psychology has tended to avoid these topics, primarily because they do not lend themselves readily to scientific investigation. Jung certainly did not avoid these topics, and he studied a wide range of spiritual topics. For example, he wrote the foreword for Richard Wilhelm’s translation of the I Ching (Wilhelm, 1950), he wrote psychological commentary for a translation of The Tibetan Book of the Great Liberation (Evans-Wentz & Jung, 1954), he discussed the psychology of evil in Answer to Job (Jung, 1954), he wrote about Gnostic traditions at length (see Segal, 1992), and one of the volumes of his collected works is entitled Psychology and Religion: West and East (Jung, 1958). In addition to his varied spiritual interests, Jung became interested in psychological phenomena that could not be explained in scientific terms. Such phenomena do not necessarily require a spiritual explanation, but in the absence of any other way to explain them, they are often thought of in spiritual terms. One such topic is synchronicity.
Jung uses the term synchronicity to describe the “coincidence in time of two or more causally unrelated events which have the same or a similar meaning” (Jung & Pauli, 1955). In particular, it refers to the simultaneous occurrence of a particular psychic state with one or more external events that have a meaningful parallel to one’s current experience or state of mind. I would like to share with you two experiences of synchronicity from my own life. Having a Ph.D. in physiological psychology, and having spent a number of years conducting biomedical research, it seems rather strange to be sharing experiences that can be classified as extrasensory perception, or ESP. Jung also found it difficult to address this topic:
…If I have now conquered my hesitation and at last come to grips with my theme, it is chiefly because my experiences of the phenomenon of synchronicity have multiplied themselves over the decades…As a psychiatrist and psychotherapist I have often come up against the phenomena in question and could convince myself how much these inner experiences meant to my patients. In most cases they were things which people do not talk about for fear of exposing themselves to thoughtless ridicule. I was amazed to see how many people have had experiences of this kind and how carefully the secret was guarded. So my interest in this problem has a human as well as a scientific foundation. (pp. 5-6; Jung, in Jung & Pauli, 1955)
Synchronicity Experience #1: In February, 1992, our first son, Mark David Kelland, Jr., died at birth. Later that year, I was traveling across the country, taking a whole week to get to a neuroscience convention in California, and I decided to hike up Wheeler Peak, the highest point in New Mexico (13,161 feet). I arrived a little late in the day, but decided I had enough time to make the climb and get back down off the ridge before dark. I just made it, but still had a few miles to go on the jeep trail down to the parking lot. Along the way, I stopped and looked back up at Wheeler Peak. I turned off my flashlight, and in the dark I could just make out the outline of the mountain against the night sky. I prayed to God for a sign that our son was in Heaven. The instant I said “Amen,” a brilliant shooting star streaked across the sky and descended behind Wheeler Peak! I took it to be the sign I had asked for.
Synchronicity Experience #2: While growing up, we lived next door to Bill and Jackie O’Reilly, who co-owned the corner drugstore in the center of Foxborough, MA. When I was young I mowed their lawn in the summer and shoveled their driveway in the winter. When I was old enough to get a regular job, I asked Mr. O’Reilly for a letter of recommendation for a job at the local newspaper. He declined, saying he wanted me to work at their drugstore. But he didn’t say anything else, until Mrs. O’Reilly told him to give me a job. So, I worked at the drugstore from the age of 15 to 20 years old. I even began college at the same school they had attended: the Massachusetts College of Pharmacy. Although I changed schools and switched my major to psychology, I was always hopeful that the O’Reilly’s would be proud of me. Unfortunately, Bill O’Reilly died a week after I graduated from college. Jackie O’Reilly retired and sold their building, and the old corner drugstore in the center of town ceased to exist.
Eventually I moved away, pursued my career in psychology, got married and had children, and visits to Massachusetts became few and far between. One night, about 25 years after I had worked at the drugstore, I had a very vivid and moving dream. I was standing in the center of Foxborough, looking at the building where the drugstore had been. I was overwhelmed by a profound sense of sadness, sad that things must change with time and cannot remain the same, no matter how much we may long for the past. I awoke from that dream astonished by its sense of reality and its emotional impact. The next morning my mother called me, and told me that Jackie O’Reilly had died during the night! Was it merely a coincidence that I dreamt about O’Reilly’s Pharmacy and felt the sadness of watching time pass away, while Jackie O’Reilly was in reality passing away, or was it something more? There can be no scientific explanation. I searched my mind for anything that might have coincidentally caused me to think about the drugstore the day before, but nothing came to mind except for an alternative explanation, which was not at all scientific. Had Jackie O’Reilly’s spirit passed by and said goodbye, on her way to the great beyond?
In the quote cited above, Jung wrote that he was amazed by how many people have had experiences of synchronicity. The questions I would pose to you are quite simple. Have you ever experienced synchronicity? If you have not, do you consider it possible that such events occur as something more than simple (if improbable) coincidence?
Before dismissing synchronicity as non-scientific, keep in mind the circumstances that led Jung to this theory. In addition to personally knowing Wolfgang Pauli, Jung also knew Nils Bohr and Albert Einstein (both of whom, like Pauli, had won a Nobel Prize in physics). Although these men are considered among the greatest scientists of modern times, Einstein perhaps the greatest, consider some of their theories. For instance, Einstein proposed that time isn’t time, it’s relative, except for the speed of light, which alone is always constant. In recent years, experimental physicists have exceeded the speed of light, broken Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle (which, by definition, couldn’t be broken), and proposed that it might be possible to get something colder than absolute zero. How can we accept things that cannot be observed or proved as scientific, while rejecting something that Jung and many others have observed time and time again? Jung was impressed by the possibility of splitting atoms, and wondered if such a thing might be possible with the psyche. As physics suggested strange new possibilities, Jung held out the same hope for humanity (Progoff, 1973).
Regardless of whether the strangest of Jung’s theories are ever proven right or wrong, at the very least they provide an opportunity for interesting discussions! There also happens to be another well-known person in the history of psychology who has experienced synchronicity and who talked about many of her patients having had out-of-body and near-death experiences: Elisabeth Kubler-Ross. In her book On Children and Death (Kubler-Ross, 1983), Kubler-Ross describes even more serious concerns than Jung about discussing this topic, but as with Jung, she has also met many, many patients who have had these experiences:
…I have been called every possible name, from Antichrist to Satan himself; I have been labeled, reviled, and otherwise denounced…But it is impossible to ignore the thousands of stories that patients - children and adults alike - have shared with me. These illuminations cannot be explained in scientific language. Listening to these experiences and sharing many of them myself, it would seem hypocritical and dishonest to me not to mention them in my lectures and workshops. So I have shared all of what I have learned from my patients for the last two decades, and I intend to continue to do so. (pg. 106; Kubler-Ross, 1983)
discussion question \(1\)
Jung studied and wrote about topics as diverse as alchemy, astrology, flying saucers, ESP, the prophecies of Nostradamus, and synchronicity. Does this make it difficult for you to believe any of his theories? If you don’t believe anything about any of these topics, are you still able to find value in other theories proposed by Jung?
13.S: Chapter Summary
Review of Key Points
• As a child, Jung was introduced to a wide variety of cultural and religious perspectives from around the world. As a result of these experiences, he was open to many different perspectives throughout his career.
• Jung had extremely vivid dreams, many of which he interpreted as visions (or unconscious communications) intended to guide his actions.
• Jung called his approach “analytical psychology” in order to distinguish it from Freud’s “psychoanalysis” and Adler’s “individual psychology.”
• An important starting point for Jung’s theories was the concept of entropy, which proposes an eventual balance of all energy. Jung applied this concept to the psychic energy present in the conscious and unconscious psyches.
• Jung proposed two distinct realms within the unconscious psyche, the personal and the collective.
• According to Jung, the personal unconscious is revealed through its complexes.
• Jung advanced the Word Association Test as a means of examining the complexes contained within the personal unconscious.
• The collective unconscious communicates through archetypal images. Jung believed the most readily observed archetypes are the shadow, the anima, and the animus.
• Another important archetype is the self, the representation of wholeness and the completed development of the personality. The self is often symbolically represented by mandalas.
• Jung developed a framework for recognizing particular personality types. He proposed two attitudes, introversion and extraversion, and four functions, thinking, feeling, sensing, and intuition.
• Jung’s type theory provided the basis for some practical personality tests. The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and the Keirsey Temperament Sorter are both well-known in the field of psychology.
• Jung believed that everyone’s ultimate goal is to fully develop the potential of their personality. Jung called this process individuation.
• Development during the first half of life involves the natural aims of survival and procreation. The second half of life offers the opportunity to seek cultural development and the fulfillment of one’s self.
• Jungian analysis follows a basic series of stages, involving confession, elucidation, education, and transformation. However, Jung suggested it was better to avoid being locked into a rigid procedure. As a result, he utilized many different techniques, based on each individual patient.
• As Freud had before him, Jung developed a grand vision of how analytical psychology might help society as a whole. One unique proposition was that the Western world had much to learn from Eastern cultures.
• Jung’s interest in topics such as alchemy and extrasensory perception did not sit well with colleagues seeking to establish psychology as a scientific discipline. This opposition to Jung remains quite strong today, though Western psychology is broadening its perspective. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/13%3A_Carl_Jung/13.07%3A_Personality_Theory_in_Real_Life.txt |
Yoga and Buddhism are vast subjects, spanning many thousands of years, and they are amazing philosophies. But, are they philosophy or religion? They both certainly have significant religious overtones, and are considered to be religions by many people. Actually, however, they are styles of life that developed in order to help people be more in tune with their religion and with God. Yoga, which means unity, was a practice that developed within the Hindu religion to help Hindus achieve unity with God. So it developed as a practice in one’s daily life that led to religious fulfillment. The Buddha was a Yogi, and did not consider himself to be different than other people. His followers, however, have so fervently held to his teachings that the practice of Buddhism is often viewed as a religion, and over time it became mixed with religious stories and myths, as people tried to fit Buddhism into their traditional culture.
We will look at Yoga and Buddhism as lifestyles, which lead individuals toward a healthy psychological development. We will not be able to avoid the obvious religious and metaphysical overtones, nor should we try. It will actually be quite interesting to compare Yoga and Buddhism to the lifestyle philosophies of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam (which cover at least the traditional religions of most American students), since Judaism, Christianity, and Islam certainly have no shortage of guidelines for living one’s daily life in the service of God. Indeed, Alice Bailey (1927), who has offered an inspiring commentary on the earliest teachings on Yoga, suggests that in order for students to have a complete picture of the fulfillment of the soul they need to have read three books: the Yoga Sutras and the Bhagavad Gita, the philosophy of which will be covered briefly in this chapter, and the New Testament, covered in the next chapter.
Before beginning this chapter and the next one, however, it should be noted that there are many translations of the classic books on Yoga and Buddhism and terminology varies from translation to translation. One must simply accept this, since the only alternative is for each one of us to learn all of the languages in which these books were written. In this chapter, we will only be exploring the basic concepts of these different perspectives on human nature and intentional personality development.
Toward the end of each section we will take a look at how Yoga and Buddhism have influenced America and Western psychology. Quite a lot has been written on this topic, including works by some of the most famous personality theorists (Freud, Jung, Fromm, James, etc.). However, only recently has there been sufficient interest in the field of personality for these discussions to start becoming more common. Since religion and spirituality are an important aspect of positive psychology, which is itself a rapidly growing force in psychology, it is likely that knowledge of the overlap between Yoga, Buddhism, and other spiritual aspects of human nature and personality theory will continue to grow.
14.02: Zen Buddhism in America
Zen Buddhism is probably the best-known school of Buddhism in America due to the influence of D. T. Suzuki, who first visited America in the year 1897. Suzuki was a renowned Buddhist scholar, who wrote extensively on Zen Buddhism and its relationships to such diverse topics as Christian mysticism (Suzuki, 1957) and psychoanalysis, the latter book being co-authored by Erich Fromm (Suzuki et al., 1960). Zen Buddhism has also made its way into popular literature in the United States. The famous “Beat generation” author Jack Kerouac, who had many discussions with D. T. Suzuki (Suzuki taught for a few years at Columbia University, which happened to be Kerouac’s alma mater), wrote a most entertaining book about his own pursuits on the path of Zen called The Dharma Bums (Kerouac, 1958). And there was the immensely popular classic entitled Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, first published in 1974 (Pirsig, 1999), which opened the eyes of a whole new generation of Americans to the philosophy of the Far East.
Buddhism, and Zen Buddhism in particular, is also beginning to have more and more influence on psychotherapy in America today. Although a discussion of therapy techniques is beyond the scope of this chapter, it is becoming easy to find such material. There are books on Zen and psychotherapy (Brazier, 1995; Mruk and Hartzell, 2003), Buddhism and well-being (Brach, 2003), comparisons of psychoanalysis and Buddhism (Epstein, 1995; Suzuki et al., 1960), and a variety of chapters in spiritually oriented handbooks on psychotherapy (e.g., Cooper, 2005; Corbett & Stein, 2005; Crawford, 2005; Finn & Rubin, 2000; Lukoff & Lu, 2005; Roland, 2005; Sharma, 2000; Tan & Johnson, 2005). Not only does this blending of Eastern and Western philosophy promise to expand the horizons and potential effectiveness of psychotherapy, learning more about the different cultural perspectives that led to these different lifestyles will help to prepare psychologists to recognize more quickly and easily the culturally-related issues that are affecting their patients or clients.
Sangha: A Community Practicing Together
The concepts of togetherness, friendship, social support, etc. are certainly well known in the West, despite the fact that Western cultures are generally considered to be individualistic. Adler identified developing friendships as one of three main tasks in life, and the value of social support during times of stress and grief has been well documented. In Yoga and Buddhism these concepts have been central for thousands of years. Buddhists refer to the Three Jewels (also known as the Three Gems or the Three Refuges): the Buddha, the Dharma, and the Sangha. A Buddha is one who is fully enlightened (not just Gotama Buddha), and the Dharma is the way of understanding and love taught by Gotama Buddha. A Sangha is a community of Buddhists who practice the Dharma and seek enlightenment together (Suzuki, 1960; Thich Nhat Hanh, 1995). The Sangha is not, however, just a get-together of companions with similar interests. The Sangha can renew our inspiration and energy, and it can help us to keep practicing when our own motivation wanes (Goldstein & Kornfield, 1987). The energy and motivation we gain from being part of a Sangha can help us to develop Bodhicitta, the altruistic desire to help all people achieve enlightenment. The ceremony to actively generate Bodhicitta within us begins with a series of visualizations in which we imagine Gotama Buddha being with us, surrounded by other Buddhas, great sages, and all sentient beings (Dalai Lama, 2001). Being filled with Bodhicitta makes us a Bodhisattva right away (Thich Nhat Hanh, 1999). This is not simply a belief or devotion, however. Taking refuge in the Sangha is a practice, one that can only take place in the company of others and with their support (Thich Nhat Hanh, 1995).
The Sangha is by no means unique to Buddhism. In Yoga they refer to Satsanga, associating with the truth or with someone virtuous such as a guru (Feuerstein, 2003; Yogananda, 1946). I remember when a monk, and a monk in training, from the Self Realization Fellowship visited the Yoga retreat center I visit. During the evening they offered Satsanga, a brief lesson followed by a question and answer discussion. In this semi-formal setting we were all able to expand our understanding of Yoga and share our interests and experiences. Indeed, some people practicing traditional Yoga or Buddhism consider the guru (or lama, in Tibetan) to be a fourth jewel in which to seek refuge (Feuerstein, 2003).
discussion question \(1\)
Buddhists strongly support a Sangha, a community of believers. Can you imagine practicing Buddhism alone? What about your own personal groups, whether church groups, clubs, friends, family, etc.? Are they supportive? How important are those groups to the way you live your life, and could you imagine your life without them?
A Final Note
This chapter and the one that follows have very religious overtones. So I would like to say a little more about the importance of covering these topics in a personality textbook. Alfred Adler said that if you want to understand someone, look at their style of life. As stated at the outset of this chapter, I have tried to present this material as guides for one’s lifestyle that have developed within different cultures. There are three basic moral codes that influence our lives: community, autonomy, and divinity (see Triandis & Suh, 2002). In collectivistic cultures there is an emphasis on community moral codes, whereas autonomy codes are more influential in individualistic cultures. Both cultures emphasize moral codes related to divinity (as religion or spirituality). If we tried to separate religious culture absolutely from our study of personality, we might very well end up with an academic discipline that misses the richness and wonder of human life. More importantly, what happens to people who ignore spirituality in their own development? Abraham Maslow lamented the defense mechanism of desacralization, the failure of people to consider anything to be truly important and meaningful. Yehudi Menuhin, in his introduction to Light on Yoga by B. K. S. Iyengar (1966), offers a striking impression of those who do not seek harmony with the universe:
What is the alternative? Thwarted, warped people condemning the order of things, cripples criticizing the upright, autocrats slumped in expectant coronary attitudes, the tragic spectacle of people working out their own imbalance and frustration on others. (pg. 12)
I don’t know whether Maslow considered desacralization to be this frightening a possibility, but it certainly gives one reason to consider the value of spiritual aspects of human development, especially since spirituality is one of the cultural universals (Ferraro, 2006a; Murdock, 1945). And given that spirituality is universal, these matters are certainly not unique to Eastern culture. In the next chapter we will consider spiritually guided lifestyle recommendations as they apply to cultures influenced by the Abrahamic religions: Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.
Personality Theory in Real Life: Are You Really You?
We ended the first chapter in this book by asking an interesting question: Who are you? In this chapter, we have addressed the possibility that everything you know about yourself is an illusion, and that even knowing is an illusion. How can this be? The answer may be found, or perhaps not found, in the mystery that is God. The Christian Bible teaches that God’s ways are not Man’s ways. Paramahansa Yogananda provides a marvelous image of the mystery of the Godhead being so far beyond our comprehension that it defies description (Yogananda, 1946); and Dante’s awesome description of the appearance of the divine essence in Paradiso is difficult to envision, even as one reads Dante’s words (in Milano, 1947). Perhaps some things are beyond our comprehension.
How then, should we proceed to live our life? Based on the concept of Karma, our past actions will influence our future experiences. Consider things you have done in your life. Have you regretted some of them? Did they seem out of character for you? Try to determine if unfortunate events followed those actions you regret. On the positive side, are there things you have done that make you proud or happy? Have those things involved other people, or were they done for other people? Try to determine whether those good things you have done resulted in favorable consequences for you and for others.
Now, here comes the tricky part. When you have done good things, do they feel more like you than the bad things did? If the answer is yes, it may be that you have begun to touch something special within yourself. You are responsible for both the good things and the bad things you have done in this life. But perhaps the good things feel better, feel more like you, because they begin to connect you with your transcendental self, that spark of the divine within you, which may be called spirit or soul. Thinking this way is a deep and powerful challenge, which requires you to have some faith in yourself. Meditate on this, and see what happens!
14.03: Historical Description of Yoga
Yoga dates back thousands of years. Yoga as we know it today stems primarily from the writings of Patanjali. Patanjali was one of the first to write down an ancient oral tradition, in his Yoga Sutras (the rules of Yoga), sometime between 800 B.C. and 300 A.D. (though some claim it is much older). Divided into four short books, they contain a profound philosophy that continues to have significant influence today. There are many branches of Yoga now, but the type that was brought to the West, specifically to the United States by Paramahansa Yogananda in the 1920s (Yogananda, 1946), traces its roots directly to the Yoga of Patanjali.
14.04: The Yoga Sutras of Patanjali
An early translation of the Yoga Sutras lists 195 sutras in the four books, totaling only sixteen pages (Bailey, 1927). And yet, the philosophy contained within them is amazing, although somewhat difficult to understand without having prepared oneself for this very different Eastern philosophy. A more Americanized version of the Yoga Sutras has recently been provided by Hartranft (2003), along with a section by section interpretation of the text.
The first verse of the first book states very clearly what Yoga is about. “Aum. The following instruction concerneth the Science of Union.” (Yoga Sutras I:1; Bailey, 1927). Aum, or Om, is the sound of creation, which many Christians may relate to the Word of God in the New Testament (John 1:1; Holy Bible, 1962). The union refers to the union of the individual with the divine creator. Don’t be confused by the fact that Hindus believe in many gods. In reality, they view those lesser gods as aspects or manifestations of the one true God, much as Christians believe in one God but refer often to Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (the Holy Trinity) and the angels and demons (including Satan).
The second and third verses then set the stage for the purpose of practicing Yoga: restraining one’s inquisitive nature and controlling the mind, so that we might see ourselves realistically. The primary way in which we control the mind is to meditate. The remaining verses describe the nature of man, the universe, and the divine, the proper practice of Yoga through meditation, the challenges one is likely to face along the way, and the marvelous benefits of Yoga. Thousands of books, describing many different approaches to Yoga, have followed these simple and straightforward guidelines. No matter which type of Yoga one may choose to study, it would be valuable for anyone to return to this primary source of information to be reminded of the basic goal and purpose of Yoga. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/14%3A_Yoga_and_Buddhism_as_Personality_Development_Paths/14.01%3A_Chapter_Introduction.txt |
The Bhagavad Gita, or “Song of the Blessed One,” is a fascinating story, with great religious significance if one accepts it at face value (Mitchell, 2000). It consists primarily of a conversation between Krishna, a great Avatar or divine incarnation, and Arjuna, a great warrior, on the eve of a battle. The battle is a civil war, with noble warriors and relatives split between both sides. Arjuna decides that no good can come of killing so many people in this battle, and he decides not to fight. Krishna, who is driving Arjuna’s chariot, instructs Arjuna in Yoga as he discusses what is right both for Arjuna and for all people. Many of the principles of Yoga derive from what Krishna told Arjuna, thus it is believed by many that these Yoga principles come from the mouth of God. This is similar to what Jews, Christians, and Muslims believe about the Torah, the Bible, and the Koran: that they are divinely inspired texts.
My favorite quote from the Bhagavad Gita refers directly to the self:
The Self is a friend for him who masters himself by the Self;
but for him who is not self-mastered, the self is the cruelest foe.
(pg. 89; Mitchell, 2000)
This quote suggests that we can be our own best friend, or our own worst enemy. Indeed, Krishna tells Arjuna that what he must do is to be himself. It is only through his own actions that Arjuna can fulfill his potential. However, Arjuna must not remain attached to the consequences of his actions; he must simply act and allow the universe to move forward as it will. Only by truly understanding the nature of the universe, and the nature of ourselves, can we properly make this choice. The practice of Yoga helps us to see this reality, and the Bhagavad Gita helps to describe the essential practices.
Figure \(1\)
The altar prepared for the ceremony when the author was initiated into Kriya Yoga.
Together, the Bhagavad Gita and the Yoga Sutras contain all of the basic information on Yoga we will explore in this chapter. There is actually a fair amount of overlap between the books, but it is unclear which one may have been written first. Most scholars believe that the Bhagavad Gita was written between 500 B.C. and 100 A.D. (Mitchell, 2000), which falls right in the middle of when Patanjali is believed to have written down the Yoga Sutras. Since both philosophies seem to come from much older sources, it may well be that they owe their commonalities to some older tradition that can no longer be specifically identified.
Placing Yoga in Context: An Ancient Plan for Self Development
Yoga is much older than any other theory described in this book, with the exception of those parts of other theories that were borrowed from Yoga and Buddhism. The ancient Vedas, which provide much of the mythological and philosophical basis for Hinduism, are 4,000 to 5,000 years old (placing them amongst the oldest recorded literature in the world). The Yoga Sutras of Patanjali and the Bhagavad Gita, which provide the basic teachings of traditional Yoga, were written as early as 600 B.C. (though there is little consensus on exactly when). Kriya-Yoga, the yoga believed by many to be the original Yoga of Patanjali, was lost to the world for many centuries, until it was reintroduced by Lahiri Mahasaya in 1861. Yoga continues to evolve today, with many different styles being introduced and revised, both in the East and the West.
Although this ancient philosophy may not seem relevant to modern personality theory, it has actually been part of psychology from the very beginning. Most notably, Jung and Rogers were clearly influenced by their travels to India and China, respectively. The knowledge of Yoga and Buddhism they developed as a result of those and other experiences helped to shape their personality theories. Fromm also examined how psychoanalysis and Buddhist meditation compare to each other. Today, as positive psychology examines topics such as happiness and well being, and as spiritual psychotherapists examine the important role that spirituality plays in the lives of many people, those practices that Yoga, Buddhism, and other spiritual disciplines have in common are being examined more closely by psychologists. In the next chapter we will examine similar spiritual disciplines that exist within the Jewish, Christian, and Muslim traditions.
Spirit, Nature, and Consciousness
In the metaphysics of Yoga there is believed to be a duality between spirit and nature. Spirit is pure consciousness; nature is the opposite of spirit. Human beings are a combination of spirit and nature. The body and mind come from nature, but the transcendental self comes from spirit. A key point here is that it is the transcendental self that comes from spirit, not the self we are aware of every day. Our thoughts, feelings, sensations, indeed our mind itself, are all the result of neural activity in our brain, and our brain is part of our body. Thus, our awareness is not our consciousness.
Our true self, the transcendental self, is a temporary manifestation of Spirit in essence. The great mistake in our lives is to confuse our body and mind with who we really are, to believe that this body and this mind are our self. The practice of Yoga, however, teaches us to still our minds, to eliminate all thought and sensation, so that we might be in union with our transcendental self and the universal spirit. Once we have accomplished this task, by subjugating our natural tendency to think and restraining our mind itself, we will know who and what we really are (Yoga Sutras I:2,3 [Bailey, 1927]). This is not an easy task, but it has a great reward. As Sri Yukteswar told Yogananda:
The soul expanded into Spirit remains alone in the region of lightless light, darkless dark, thoughtless thought, intoxicated with its ecstasy of joy in God’s dream of cosmic creation (Yogananda, 1946; pgs. 489-490).
William James, America’s foremost psychologist, is best known for his theory on the stream of consciousness. According to James, it is the continuity of consciousness that defines our self. This is in direct contradiction to Eastern philosophies, which consider the conscious mind to be derived from the natural world, and therefore only an illusion. Eastern philosophies consider the transcendental self to be real, but obscured from us by the distraction of the so-called conscious mind. Can we find some compromise between these points of view? No! However, such a contradiction would probably not bother James. James (1892) did talk about the soul, the transcendental ego, and spirit as possible sources for the conscious self, but considered that possibility to be outside the realm of psychological study
discussion Question \(1\)
Do you believe in a transcendental self (whether you call it self, spirit, soul…whatever)? What does this make you feel about your physical body? As for all of nature can you really believe it is just an illusion?
Karma
Karma is a difficult concept to grasp. We generally think of karma as the consequences of things we have done wrong, but karma does not apply simply to our misbehavior, it applies to all of our actions. An easy to understand discussion of karma has been written by Goldstein and Kornfield (2001). The law of karma can be understood on two levels. First, karma refers to cause and effect. Whenever we perform an action, we experience some consequence at a later time. The second level of karma may be more important, as it refers to our state of mind at the time when we performed the action in question. Our intentions, or the motives behind an action, determine the nature of the consequences we experience. The importance of this point is that we control the nature of our karma. This, of course, has important implications for personality development. Once we understand the karmic law, it is only natural that we should begin to plant the seeds of healthy karma. In other words, we should be inclined to act only in ways that are healthy and socially beneficial, so that the consequences we then experience will lead to greater well-being for ourselves.
The second level of karma, that it is our intentions and motivation that affect the outcome of our lives, seems quite similar to cognitive theories in psychology. Cognitive psychology focuses on the nature of our thought, and problems often arise when we are trapped in a series of automatic thoughts that create problems for us. In other words, when we view the world negatively, we react in negative and maladaptive ways. Similarly, our past karma influences the karma we create for the future. If we think and act in negative ways, we create negative karma, but it is also true that if we think and act in positive ways we create positive karma. Cognitive therapy resembles much of what is written in the East about recognizing the cause-and-effect pattern that our karma traps us within. Successful cognitive therapy is something like enlightenment: when we realize the truth of what we are doing we have a chance to break that pattern and move in a healthy direction.
discussion question \(2\)
Karma refers to the cosmic law of cause and effect, the idea that our past actions will someday affect our current and future lives. Do you believe this, and can you provide any examples of this happening to you?
The Three Principles of Creation
Would it be possible for us to avoid or circumvent the law of karma by remaining inactive? Sometimes many of us do just want to get away from everything and everyone. However, social withdrawal is often an early sign of psychological distress or mental illness, suggesting that this is generally not a healthy action. According to Yoga, all nature is composed of three aspects called the gunas: rajas, tamas, and sattva. According to Krishna, as recorded in the Bhagavad Gita, the three gunas “bind to the mortal body the deathless embodied Self” (pg. 158; Mitchell, 2000). Rajas (born of craving) binds us to action, tamas (born of ignorance) binds us to dullness, and sattva (untainted and luminous) binds us to knowledge and joy. Only through faithful Yoga practice can an individual transcend the gunas and achieve unity with God. Only then will the individual be free from any attachment to action and free from the law of karma.
Another important and practical question that arises from an understanding of the three gunas is: what should we eat? In America we generally associate being vegetarian with practicing Yoga or being a Buddhist. But is there a good reason for this? Everything is made from the three gunas, but in different proportions. So we might say that a hot, spicy dish like Gang Garee from Thailand (a personal favorite) is predominantly rajas. Heavy food, with a thick sauce or gravy is predominantly tamas. Fruits and vegetables, however, are lighter and more refreshing; they are predominantly sattva. So a vegetarian diet should increase the relative amount of sattva in our body, thus making us a better person. This is just like the old saying: “You are what you eat!” This goes beyond diet, however, since diet only directly affects the body. What about the mind? Everything we take in is comprised of the three gunas: words and ideas that we hear, music, the emotions expressed by people we spend time with, and so on (Vivekananda, 1955a). It is important not only that we eat well, but also that we spend time in relaxing and healthy environments, associate with good people, and generally try to cultivate a life that moves more toward sattva than the other gunas.
The Guru or Teacher
Spirit vs. nature, consciousness, karma, the three gunas, it can all seem very strange to those of us who did not grow up with these concepts. Another common source of confusion is the distinction between the terms yogi and guru. A yogi is anyone who practices Yoga. A guru is a teacher, someone advanced in Yoga and capable of leading others on the path. A true guru is typically revered in the East, and in English they are often referred to as prophets, or saints.
Many believe that a guru is essential to the practice of Yoga. The practice of Yoga can be difficult, and the principles can be confusing. Some argue that only through initiation by a guru can an individual truly and correctly use mantras such as Om. Otherwise, the would-be student of Yoga will not know the correct frequency or nature of the mantra. Perhaps most important, though, is the spiritual consciousness provided by the guru. As described by Yogananda:
…If I entered the hermitage in a worried or indifferent frame of mind, my attitude imperceptibly changed. A healing calm descended at the mere sight of my guru. Each day with him was a new experience in joy, peace, and wisdom. Never did I find him deluded or emotionally intoxicated with greed, anger, or human attachment. (pg. 137; Yogananda, 1946)
Another aspect involved in the importance of a guru is his or her lineage. In Western culture we are very individualistic, so it is common for each new teacher or leader to try establishing a new beginning. In the collectivist cultures of the East, however, they pay more attention to the earlier teachers of current teachers. Establishing this lineage is very important, not to suggest that one line of Yoga is better than another, but to connect the past to the present and, presumably, the present to the future. Recent research in the field of positive psychology has suggested that such a balanced time perspective, emphasizing the past, present, and future, is an important facet of psychological well-being (Boniwell, 2005; Boniwell & Zimbardo, 2003).
discussion question \(3\)
In Eastern cultures they talk about gurus, in Western cultures we often hear about mentors. Do the words “guru” and “mentor” mean the same thing to you? Have you ever been inspired by someone you thought of as a guru or mentor? | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/14%3A_Yoga_and_Buddhism_as_Personality_Development_Paths/14.05%3A_The_Bhagavad_Gita.txt |
There are many schools of Yoga, and the styles depend somewhat on which translations and which authors you happen to read. In her discourse accompanying the translation of Patanjali’s Yoga Sutras, Bailey refers to four types of Yoga that developed as humanity developed (1927). In chronological order they are Hatha-Yoga, Laya-Yoga, Bhakti-Yoga, and Raja-Yoga (also known as Kriya-Yoga, see Yogananda [1946]). Feuerstein (2003) adds three more to what he describes as the seven major branches of the tree of Hindu Yoga: Jnana-Yoga, Karma-Yoga, and Mantra-Yoga.
The purpose of each of these schools of Yoga, in their own way, is to guide the individual toward the fulfillment of their life. This fulfillment is not necessarily enlightenment, or what we in the West may think of as heaven, but may instead be preparation for steadily improving lives over subsequent reincarnations. In accordance with the concept of karma, if we do our best to live this life as a good and faithful person, then in our future lives we will benefit from the seeds of good karma we have planted in this life. As humans we can achieve enlightenment in this life, but we are not doomed to eternal damnation if we don’t quite make it. So, Yoga offers us a hopeful guide toward being a good person, and teaches ways in which to continue our personal growth.
Hatha-Yoga
Hatha-Yoga is the Yoga of power, referring primarily to the Kundalini energy and prana (vital energy) within the body. The practices of Hatha-Yoga are intended to strengthen and prepare the body for controlling the life forces within. An important aspect is the practice of asanas, the postures that are often misidentified as being Hatha-Yoga itself. However, traditional Hatha-Yoga also involves celibacy, a vegetarian diet, breathing and concentration exercises (meditation), and cleansing the nasal passages and the alimentary canal.
Laya-Yoga
Laya-Yoga focuses on meditative absorption of the psyche or mind to the point of ecstatic realization, or samadhi. As an advancement from Hatha-Yoga, Laya-Yoga leaves behind the physical focus of Hatha-Yoga for a highly developed state of meditation in which one’s sense of self dissolves into transcendental self-realization (i.e., realization of the true self, the transcendental spirit).
Bhakti-Yoga
Bhakti-Yoga is the Yoga of devotion or love, in which the force of human emotion is channeled toward the Divine. This devotion develops along nine stages, the first being to listen to the names of God. The second is to chant praises in honor of the Lord, which is why chanting is so common in the practice of Yoga and Buddhism. The remaining stages involve a variety of practices or rituals. As simple as the first two stages may seem, together they have given rise to a special form of musical prayer: Kirtan, the practice of singing the many names of God (see the section on spiritual music below).
Bakti-Yoga is more than just a simple devotion to atman (the Supreme Soul that is God). It is a deep, genuine searching for the Lord that begins, continues, and ends in love (Vivekananda, 1955a). The secret of Bhakti-Yoga is that the great sages of ancient India realized that passionate human emotions are not wrong in themselves, they are not to be avoided and repressed, but rather they should be carefully harnessed and turned toward a higher spiritual direction. This is the direction of God, and the true nature of Bhakti-Yoga. However, there can also be dark side to Bhakti-Yoga, among those who have not turned toward a higher direction. Individuals who become trapped in the lowest level of Bhakti-Yoga can become religious fanatics. The only way they see to truly love one ideal is to hate all others (Vivekananda, 1955a). Religious fanaticism has caused great torment throughout the history of the human race, but it should never be confused with the true ideals of religion or spirituality.
Raja-Yoga or Kriya-Yoga
Raja-Yoga, or Royal Yoga, combines the principles, though not necessarily the practices, of other forms of Yoga and thus supersedes them all (Bailey, 1927). Raja-Yoga is that which was originally taught by Patanjali in the Yoga Sutras. It is also known by the name Kriya-Yoga, and it is this term that Yogananda used when bringing Yoga to the United States in 1920. According to Yogananda, this form of Yoga is more than just a practice developed by a great man. Patanjali is believed to be one of the ancient avatars of India, making this form of Yoga a direct divine inspiration (Yogananda, 1946). Furthermore, this form of Yoga was lost to humanity for centuries, until another avatar named Babaji revealed it again to the Indian guru named Lahiri Mahasaya in 1861 (Yogananda, 1946). Of particular interest to Americans may be the fact that Babaji inspired Yogananda to come to America, through Babaji’s disciples Lahiri Mahasaya and Sri Yukteswar. Thus, Yoga came to the United States, as well as the rest of the Western world, at the behest of Babaji, a divine incarnation believed by many to be as significant as Gotama Buddha or Jesus Christ!
Jnana-Yoga
Jnana-Yoga is the Yoga of wisdom or knowledge. It is a rigorous discipline in which one uses the intellect to discern reality from maya. Maya is often misunderstood, and described as the cosmic delusion that our Self is this body in this life. However, Swami Vivekananda has offered an excellent explanation of what maya really is: simply a matter of fact statement about the nature of the world and of man (Vivekananda, 1955b). The philosophy from which our understanding of maya comes is neither optimistic nor pessimistic, but it does challenge our basic understanding of everything we believe is real. There is no good without evil, no happiness without misery, no beauty without ugliness. Consequently, there will never be a perfect world, a world in which there is no suffering or death. Even the basic existence of the world must be considered in the context of no-existence. This strange and challenging philosophy is described by Vivekananda in the following passage:
What, then, does the statement that the world exists mean? It really means that the world has no existence. What, again, does the statement that the world has no existence mean? It means that it has no absolute existence: it exists only in relation to my mind, to your mind, and to the mind of everyone else. We see this world with the five senses, but if we had another sense, we would see in it something more. If we had yet another sense, it would appear as something still different. It has, therefore, no real existence; it has no unchangeable, immovable, infinite existence. Nor can it be said to have non-existence, since it exists and we have to work in and through it. It is a mixture of existence and non-existence. (pg. 27-28).
As you can see from this passage, Jnana-Yoga requires not only a keen intellect, but an open-minded willingness to embrace a different perspective. This perspective had a strong influence on the development of Chinese religion and philosophy, and similar concepts can be found in the famous Tao Te Ching of Lao Tsu, which provides the basis for Taoism (Lao Tsu, c. 600 B.C.).
The question of whether or not we recognize the reality of our world is central to cognitive psychology. In cognitive therapy, it is taken for granted that an individual does not view their environment realistically, that automatic thoughts of a maladaptive nature turn each situation into another instance of the person’s typical problem. With the help of an objective therapist, the individual may come to realize the nature of their maladaptive thought processes, and learn to control and re-evaluate their thoughts and feelings, so that they can react appropriately to other people and to new situations. In a similar way, the principles of Yoga, under the guidance of a guru, can help us to understand our world and the role we play in determining our future (creating good or bad karma).
Karma-Yoga
Because we are inseparably compelled by the gunas (the three aspects of existence), existence involves action. Karma-Yoga teaches us to act without attachment to the consequences of our actions and without any expectations. But it is not enough to control our actions, we must understand why we are controlling our mind. As Krishna tells Arjuna in the third chapter of the Bhagavad Gita:
He who controls his actions, but lets his mind dwell on sense-objects, is deluding himself and spoiling his search for the deepest truth. The superior man is he whose mind can control his senses; with no attachment to results, he engages in the yoga of action (pgs. 62-63).
The practical values of Karma-Yoga are many. According to Vivekananda (1955a), the true character of a person can be seen by watching their actions. Those who work for work’s sake, just because good will come of it, and who have given up any sense of self or attachment to their works, has achieved the ideal of Karma-Yoga. As difficult as it may be to take control of one’s life, in other words to direct one’s own karma, it can be done. If we learn to look at our past and present bad circumstances simply as facts that have happened, it is really our own opinion that allows those circumstances to affect our self-image (Schied, 1986). If we can look past those negative circumstances, indeed even look for the positive aspects in all situations, we can begin to act in positive ways that will create good karma for our future.
“In the end, these things matter most: How well did you love?
How fully did you live? How deeply did you learn
To let go?” – Kornfield, 1994
Mantra-Yoga
Mantra-Yoga is the Yoga of sound or vibration. The universe is believed to be in constant vibration. Om, the most sacred mantra, is believed to be the word representing the fundamental vibration of the universe. As such, meditating while chanting Om is believed to have almost magical transformative powers over the body and mind (Feuerstein, 2003). It is also common to chant short prayer phrases, such as Om Namah Shivaya (I bow to Shiva), the Hare Krishna mantra (the mahamantra, or great mantra), and Om Mani Padme Hum (a Tibetan Buddhist chant that has no direct translation). The CD Pilgrim Heart, by Krishna Das (2002), offers both insightful description and a modern musical presentation of some of these chants.
Connections Across Cultures: Franchised Yoga Centers in America
If you take a look at the magazine section of a major bookstore, you will find several magazines devoted to the practice of Yoga. In those magazines, you can find dozens of Yoga training centers and retreats. Many colleges and universities in America offer courses in Yoga. Yoga is very much a part of life for many Americans. But has it made its way into the mainstream? There is some interesting evidence to suggest that if it hasn’t yet, it will very soon. The days when Yoga centers were only individual operations, run by a small group of devoted yogis, appear to be over.
In 2003, internet entrepreneurs George Lichter and Rob Wrubel (formerly with the search engine Ask Jeeves International) were looking to move into a new business venture. When the two men realized that both were practicing Yoga (primarily the physical aspects of Hatha-Yoga), they decided to create a chain of Yoga centers across America. Beginning with the purchase of an established yoga center in Los Angeles, they have plans to expand to a variety of major cities, and ultimately to smaller locations around the country. Although a business model may fit well with American capitalism, can such an approach fit with Yoga? They hope that by having the company focus on the business aspects of running a Yoga studio, the instructors can be freed to focus on teaching Yoga to their students.
Many Americans still view Yoga as an odd curiosity and, primarily, as a form of exercise. Before I first began going to a Yoga retreat center I wondered if it would be too strange for me (even though I knew someone who had been going there for years). I had a wonderful time, and have returned there many times. But, like so many others, it is a retreat center all by itself. As Yoga centers based on the model of chain stores, with some consistency in terms of the services and environment they offer, spread across America, I think more people will take a chance on beginning to examine this curious path toward relaxation and peace of mind. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/14%3A_Yoga_and_Buddhism_as_Personality_Development_Paths/14.06%3A_Pathways_to_Personal_Growth_-_Schools_of_Yoga.txt |
Patanjali’s five hindrances refer to conditions that block our personal development. The hindrances are identified as: avidya (ignorance), sense of personality, desire, hate, and sense of attachment. It may seem confusing to us that a sense of personality is a hindrance to personal development. Isn’t the goal in life to become aware of and comfortable with our true selves? Unfortunately, from the perspective of Yoga, that belief is the result of the single most challenging hindrance, the one that is the source of all other difficulties: ignorance. The problem, according to Patanjali, is that our sense of personality is a mistaken identification of our mental awareness, a product of our brain (nature), with our true and transcendental self (spirit). Specifically, the fifth Sutra of Book II states that “avidya is the condition of confusing the permanent, pure, blissful and the Self with that which is impermanent, impure, painful and the not-Self” (Bailey, 1927; pg. 115). The latter point refers specifically to the duality between our true self, that temporary manifestation of spirit in nature, with the body/mind of this world that will cease to exist when we die (though death does not really exist in the same sense in the perspective of Yoga).
It is also something of a problem to use the term attachment in a negative way. In Western psychology attachment is typically used to refer to the bonding between parent and child. Thus, we consider attachment to be a necessary condition of healthy development. In Yoga, however, any form of attachment is a delusion in which we consider elements of the natural world to be of importance. Only the universal spirit is perspective, even the love of a parent for a child is a delusion that keeps us attached to this world, and would therefore be a hindrance to our union with God. Actually, things are not as bleak as that might make them seem at first. Since there is only one universal spirit, we and our children, indeed everyone everywhere, is one and the same universal spirit, both past and present (hence the meaninglessness of death). So it is not wrong to love, it is only a mistake to think that love for a person or love for a thing is the most important thing in life. What is important is to practice Yoga in order to overcome these hindrances, to escape the laws of karma, to quiet the mind and transcend the natural world. Then one will know their union with God and all creation.
discussion question \(1\)
According to Patanjali, the single greatest obstacle to personal growth is avidya (ignorance). How has your education helped you to grow as a person? Have you taken any courses specifically designed to help you with personal development? What plans, if any, do you have for continuing your education after you finish school?
Classic Indian Stages of Life
According to the Vedic teaching of ancient India, each Hindu male should progress through four stages of life: student, householder, hermit or forest-dweller, and finally renunciant. At a young age the child would be sent to live with a guru, so that he might devote himself to spiritual development, studying the Vedas (ancient Indian texts that provide much of the philosophy, practices, rituals and other guides for Hindu life), and mastering Yoga. Then the young man returns home, takes a wife (usually an arranged marriage), runs the family business, and basically takes care of the business of maintaining the Indian society. As the man grows older, and his children become ready to take over as the householders, he becomes a hermit, once again devoting himself to Yoga. Finally, the old man leaves society completely behind and focuses himself entirely on unity with God. For Hindu females all that can be said is that, unfortunately, this philosophy comes from an old and patriarchal society. There are no classic stages of life for women in the Vedic teachings.
These four stages are an ideal of the traditional Hindu life. As in our own culture, both personal and family values change over time. Many Hindus do not follow these ancient ways. Though this style of life is certainly not necessary for the practice of Yoga, one can see the advantage of beginning and ending one’s life with the sole purpose of practicing and mastering Yoga. Another interesting issue raised by these stages of life is the importance of middle age. In America we often hear about the so-called midlife crisis. There is some debate as to whether the midlife crisis exists, and whether it exists for both men and women, but in traditional Indian culture there is a profound difference: middle age is not the beginning of a decline toward old age and death, but rather a time to focus on the future and one’s enlightenment. Therefore, middle age should be a particularly hopeful and peaceful time. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/14%3A_Yoga_and_Buddhism_as_Personality_Development_Paths/14.07%3A_Obstacles_to_Personal_Growth-_Patanjali%27s_Five_Hindrances.txt |
Although many different gurus have come to America, teaching many different types of Yoga, perhaps the two most influential have been Paramahansa Yogananda and Maharishi Mahesh Yogi. Yogananda established the Self-Realization Fellowship (SRF) in 1920 (Yogananda, 1946). Yogananda was one of the first gurus to come to America, and the SRF may be the oldest continuing school of Yoga in the West. Headquartered in California, SRF is dedicated to combining the Yoga of old with the predominant religion of the new world: Christianity. One of Yogananda’s most important works is The Second Coming of Christ, a two volume discussion of the Christian Gospels viewed from a Yogic perspective (Yogananda, 2004a,b). The basic premise of this work is that God is within us as the Christ consciousness, it is His presence that gives us life, and when we realize that He is within our selves (thus, the name Self-Realization) we cannot help but lead a better life. As strange as this may seem to many Christians, blending religious and philosophical beliefs is commonly accepted in Eastern cultures. They seek the best points of view in a variety of perspectives, and try to live according to those beliefs that are common and which benefit everyone in their community. More information on the SRF can be found on their website (listed at the end of the chapter).
In 1958, a guru named Maharishi Mahesh Yogi began formally teaching Transcendental Meditation (TM; Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, 1963). TM became a very popular meditation technique in America, and as many as 6 million people around the world have learned the TM technique (this website is also listed at the end of the chapter). Yogi’s first book on TM was originally entitled The Science of Being and the Art of Living, and he stated very clearly the purpose of life: “Expansion of happiness is the purpose of life…” (pg. 64) and “When one does not live a normal life or a life using his full potential, he feels miserable and tense and suffers in many ways” (pg. 69). This reference to the necessity of using one’s full potential sounds very similar to Roger’s and Maslow’s concept of self-actualization (or perhaps self-realization as described in the preceding paragraph). As is true of the SRF, the TM program does not advocate or reject any organized religion. Instead, TM is presented as a means to fulfill one’s life, regardless of the situation in which one is living.
Connections with Western Religious Practice
Contemplative Prayer
Consider the following quote: “Listen carefully, my son, to the master’s instructions, and attend to them with the ear of your heart. This is advice from a father who loves you; welcome it, and faithfully put it into practice. The labor of obedience will bring you back to him from whom you had drifted through the sloth of disobedience. This message of mine is for you, then, if you are ready to give up your own will…” This sounds like the words of a guru, especially the part about giving up your own will. Doesn’t that sound like the Yoga philosophy of transcending the mind in order to be in union with the spirit? Actually, this was written by St. Benedict, a Catholic monk who lived from 480-547 (Fry, 1982). In fact, this is the very beginning of the Rule of St. Benedict, and it is interesting to note that the very first word is “Listen…” Remember the first stage of devotion in Bhakti-Yoga? It is not easy to listen, and listening intently with our whole being is something that takes a lifetime to master (deWaal, 1984). Naturally, it is easier to listen when we are focused, and either the practice of Yoga or contemplative prayer can help to still our mind, to tune out the distractions of our daily lives, so that we can listen to and/or be in union with God.
During the twentieth century, a Benedictine monk named John Main (1926-1982) tried to help the Christian world rediscover meditation and contemplative prayer. In addition to his own efforts, he inspired the creation of the World Community for Christian Meditation, an international community that practices and teaches meditation in the Christian tradition (see the website list at the end of the chapter). As is true of many practitioners of meditation, Fr. Main recommended meditating twice a day, once in the morning and once in the evening. A marvelous collection of Fr. Main’s writings has been compiled by Paul Harris (2003). The readings are quite short, and there is one for each day of the year. They can be used as a starting point for contemplation and prayer on the day assigned for each reading (if one chooses to follow that pattern). We will cover Christian mysticism, meditation, and contemplative prayer in more detail in the next chapter.
Spiritual Music
Another interesting comparison between Eastern and Western spiritualism is the use of music and song. The importance of chanting was mentioned above, but now we will take a closer look at the importance of music. The Yoga of Patanjali focuses on withdrawing from all sensory experience. The goal of meditation is to focus and then clear the mind, so that one is no longer distracted by the events of this world. However, in Bhakti-Yoga, the Yoga of devotion, some yogis embrace the fullness of refined human emotion (Mandala Publishing Group, 2000). Music is one of the best ways to fully express our emotional connection with all that is around us. A special type of musical prayer called Kirtan grew out of the first two stages of Bhakti-Yoga. Kirtan refers to the practice of singing the many names of God (including Goddess names). In the practice of Kirtan, the words that are sung are typically short mantras, and a wide variety of emotional states can be accommodated. Regardless of how one feels when beginning Kirtan, the practice of Kirtan can lead to a transformational, meditative state that “creates a safe, calm haven for the flower of the heart to unfold” (Jai Uttal, 2003). A wonderful CD of Kirtan, including an explanation of this practice in English, has been recorded by Jai Uttal (2003). If you would like to learn more about Kirtan, especially if you are interested in reducing stress in your life, this CD is highly recommended.
Although most Christian church services include some music, few are thought of as profoundly inspirational and emotionally moving as the gospel choirs associated with Black churches, especially those in the Southern United States. Much of this music is rooted in the spirituals sung by American slaves. Much like Kirtan as a practice within Yoga, the spirituals helped to hold onto an identity shared by Africans brought to America as slaves. The music was not strictly religious, but religious themes were common. More importantly, the spirituals helped to connect the slaves to their African ancestry, and to provide a context within which they could share the lives they had come to know in a new country (Cone, 1972; Lovell, Jr., 1972). As slavery came to an end in the United States, prejudice and discrimination certainly did not. On one hand the spirituals gave rise to the blues, but on the other hand they gave rise to distinctly religious gospel music (Boyer and Yearwood, 1995; Broughton, 1985). Gospel music can be so passionate that it has been described as “hinting at a vocal imperative which was said to induce religious convulsions in their audiences…” (Broughton, 1985). Perhaps it should not be surprising that Black gospel music is so deeply emotional, since it arose from a group of people who had been slaves, and were still suffering from rampant discrimination in a country that claimed to hold freedom above all else. Although such raw emotion is not common to Kirtan, it is still deeply passionate for those who feel its intimate connection to the universal spirit.
discussion question \(1\)
Using music during prayer or religious services has a long and rich history. Many of our social gatherings are centered on music. How has music influence your life? Do you listen to inspirational music when you feel a need to clear your mind and relax, or do you listen to lively and entertaining music to enhance the enjoyment of being with family and/or friends? | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/14%3A_Yoga_and_Buddhism_as_Personality_Development_Paths/14.08%3A_Yoga_in_America-_The_Self-Realization_Fellowship_and_Transcendental.txt |
Siddhattha Gotama
Siddhattha Gotama is recognized as the Buddha, but this is technically incorrect. Anyone can be a Buddha, there were many before Gotama Buddha, many after, and more to come. Indeed, Siddhattha Gotama had lived many lives before he was born into that earthly identity (if, of course, you believe in such things), and this had an important impact on his life. According to legend, Dipankara Buddha foretold that Siddhattha Gotama would be born as a prince in the kingdom of the Shakyas (so he is also referred to as Prince Shakyamuni and as Shakyamuni Buddha), and that in that lifetime he would become a Buddha. Sometime around the fifth or sixth century B.C., Prince Shakyamuni was born. Not wanting his son to leave the kingdom, the king indulged his son with every sensual pleasure known to man. The king also protected his son from knowing the unpleasant realities of life (disease, death, etc.). However, the prince’s destiny was set. Prince Shakyamuni decided he wanted to see the kingdom. In order to prevent the prince from seeing the reality of life, the king ordered that everything in the city should be cleaned and decorated and everyone should be on their best behavior. However, four heavenly beings appeared to Prince Shakyamuni: the first as someone suffering the ravages of old age, the second as someone stricken with disease, the third as a corpse, and the fourth as a wandering monk. These visitors made a profound impression on the young prince, who left his wife, child, and home to seek enlightenment.
Living in India, the path to spiritual enlightenment that he followed was to become a yogi. He studied meditation, he became an accomplished ascetic (it is said he lived for a time on one grain of rice a day), but he failed to achieve anything satisfying. So finally he had a nice lunch and sat down under a Bodhi tree, vowing to remain seated until he achieved enlightenment. Finally, he was “awakened,” which is the meaning of the word Buddha. In his first sermon, Gotama Buddha revealed the Four Noble Truths and the Middle Way, the latter also being known as the Eightfold Path. Those who have followed his teachings have come to be known as Buddhists. For more on the life of the Buddha, an excellent chapter has been written by Goldstein and Kornfield (2001). The sayings of the Buddha have also been collected, and are readily available (e.g., see Byrom, 1993). In his own words, we can see the relationship between Buddhism and psychology, and how these teachings were meant to guide people toward a healthy and happy life. In the teaching entitled “Choices,” the Buddha says:
We are what we think.
All that we are arises with our thoughts.
With our thoughts we make the world.
Speak or act with a pure mind
And happiness will follow you
As your shadow, unshakable. (pgs. 1-2)
Bodhidharma
Bodhidharma (c. 440-528) is recognized as the monk responsible for bringing Zen Buddhism from India into China. He was also present during the construction of the Shaolin Temple, and was one of the first monks there. During his time at Shaolin Temple he is most famous for spending nine years in meditation, staring at the wall of a cave. He is also credited with developing kung-fu, the well-known martial arts technique, so that the temple monks could protect themselves from bandits. Although Bodhidharma may have spent a great deal of time in meditation, his Zen teaching was based more on a sword of wisdom (Red Pine, 1987). Some of the strange practices in Zen that we will examine in this chapter can be described as almost surprising people into enlightenment. Of course, many years of practice and discipline are necessary in order to be ready for this enlightenment. Some of Bodhidharma’s writings are still available to us today (e.g., Red Pine, 1987), and in his own words (translated, of course) we can get a glimpse of just how strange a Zen understanding of the truth can be:
If you use your mind to study reality, you won’t understand either your mind or reality. If you study reality without using your mind, you’ll understand both. Those who don’t understand, don’t understand understanding. And those who understand, understand not understanding. People capable of true vision know that the mind is empty. They transcend both understanding and not understanding. The absence of both understanding and not understanding is true understanding. (pg. 55)
His Holiness the Dalai Lama
Unlike the historical figures Gotama Buddha and Bodhidharma, the Dalai Lama is alive today. Although his home is Tibet, where he was born in 1935, he lives in exile in India. He is believed to be the 14th Dalai Lama, a reincarnation of the previous Dalai Lamas, the first of whom is believed to have been the reincarnation of a boy who lived during the time of Gotama Buddha. That boy was an incarnation of Chenrezig (also known as Avalokiteshvara), the Bodhisattva of Compassion (a Bodhisattva is like a Buddha – see below), and the Dalai Lamas have served for over 650 years as the religious leader of the Tibetan people. Due to political circumstances in Tibet today, it is unclear what may happen to Tibetan culture. The Dalai Lama himself does not know whether he will be the last of the Dalai Lamas, but he hopes that choice will someday be made by a free and democratic Tibetan society (Dalai Lama, 2002).
Placing Buddhism in Context: The First Psychology?
Both Buddhism and Yoga share roots in ancient traditions among the Vedic people. Siddhattha Gotama was a yogi seeking enlightenment, and it was his followers who established Buddhism as the practice of his new path: the Middle Way. Since most people think of Buddhism and Yoga as separate, it makes things easier to treat them separately.
Buddhism is as old as the Yoga of Patanjali, perhaps even older, and like Yoga had a profound influence on some well-known personality theorists (such as Rogers and Fromm). Since Yoga is usually thought of as a form of exercise in America, because of the popularity of Hatha Yoga, when people think of meditation they often think first of Buddhism. Zen Buddhism emphasizes meditation, and Zen has been the most popular and best-known form of Buddhism in America, largely due to the arrival of D. T. Suzuki in 1897.
There are two major schools of Buddhism in the world today. The Theravada tradition is most popular in southeast Asia. It emphasizes self-discipline and seeking nirvana. The Mahayana tradition is most popular in China, Tibet, Korea, and Japan. The Mahayana tradition emphasizes compassion, and is the school within which Zen developed. Tibetan Buddhism, which also developed within the Mahayana tradition, enjoys something of a celebrity status due to the renown of the Dalai Lama, who is recognized as the spiritual leader of the Tibetan people.
In many ways one can find connections between Buddhism and psychology today. As an interesting example, the well-known author and spiritual leader Jack Kornfield became a Thai Buddhist monk before returning to the United States and becoming a clinical psychologist. Many of the books comparing Eastern philosophy to Western psychology have focused on Zen Buddhism. Zen emphasizes meditation, which in one form or another has become a common element of many types of psychotherapy, particularly in humanistic and cognitive approaches. Since Buddhism shares the same tradition as Yoga, it would make no sense to say that Buddhism has influenced psychology more than Yoga. They are fundamentally the same, and their influence continues to grow. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/14%3A_Yoga_and_Buddhism_as_Personality_Development_Paths/14.09%3A_Historical_Description_of_Buddhism.txt |
Following his enlightenment, the Buddha began to teach what he had realized. In his first lesson, he described the Four Noble Truths: 1) suffering is an unavoidable reality in human life; 2) the source of suffering is craving or desire, and the bad karma it creates; 3) the craving that leads to suffering can be destroyed; 4) the Middle Way is the path to eliminate craving and suffering (Suzuki, 1960; World’s Great Religions, 1957; Wilkins, 1967). People often ask why there is so much suffering in the world. When this question is asked, there is usually an unspoken desire to remove this suffering from the world. The Buddha, however, taught us that we cannot escape from reality. Who has never been sick? Who never dies? Who can live without desiring something? The problem is that when our cravings are satisfied, we typically find that we want something else, or something more, we never seem to be really satisfied. And so this cycle of craving, temporary satisfaction, craving again, and so on, continues throughout our life, unless we consciously do something to break the pattern. The Buddha taught us how to do that: by following the Middle Way.
The Middle Way is also known as the Eightfold Path, because there are eight aspects to it: 1) right knowledge, 2) right intention, 3) right speech, 4) right conduct, 5) right livelihood, 6) right effort, 7) right mindfulness, and 8) right concentration. Some believe that each step depends on what goes before it, so that in order to reach higher levels of this discipline one must accomplish the lower levels (Wilkins, 1967). A hierarchical series of steps like this is reminiscent of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. In Buddhism, we must begin with an understanding of how things really are, an understanding of the four noble truths, impermanence, and interbeing (right knowledge). We must then develop the right intentions, to want to be compassionate, selflessly detached, loving, and non-violent. Once we have developed a conducive state of mind, we can choose to refrain from lying, gossiping, swearing, and other misuse of language (right speech). We can avoid doing things that are immoral, irresponsible, cruel, or illegal (right conduct), and we would not choose a career which required us to do any such things (right livelihood). Then we would be able to focus our will on avoiding any unhealthy states of mind, and on eliminating them quickly should they arise (right effort). Finally we could become more aware of our sensations, feelings, minds, and bodies (right mindfulness), so that we might focus on the discipline necessary to continue our practice of the Middle Way (right concentration).
These principles provide the basis for a practical code of conduct, which all Buddhists must follow, known as the Five Precepts. They are: 1) to abstain from killing, 2) to abstain from stealing, 3) to abstain from sexual misconduct, 4) to abstain from lying, and 5) to abstain from mind-altering intoxicants (World’s Great Religions, 1957). The first four seem to follow naturally from the Eightfold Path, but the last one is somewhat more interesting. The problem with intoxicating drugs, such as alcohol, is that they cloud the mind. They make it difficult for us to make responsible choices, which is what the Middle Way is all about. Also, if you think back to our discussion of karma, the intentions behind your actions are as important, if not more important, than the actions themselves. When you have made a choice to use intoxicating drugs, and then violate any of the other precepts, it is the consequence of your earlier choice. And who needs bad karma on top of bad karma?
“Calm and compassion are so precious. Make sure not to lose them through intoxication.” – Kornfield, 1994
Characteristics of Existence
Impermanence
The Buddha said that “everything arises and passes away…existence is illusion” (in Byrom, 1993). The idea that nothing is permanent is a central belief in Buddhism. People are born, grow up, grow old, and die. Buildings wear down, cars break down, and enormous trees wither away. Even mountains are eventually worn down by erosion. However, children are born, new cars and buildings are built, new plants grow, and life goes on. The implications for Buddhism are quite interesting. If everything, and everyone, changes, then even someone who is enlightened will change! One cannot be a Buddha, for they will change. We must always continue to grow. Likewise, Buddhism itself will change, so most of their doctrines are not seen as static. They anticipate change over time.
For psychology, this has both good and not so good implications. For people who are depressed or anxious, they might take heart in impermanence, since things should eventually get better. Indeed, studies on the effects of psychotherapy often show that some people get better over time without treatment. However, if things seem to be going great, if you are happy and having lots of fun, those things will change too. But knowing this, we can prepare ourselves for it. An important aspect of coping with life’s challenges is a sense of being in control. Although there are a wide variety of variables that contribute to individual resilience, maintaining a positive state of mind can help, and knowledge can help to maintain that positive state of mind (Bonnano, 2004, 2005; Folkman and Moskowitz, 2000; Ray, 2004).
If we practice mindfulness and meditation, we can begin to see the impermanence of our lives. As we let go of our attachments to our self-image, our life will flow by like the pictures of a movie, each one a separate image, which only appears to flow smoothly when viewed at high speed. As we observe these fleeting images, we see how our sensations, thoughts, feelings, every aspect of our lives, change so quickly. We might then embrace the change that is truly our life. This process of letting go can be very difficult, but also very liberating (Goldstein and Kornfield, 2001).
“Do not seek perfection in a changing world. Instead, perfect your love.” – Kornfield, 1994
Suffering
As we learned with the first of the Four Noble Truths, suffering is an integral part of the human experience. It is easy for us to think of suffering in terms of big pictures: war, famine, natural disasters, and the like. But how often do we think of suffering as an inherent part of our daily lives? Life is difficult, it is a struggle, especially the way most of us live it. A struggle can only lead to suffering. The ultimate outcome of life’s struggle, should we lose the battle, is death. If we could defeat death we would end up alone, and that loneliness might be even worse than the original suffering itself (Suzuki, 1962). Still, we do not even need to look at suffering in terms of a lifetime battle against aging and death, we can see suffering in every moment of the day. Goldstein and Kornfield offer a marvelous description of the daily challenge to be satisfied (2001). It goes something like this. Suppose we woke up on a day when we had no obligations at all. It might be tempting to stay in bed all day, but eventually we become uncomfortable because we have to go to the bathroom. Finally we go, and then crawl back into bed to get warm. But then we get hungry, so finally we get up to get something to eat. Then we get bored, so maybe we watch TV. Then we get uncomfortable, and have to change positions. Even each pleasurable moment is brief, and fails to bring lasting satisfaction. So on, and so forth. We just keep suffering!
The source of this suffering is attachment. We are attached to pleasurable things because we crave them. We are also attached to things that are not pleasant, because they occupy our mind and we cannot be free. The Buddha says, “Free yourself from pleasure and pain. For in craving pleasure or in nursing pain, there is only sorrow” (in Byrom, 1993). It may seem strange that we would be attached to our pain, but the word is used differently here than in most of Western psychology. Traditionally, psychologists think of attachment in a positive way, such as the attachment a child feels toward his or her parents. And yet, some cognitive psychologists do talk about individuals whose automatic thoughts lead them into consistently negative states of mind by disqualifying positive events, catastrophizing events, taking everything too personally, etc. (Pretzer and Beck, 2005). In Buddhism, attachment is neither positive nor negative, it is simply anything that reflects our illusion that the natural world is real. Only when we let go of our attachments to this world can we be one with the universal spirit, and only then can we end our suffering. There is also something hopeful in suffering. Bodhidharma taught that every suffering is a Buddha-seed, because suffering leads us to seek wisdom (in Red Pine, 1987). In this analogy, he describes the body and mind as a field. Suffering is the seed, wisdom the sprout, and Buddhahood the grain.
discussion question \(1\)
Gotama Buddha taught that suffering is the result of craving or desire. Many of us have heard the saying that money is the root of all evil. Is our society excessively focused on buying more and bigger things? Do you ever find yourself obsessed with some material purchase? What problems, if any, have you experienced because people were more concerned with getting things than caring about the people around them?
Selflessness
In keeping with its origins in Yoga, Buddhism teaches that there is no immortal, unchanging soul. All that we are is a temporary collection of attributes, made up of the body, the feelings, the perceptions, the reactions, and the consciousness of the mind (which, coming from the brain, is really part of the body). It is because we confuse our true self (the transcendental self) with this temporary collection of illusory things that we crave satisfaction, and ultimately suffer as a result. Now it may seem illogical to reject everything we are familiar with, including our own physical body, as an illusion, but Buddhists would suggest that there is a danger in choosing intellectual logic over faith. According to D.T. Suzuki (1962), “Faith lives and the intellect kills.” Try the following exercise. Consider your body. Is it real? How much food have you eaten in your life, and where is it now? How many times have you gone to the bathroom, and where did all of that come from? It certainly isn’t the same as when you ate it! Your body has been replaced many, many times. It is being replaced right now. It isn’t real, it is only temporary, ever changing. The same is true with your mind. Even when William James discussed the stream of consciousness, he described a constantly changing awareness, one in which you cannot have the same thought twice. It just isn’t possible. James (1892) realized that we cannot establish a substantial identity continuing from day to day, but concluded that our sense of continuity must reveal a functional identity. Arriving at a very different conclusion, Buddhists consider this to be maya, our inability to see things as they truly are (Suzuki, 1960).
These three characteristics of existence (impermanence, suffering, and selflessness) can be somewhat unsettling. It is not very appealing to believe that we don’t really exist, that we will suffer as long as we believe we do exist, and all of it will just eventually pass away anyway. So, how does one continue in this practice? It is important to keep as our goal a true understanding of the way things are, and the practice of meditation and other aspects of Yoga and Buddhism will help to deepen our realization of these basic truths (Goldstein & Kornfield, 2001). The practice remains challenging, however, because as we deepen our understanding the characteristic most often occupying the center of our greatest realization is that of suffering (Goldstein & Kornfield, 2001; Suzuki, 1962). We must then put aside our intellectualizing, we must slay it and throw it to the dogs, experiencing what Buddhists call the “Great Death” (Suzuki, 1962). Only then will we know the greatest wisdom and compassion. This is the beginning of our transcendence. It is not a separation from others, but a realization that we are all one. In other words, we are all in this together.
Interbeing – A Connection Between All People and All Things
Many people are familiar with the golden rule: do unto others as you would have others do unto you! This Christian saying also has great implications when considered from a Buddhist perspective. Based on the same philosophical/cosmological perspective as Yoga, Buddhists believe that there is one universal spirit. Therefore, we are really all the same, indeed the entire universe of living creatures and even inanimate objects in the physical world come from and return to the same, single source of creation. Thus, we could alter the golden rule to something like: as you do unto others you are doing unto yourself! This concept is not simply about being nice to other people for your own good, however. Much more importantly, it is about appreciating the relationships between all things. For example, when you drink a refreshing glass of milk, maybe after eating a few chocolate chip cookies, can you taste the grass and feel the falling rain? After all, the cow could not have grown up to give milk if it hadn’t eaten grass, and the grass would not have grown if there hadn’t been any rain. When you enjoy that milk do you remember to thank the farmer who milked the cow, or the grocer who sold the milk to you? And what about the worms that helped to create and aerate the soil in which the grass grew? Appreciating the concept of interbeing helps us to understand the importance of everyone and everything.
The value of this concept of interbeing is that it can be much more than simply a curious academic topic. The Vietnamese Buddhist monk Thich Nhat Hanh writes very eloquently about interbeing and its potential for promoting healthy relationships, both between people and between societies (Thich Nhat Hanh, 1995):
“Looking deeply” means observing something or someone with so much concentration that the distinction between observer and observed disappears. The result is insight into the true nature of the object. When we look into the heart of a flower, we see clouds, sunshine, minerals, time, the earth, and everything else in the cosmos in it. Without clouds, there could be no rain, and there would be no flower. Without time, the flower could not bloom. In fact, the flower is made entirely of non-flower elements; it has no independent, individual existence. It “inter-is” with everything else in the universe. … When we see the nature of interbeing, barriers between ourselves and others are dissolved, and peace, love, and understanding are possible. Whenever there is understanding, compassion is born. (pg. 10)
Having understood this concept, how might it apply to personality? One of the best known cross-cultural topics in psychology today is the distinction between collectivistic vs. individualistic cultures (Triandis & Suh, 2002; Triandis et al., 1988). It is generally accepted that Western cultures focus on the individual, whereas Eastern cultures focus on society as a collective group. One can easily imagine how people whose religious and cultural philosophy focus on a single, universal spirit (the basis of interbeing) would focus more on their family and societal groups than on the individual. Both individualistic and collectivistic cultures seem to have advantages. People living in individualistic cultures report higher levels of subjective well-being and self-esteem, whereas people in collectivistic cultures have tend to have lower levels of stress and correspondingly lower levels of cardiovascular disease (Triandis & Suh, 2002; Triandis et al., 1988). In collectivistic cultures people tend to view the environment as relatively fixed, and themselves as more flexible, more ready to fit in (Triandis & Suh, 2002). The collectivistic perspective supports the value of social cooperation and social interest (something Alfred Adler would likely appreciate). Still, even within cultures there are individual differences. There are idiocentric persons (those who favor individuality) living in collectivistic cultures, and allocentric persons (those who favor ingroups) living in individualistic cultures. The best relationship between personality and culture may be the “culture fit” model, which suggests that it is best to live in the culture that matches your personal inclinations.
discussion question \(2\)
The concept of interbeing suggests that all things are ultimately connected. Have you ever taken the time to think about all the things that had to happen, and all the people who were involved, in producing anything you hold in your hand? What about all the things that had to happen, and all the people who were involved, in your creation? And if we are all connected in some way, if we are all interbeing, what have you done to value those relationships?
Connections Across Cultures:
The Non-Violent Struggles of Mahatma Gandhi, Thich Nhat Hanh, Martin Luther King, Jr., and the 14 th Dalai Lama
The four men listed above are famous in a variety of ways, but they are probably best known for their commitment to nonviolence as a way to achieve political and social justice. Most importantly, they vowed non-violence while those around them were committed to terrible violence in order to deny justice to others. The two who are not alive today were both assassinated, and the other two were forced to live in exile. Gandhi was a Hindu who practiced Yoga, Thich Nhat Hanh and the Dalai Lama are Buddhists, and M. L. King, Jr. was a Christian, and it was their spiritual beliefs that so profoundly determined those aspects of their personalities that demanded peace.
Gandhi (1869-1948) is considered the father of modern India. He was born when the British ruled India, and spent much of his life fighting for the independence of his homeland. Twice he was imprisoned by the government, even though he insisted that all protests should be nonviolent. Indeed, he had established a movement of nonviolence known as Satyagraha. Ultimately this movement was successful, and India achieved its independence. Gandhi, however, was assassinated less than a year later. As he died, he spoke the name of God: Rama (Easwaran, 1972; Wilkinson, 2005).
Thich Nhat Hanh (1926-present) was born in Vietnam, and saw his country dominated first by the French and then by communists. During those difficult times he helped to develop what he and his friends called “engaged Buddhism.” Rather than sitting in the temple meditating, they went out into the villages and tried to help the poor people of Vietnam. When confronted by soldiers they did their best to remain mindful, and to feel compassion for the soldiers who threatened them. After all, it was clear to Thich Nhat Hanh that many of those young soldiers were frightened themselves, and so their behavior was very hard to predict. Thus, the calm and peace that accompany mindfulness was often essential for protecting everyone in those terrifying encounters. After being exiled from Vietnam in 1966, he established a community called Plum Village in France, where he still resides today (Thich Nhat Hanh, 1966, 2003).
Martin Luther King, Jr. (1929-1968) was a major figure in America’s civil rights movement of the 1950s and 60s. The King children learned at an early age about the realities of racism in America. Coming from an educated and socially active family, both his father and grandfather were ministers, he vowed at an early age to work against racial injustice. According to his sister, he said he would turn the world upside down (Farris, 2003). However, he always insisted on doing so in a nonviolent fashion. For this commitment to nonviolence, in 1964 he became the youngest person to ever receive the Nobel Peace Prize. Despite the peace prize and the passage of both the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act in 1965, discrimination continued in America. So did the nonviolent protests led by Dr. King. Then, in 1968, Martin Luther King, Jr. was assassinated (Burns, 2004; Hansen, 2003; Patrick, 1990).
The Dalai Lama (1935-present) lives in exile in India, though he also spends a great deal of time in America. When China invaded Tibet in 1950, he appealed to the United Nations, other countries, and even tried to reach an agreement with the Chinese leadership. Eventually, however, he was forced to leave Tibet in 1959. Today, nearly 50 years later, he continues to seek a peaceful resolution resulting in freedom for Tibet. He also works to deliberately cultivate feelings of compassion for the Chinese, believing that someday those who have harmed the people of Tibet will have to face the consequences of their actions (Dalai Lama, 2002). The Dalai Lama received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1989.
These men have more in common than simply their shared belief in nonviolence. In addition to M. L. King, Jr. and the Dalai Lama receiving the Nobel Peace Prize, as Nobel Laureates are entitled to do, Dr. King nominated Thich Nhat Hanh for the same award. Dr. King had received a letter from Thich Nhat Hanh asking for help in protesting the Vietnam war, which by the 1960s involved the United States. Dr. King was impressed by the Buddhist monk, and once appeared with him at a press conference in Chicago (Burns, 2004). Dr. King was also familiar with and impressed by the teachings of Gandhi. In 1959 he traveled to India to learn firsthand about Gandhi’s Satyagraha, the basis for Gandhi’s nonviolent independence movement (King, 2000). In 1966, Dr. King delivered the Gandhi Memorial Lecture at Howard University (Hansen, 2003). Since both the Dalai Lama and Thich Nhat Hanh are alive today, they have met one another and the Dalai Lama has written several forewords for books by Thich Nhat Hanh. If these men from different countries and different cultures can share so much through the simple (though not easy) practice of nonviolence, perhaps there is something special here for everyone to learn more about.
Meditation
Meditation Techniques
Meditation is the means by which we control our mind and guide it in a more virtuous direction (Dalai Lama, 2001). Modern brain imaging techniques have even begun to identify the brain regions involved in these processes (Barinaga, 2003). There are many different meditation techniques in Yoga and Buddhism, and no one technique is necessarily better than another. What is most important is to pick one type of meditation and stick with it. Meditation takes practice. Most of us find it very difficult to relax and clear our mind. Even when we do, it is difficult to stay relaxed and keep our mind clear. We are distracted by constant thoughts, getting uncomfortable, we have itches and sneezes and whatever… But over time we can get better at relaxing. It helps to have a well-described procedure, and it can be very helpful to meditate in a group (especially if they offer classes or lessons on how to meditate). If you try meditation, don’t get discouraged the first few times. Keep it up. As with all paths toward self-improvement, it takes time to progress in your ability to meditate.
Some of the writings of Master Dogen (1200-1253), the monk who founded Japanese Soto Zen, have survived during the 800 years since he lived (in Cook, 2002). Master Dogen recommends a very traditional form of seated meditation. Basically, sit straight up on a comfortable cushion with your legs crossed. Place your right hand in your lap, palm up, and your left hand on your right hand in the same manner, so that your thumbs touch slightly. Keep the eyes slightly open, the mouth closed, and breathe softly. Next comes the hard part: “Think about the unthinkable. How do you think about the unthinkable? Non-thinking.”
Non-thinking may sound strange, but it is a fascinating experience for those who achieve it. It can actually make a 3- or 6-hour mediation seem to go by more quickly than a shorter meditation in which you never quite clear your mind. If it sounds a little too strange, don’t worry, it isn’t the goal of every form of meditation. Some forms of meditation focus on a mantra, or in Christian mediation a short prayer. Trying to focus on God through the celestial eye (in the middle of the forehead) is also a common technique. The Dalai Lama describes several different approaches in one of his books (Dalai Lama, 2001), and Thich Nhat Hanh discusses being reasonable in one’s approach to longer meditations (Thich Nhat Hanh, 1991). Once again, there is not a right or wrong method of meditation. Whatever technique you try, whether from a book, a guru, a teacher, or a group, it is whatever works for you on your path to personal development.
Soto Zen and Zazen
Soto Zen is one of the two forms of Zen popular in Japan. Soto Zen emphasizes zazen, which translates loosely as “sitting meditation.” It is believed that this form of meditation, common to the way most Americans envision meditation, is a tribute to the legend of Zen founder Bodhidharma spending nine years meditating while staring at a wall (Suzuki, 1962). However, there is a problem in the literature on zazen. For those who believe that zazen can help to achieve Buddhahood, the masters have taught that it cannot work. Still, it remains the essential core practice. How can this be? According to Alan Watts (1957), it may be better to consider an alternative translation of zazen, in which it translates as “sitting just to sit.” In this view, zazen results in a clear mind, the condition necessary for enlightenment. A wonderful resource for practicing basic meditation of this type has been provided by Jack Kornfield, a clinical psychologist who trained as a Buddhist monk. Meditation for Beginners (Kornfield, 2004) not only briefly describes the history, purpose, and benefits of meditation, but it also includes a CD with guided meditations led by the author.
Rinzai Zen and the Koan
The other form of Zen popular in Japan is Rinzai Zen, founded by the monk Eisai (1141-1215). Buddhists in the Rinzai school practice zazen, but they also emphasize the curious practice of meditating on a koan, a riddle that has no answer. The Soto school of Zen frowns upon the use of the koan, considering it to be superficial and possibly misguided, something of a gimmick. But within the Rinzai school the Zen masters became concerned about what they saw as problems within the communities practicing Zen. One of the chief concerns of the Rinzai masters was the reliance on absolute quietude, pure meditation purely for the sake of meditation. They believed that Zen comes from life, and therefore must grow out of life (Suzuki, 1962). They were also concerned about the intellectualization of Zen, the belief that discerning logic could lead to enlightenment (again, concerned that the pursuit of logical ideas became its own pursuit). And so they developed the koan. The purpose of these unsolvable riddles is to put an end to logical thinking, to stop the wandering minds of students and to create a profound sense of doubt in the student’s mind (Reps and Senzaki, 1994; Suzuki, 1960, 1962; Watts, 1957). The presentation of the student’s views on a koan to the Zen master is an important time, and advanced students may even challenge whether the master appreciates how deeply the student understands Zen. These periodic visits to the Zen master to present an answer to a koan are known as sanzen (Suzuki, 1962; Watts, 1957).
Although koan are considered unsolvable, they do have answers. Certainly the most famous koan is the one in which the monk Joshu is asked: Does a dog have Buddha-nature? Joshu replied, “Mu!” Mu is the Chinese symbol for “no thing” or “not.” The understanding of this koan is not found in the odd answer, or in Joshu’s apparent refusal to provide a straight answer, “Mu” is Buddha-nature! If you find this particularly difficult to understand, I suggest you back up to the quote I gave you from the writings of Bodhidharma. I doubt it will make it any more clear, but perhaps it will help to illuminate the philosophy of non-attachment: don’t worry too hard about understanding, just understand.
A student of the Rinzai school of Zen will actually study many koan, and the process is kept quite secret. Obviously if the answers to these koan were known, then students could offer the apparent answers. I say apparent answers because a Zen master would clearly recognize the mindless answer of one who really does not understand the koan. Since the process is kept secret, not many koan are publicly known, but there are some available. Not all koan are quite as odd as Joshu’s “Mu;” some are seemingly easier to understand, but challenge our concepts of defining aspects of the natural world. For example, the monk Daie used to carry a short bamboo stick, and he would say, “If you call this a stick, you affirm; if you call it not a stick, you negate. Beyond affirmation and negation, what would you call it?” (Suzuki, 1962) This is clearly a challenge to move beyond logic, beyond the normal way of thinking about things. Enlightenment, of course, does not come from normal ways. Through the use of meditation to clear our minds, and the use of koan to challenge our perspectives, Rinzai Zen seeks to offer a path toward enlightenment that will be successful.
discussion question \(3\)
Have you ever practiced meditation, or perhaps contemplative prayer? If you have, how does it make you feel? If you haven’t, does it sound attractive? Were you surprised to learn that the practice of meditation is so old, and that it has counterparts in all of the major religions?
Mindfulness
Mindfulness is a form of meditation that occurs throughout every moment of the day. Indeed, it is very important to live fully in every moment, and to look deeply into each experience (Thich Nhat Hanh, 1991, 1995). By being mindful, we can enter into awareness of our body and our emotions. Thich Nhat Hanh relates a story in which the Buddha was asked when he and his monks practiced. The Buddha replied that they practiced when they sat, when they walked, and when they ate. When the person questioning the Buddha replied that everyone sits, walks, and eats, the Buddha replied that he and his monks knew they were sitting, knew they were walking, and knew they were eating (Thich Nhat Hanh, 1995). Mindfulness can also be applied to acts as simple as breathing. According to Thich Nhat Hanh, conscious breathing is the most basic Buddhist technique for touching peace (Thich Nhat Hanh, 1991, 1995). He suggests silently reciting the following lines while breathing mindfully:
Breathing in, I calm my body.
Breathing out, I smile.
Dwelling in the present moment,
I know this is a wonderful moment!
The concept of mindfulness, viewed in its traditional way, is also being used today in psychotherapy. Two recent books address the use of mindfulness either in combination with cognitive behavioral therapy to treat depression (McQuaid and Carmona, 2004) or as its own approach to the treatment of anxiety (Brantley, 2003). McQuaid and Carmona (2004) discuss how combining cognitive behavioral therapy and mindfulness together can provide a much stronger approach to treatment than either technique alone. Since the approaches have much in common, they amplify the effectiveness of each, and given their differences, they offer a complete path to moving beyond simple recovery toward more positive self development. Dr. Brantley (2003) moves more completely into the practice of mindfulness, emphasizing that it must become a way of life. It is not simply a clever therapeutic technique or gimmick.
Discussion question \(4\)
Mindfulness refers to maintaining a meditative state throughout the day. A similar approach is essential to cognitive/behavioral therapy. Are you aware of what you do during the day, or are you overwhelmed with being too busy? Could you see the practice of mindfulness as a helpful way to deal with your hectic life, and perhaps reduce stress at the same time?
Enlightenment and the Ideal Person
Concepts of Enlightenment
There are a wide variety of different concepts of enlightenment. One concept that is somewhat familiar in America is nirvana. Nirvana refers to the extinction of all ideas and concepts, thus resulting in the end of suffering due to the craving that results from being attached to anything in the natural world. In the Theravada tradition this should be the goal of all Buddhists, and a person who achieves nirvana is referred to as an Arhat. Other Buddhists, however, seek to avoid nirvana, because it leaves all others behind.
In the Mahayana tradition, an ideal person would be a Bodhisattva, one who vows to forego complete enlightenment until all other beings have been enlightened. According to Thich Nhat Hanh (1995), such individuals touch mindfulness, and as a result of living mindfully they can touch the Buddha and shine their light of awareness on everything they do. The desire to help others achieve enlightenment comes from the deep compassion developed by Bodhisattvas. Mindfulness leads to this compassion, as it leads one to develop Bodhicitta. Bodhicitta, which means “mind of enlightenment” or “mind of love,” is an inner drive to fully realize oneself and to work for the well-being of all (in other words, it is the driving force of being a Bodhisattva; Dalai Lama, 2001; Thich Nhat Hanh, 1995, 1999).
Curiously, some Buddhists distinguish between “bodhi” as a temporary flash of enlightenment, which can even occur following arduous meditation or by accident, and “nirvana” or true liberation, which can only result from proper knowledge and dedicated practice (Mathew, 2001). This concept is similar to what Maslow described as the difference between a peak experience and a plateau experience. A peak experience is a brief period of fulfillment, usually associated with a particular event. A plateau experience, on the other hand, is a lasting feeling of oneness with the world around us. What is of particular importance for the study of personality is the recognition that individuals with certain personality characteristics, such as being kind-hearted and open-minded, can more easily accomplish long-term fulfillment, whether we call it nirvana or self-actualization.
Compassion and Loving-Kindness
“Just as compassion is the wish that all sentient beings be free of suffering, loving-kindness is the wish that all may enjoy happiness” (Dalai Lama, 2001). With these simple words about Buddhism, His Holiness the Dalai Lama has captured the history of psychology briefly presented in the introductory chapter: that psychology focused for many years on helping to identify and treat mental illness (hopefully freeing people from suffering), whereas now there is a strong movement toward positive psychology (hoping to improve well-being for all). This recognition of compassion as the strong feeling or wish that others be freed from suffering comes from mindfulness. As one becomes truly aware of the suffering involved in human life, and if one is able to feel genuine empathy for others, then compassion naturally arises (Chappell, 2003; Dalai Lama, 2001; Goldstein & Kornfield, 2001; Thich Nhat Hanh, 1995). Compassion has described as the ideal emotional state (Bankart et al., 2003; Cook, 2002; Dockett & North-Schulte, 2003; Ragsdale, 2003), and Carl Rogers considered genuine empathy to be essential for client-centered therapy to be successful. Aside from Rogers, however, have other psychologists begun to examine the value of compassion and loving-kindness? The answer is an unequivocal “Yes” (Bankart et al., 2003; Batson et al., 2005; Cassell, 2005; Dockett & North-Schulte, 2003; Keyes & Lopez, 2005; Khong, 2003; Ragsdale, 2003; Schulman, 2005; Young-Eisendrath, 2003)!
“Life is so hard, how can we be anything but kind?”
- Kornfield, 1994 | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/14%3A_Yoga_and_Buddhism_as_Personality_Development_Paths/14.10%3A_The_Four_Noble_Truths_of_Human_Life.txt |
Buddhists believe in three poisons, the great obstacles to personal development. They are greed, anger, and delusion. These poisons, or realms as they are often called, have no nature of their own, they are created by us and they depend on us. Greed flows from attachment, anger flows from our emotions, and delusion flows from maya. By following the practices of Buddhism, we can free ourselves from these poisons as did the Buddha. According to Bodhidharma, the Buddha made three vows. He vowed to put an end to all evil, by practicing moral prohibitions to counter the poison of greed. He vowed to cultivate virtue by practicing meditation to counter the poison of anger. And he vowed to liberate all beings by practicing wisdom to counter the poison of delusion (in Red Pine, 1987). Likewise, we can devote ourselves to the three pure practices of morality, meditation, and wisdom.
It is interesting to note how well this philosophy fits with the growing field of positive psychology (e.g., see Compton, 2005; Peterson, 2006). Indeed, whole books have been written on the study of virtue in psychology (Fowers, 2005; Peterson & Seligman, 2004). Note, however, that these books are quite recent. Although the seeds of positive psychology, studies on virtue and similar topics have been around since the earliest days of psychology in the Western world, we seem to be just starting to “discover” concepts that have been well established in Eastern philosophy/psychology for thousands of years. As we recognize more similarities between traditional Eastern perspectives and current Western perspectives, it may help to guide these developing areas of psychological research in the Western world.
14.S: Chapter Summary
Review of Key Points
• Although Yoga and Buddhism have significant religious overtones, they are actually lifestyle guidelines that promote psychological well-being.
• The principles of Yoga are outlined in the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali and in the Bhagavad Gita, both of which are approximately 2,500 years old.
• In Yoga there is a dichotomy between spirit and nature, with spirit being pure consciousness. Our belief that we are actually our physical selves (our natural self) is an illusion.
• Karma refers to the cosmic law of cause and effect. Our past actions, both good and bad, affect our future.
• Everything in the natural world is composed of three gunas: rajas (craving and action), tamas (ignorance and dullness), and sattva (light and joy).
• A guru is a teacher, someone who is advanced in their practice of Yoga. The guru is essential for a student to properly follow the complex teachings and practices of Yoga.
• There are a wide variety of schools within Yoga, including Hatha-Yoga (which is popular in America), Bhakti-Yoga (devotional Yoga), Kriya-Yoga (believed to be the original Yoga of Patanjali), and Mantra-Yoga (which emphasizes the chanting of mantras, such as the sacred Om).
• Patanjali described five hindrances to personal development: avidya (ignorance), sense of personality, desire, hate, and sense of attachment.
• The ancient Vedic teachings propose four stages in the ideal life: student, householder, hermit or forest-dweller, renunciant.
• Yoga is well established in America, having been taught formally for over 85 years. This mixing of cultures has been possible, in part, because of similarities between Yoga and Christian practices. Two such common practices are contemplative prayer (which is similar to meditation) and singing to God.
• Buddhism is based on the 2,500 year-old teachings of Siddhattha Gotama, who is also known as Gotama Buddha. Bodhidharma brought Zen Buddhism to China some 1,500 years ago, and the Dalai Lama is a very famous Tibetan Buddhist leader alive today.
• The Buddha taught that there are four noble truths: suffering is a reality in human life, suffering comes from craving, the craving that leads to suffering can be destroyed, the path to destroy craving is the Middle Way (aka, the Eightfold Path).
• Buddhists believe in three basic characteristics of existence: nothing is permanent, suffering is an integral part of human life, and we have no immortal, unchanging soul.
• The Buddhist concept of interbeing emphasizes the connection between all living things, and even inanimate objects, because there is only one single source of all creation.
• Meditation, the common element in all forms of Yoga and Buddhism, is a means for controlling our mind and moving it in a more virtuous direction. Soto Zen emphasizes sitting meditation alone, whereas Rinzai Zen adds to seated meditation the practice of meditating on a koan, an unsolvable riddle.
• Mindfulness is the practice of maintaining a meditative state throughout our daily routine.
• In a very general sense, enlightenment refers to transcending this life, thus eliminating craving and suffering and escaping from the cause and effect of karma. In the Mahayana tradition, some Buddhists forego complete enlightenment so that they might remain in the world to help others achieve enlightenment.
• The ideal emotional state for Buddhists is compassion. Both compassion and loving-kindness flow naturally from mindfulness, since mindful individuals recognize the reality of our existence.
• Buddhists believe in three poisons, or obstacles to personal growth: greed, anger, and delusion.
• Zen Buddhism has been taught in the United States for over 100 years. It has found its way into popular literature and has had a clear influence on psychology.
• Buddhists refer to the Three Jewels: the Buddha, the Dharma (the teachings of the Buddha), and the Sangha (a community of Buddhists). The importance of community is by no means unique to Eastern thought, but certainly takes on great significance in a culture that is generally recognized as collectivistic. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/14%3A_Yoga_and_Buddhism_as_Personality_Development_Paths/14.11%3A_Obstacles_to_Personal_Growth-_The_Three_Poisons_of_Buddhism.txt |
• 15.1: Chapter Introduction
• 15.2: Judaism and Kabbalah
• 15.3: Christianity and Christian Mysticism
Although there are many denominations within Christianity, at times generating significant conflict between each other, Christianity as a whole has been a profoundly successful and influential religion. Approximately one-third of the world’s population, over 2.2 billion people, are Christian, and it has spread around the entire world. At its heart, Christianity is a simple religion, and those who live a truly Christian life are guided by one simple philosophy: love your neighbor.
• 15.4: Islam and Sufism
The last of the Abrahamic religions to be established, Islam has also been a profoundly successful religion. It ranks second in numbers only to Christianity, with some 1.5 billion followers around the world. Muslims, those who practice the Islamic faith, consider Jesus Christ to have been a great prophet, but they do not consider him to be the Son of God. They follow the teachings of the one whom they believe to be the last and greatest prophet: Muhammad.
• 15.5: Connections Between Mystical and Eastern Perspectives
• 15.6: Personality Theory in Real Life
• 15.S: Chapter Summary
15: Religious Perspectives on Personality
In the previous chapter, Yoga and Buddhism were presented as lifestyle choices, but it was acknowledged that they developed within a religious context. In this chapter we continue that trend, but for Kabbalah, Christian mysticism, and Sufism, we cannot separate the lifestyle from the religion. However, one can easily make the argument that we should not ignore the influence of religion on psychology. After all, both spirituality and formal religion are significant factors in the lives of many people, regardless of whether some may not believe in the existence of God, or any other divine being(s). It is also true that religion was a significant factor in the lives of many of the theorists we have examined in this book, and as a result, their spiritual beliefs helped to shape the nature of their personality theories.
We will examine the mystical approaches that have developed within the Jewish, Christian, and Muslim religions. These are the three Abrahamic religions, in the order in which they were established, and together they cover an extraordinary range of cultural groups, including some 3½ billion people (55 percent of the world’s population; Haviland, Prins, Walrath, & McBride, 2005). Mysticism refers to the belief that one can know the spiritual truths of life and the universe that are beyond the intellect by being absorbed into the Deity through contemplation and self-surrender. In practice, they share common elements with Yoga and Buddhism (particularly meditation), and by bringing these five practices together, we have truly begun to take a look at the personalities, within a cultural context, of people around the entire world.
It is important to keep in mind, however, that any of the theories we have examined so far might play a role in personality development in any cultural group, in conjunction with the cultural influences of spirituality and religion. Thus, the ideas presented in these last two chapters are not meant to offer alternatives to what we have discussed within traditional Western psychology. In addition, there are other significant cultural factors beside spirituality and religion, though few of them have been studied or contemplated as deeply as religion. And undoubtedly, no other cultural phenomenon has been actively promoted and spread around the world by missionaries of many different faiths, as has been the case with religion. It is important to be open-minded and aware of some of the major factors underlying the dramatic cultural differences that exist around the world. Only then can we honestly connect with other people in a global community. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/15%3A_Religious_Perspectives_on_Personality/15.01%3A_Chapter_Introduction.txt |
We will begin our examination of spiritual/religious guidelines for living one’s life with the oldest, but smallest, of the Abrahamic religions. Judaism holds a special place in the history of psychology, since nearly all of the early and most significant psychodynamic theorists were Jewish (even if they did not practice their faith). In addition, since many of those Jewish psychoanalysts came to America during the 1930s, they then had a significant effect on the continued development of psychodynamic theory and psychoanalysis here in the United States.
The Foundation of the Jewish Faith
Judaism is one of the oldest religions in the world, and today some 14 million people practice this faith. It is a monotheistic religion, thus believing that there is only one god: Yahweh. They believe that Yahweh called Abraham out of his homeland to establish a new home, in the general area of modern-day Israel. This occurred in approximately the year 1900 B.C. However, the formal foundation of Judaism involved the establishment of Yahweh’s laws, known as the Torah. The Torah is not merely a set of laws or cultural guidelines, but rather, they are a pattern for living that transforms the Jewish people into Yahweh’s people (Wilkins, 1967). The Torah is quite long, consisting of five books, which include many complex rules for both the people and the priesthood. However, the rules were greatly simplified in Yahweh’s special revelation to Moses on Mt. Sinai, around the year 1300 B.C., and these simplified guidelines for how to live one’s life are known as the Ten Commandments:
I am the Lord your God…You shall have no other gods before me.
You shall not make for yourself a graven image…you shall not bow down to them
or serve them…
You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain…
Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
Honor your father and your mother…
You shall not kill.
You shall not commit adultery.
You shall not steal.
You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
You shall not covet your neighbor’s house…your neighbor’s wife…or anything
that is your neighbor’s.
from Exodus, Chapter 20; Holy Bible
As simple as it might seem to follow these ten guidelines for living one’s life, it is just as easy to ignore them. Unfortunately, ignoring them has often been the case, even among some of the most famous people in Jewish history. Thus, the mystical practice of Kabbalah has arisen, to both help people live a righteous life, and to help them do so without having to guide their behavior by simple, yet strict, commandments. In other words, there was, and is, a need to transform people’s minds. In order to effect real change, we cannot simply expect people to follow the rules, we need to help them make the rules a part of their life. In this sense, Kabbalah, like Yoga, Buddhism, and as we shall see for Christian mysticism and Sufism, can be viewed as a sort of cognitive psychology, a redirection of one’s conscious personality development.
discussion Question \(1\)
If the Ten Commandments are simply rules, as opposed to being an inherent part of our lives, is anything missing? Are there things we would still be allowed to do that would harm other people, or harm ourselves? What can we do to make the Ten Commandments a way of life, how can we be mindful of them?
Kabbalah
Kabbalah is a path designed to teach people about their place in life and in the universe, particularly with regard to the divine. It emphasizes that one’s daily life should not be separated from one’s spiritual life. In more practical terms, Kabbalah deals with the everyday experience that we have unlimited desires, but only limited resources to satisfy them. Thus, there will always be some degree of suffering in our lives if we focus only on the material world. Kabbalah teaches a pathway toward experiencing something beyond simple materialism. And yet, that path remains obscured in a certain degree of secrecy. The principal books are available only in the Hebrew and Aramaic languages, and some believe that Kabbalists who are qualified to teach Kabbalah are all in the country of Israel (Besserman, 1997; Laitman, 2005). Accordingly, a distinct degree of difficulty in the study of Kabbalah is to be expected:
Whoever delves into mysticism cannot help but stumble, as it is written: “This stumbling block is in your hand.” You cannot grasp these things unless you stumble over them. (pg. 163; Matt, 1995)
Kabbalah is as old as Judaism itself, perhaps older. Kabbalistic legend suggests that it may have begun with Enoch, the great-grandfather of Noah (as in Noah’s Ark; Halevi, 1986), but its formal practice recognizes a few key historical events. In the sixth century B.C., a collection of manuals called Maaseh Merkavah emerged, and these manuals included a formal meditation practice. For those who engaged in this practice, the goal was to directly experience the Deity by concentrating on mandala-like images that showed a path to the Throne of God (remember that Carl Jung also meditated on Mandala images). Their emphasis on out-of-body experiences distinguished them from similar Babylonian schools of spirituality that emphasized inner-directed visualizations and, therefore, were not as mystical as the Kabbalists. In the second century A.D., Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai wrote an important Kabbalist text called the Zohar (translated as the Book of Splendor or the Book of Radiance), which was hidden in a cave in Israel and studied in secret until, around the year 1280 A.D., a Spanish Kabbalist named Moses de Leon published the Zohar. In the late 1500s, Rabbi Yitzhak Luria began teaching Kabbalah, and he contributed a number of additional influential books, such as Etz Hachayim (The Tree of Life), Sha’ar HaKavanot (The Gateway on Intentions), and Sha’ar Hagilgulim (The Gateway of Reincarnation). Known as the Ari (the Lion), he established a basic system for studying Kabbalah, which remains in use today (Besserman, 1997; Hoffman, 2007; Laitman, 2005).
The primary aspects of practicing Kabbalah are quite similar to what we saw with Buddhism. Surrendering oneself to Yahweh, and in the process annihilating one’s ego (or concept of self), in order to release one’s emotions is one of the main goals (Hoffman, 2007; Weiss, 2005). Meditation is a key practice, attempting to immerse oneself in Yahweh manifested as self, thus fulfilling the self. A common technique is to meditate on some Kabbalah teaching or a passage from the Bible. It is also highly recommended that Kabbalah be practiced within a group of other seekers, and under the guidance of a Rabbi (or teacher). Similar to Buddhist mindfulness, Kabbalists also attempt to incorporate their practice into every moment of their daily lives. As a result, the basic teachings of Judaism, such as the Ten Commandments, should become an individual’s way of life, rather than a distant set of rules merely to be obeyed (or not).
When you desire to eat or drink, or to fulfill other worldly desires, and you focus your awareness on the love of God, then you elevate that physical desire to spiritual desire…wherever you go and whatever you do - even mundane activities - you serve God. (pg. 151; Matt, 1995)
Kabbalah and Psychology
The mystical approach to understanding life and individuals has an interesting history in the field of psychology, with William James, Carl Jung, and Abraham Maslow being among those most interested in the study of spirituality and spiritual phenomena. As the meditation practices within Yoga and Buddhism have gained popularity in psychology, other spiritual/mystical traditions are being re-examined as well. Accordingly, Kabbalah is becoming more popular, both in Judaism and in psychology, and the links between Kabbalah and psychology are being actively explored (e.g., Halevi, 1986; Hoffman, 2007; Weiss, 2005).
Kabbalah seems to compare most favorably with a cognitive approach to understanding personality and healing broken relationships. Kabbalah describes a complex arrangement of elements that underlie our relationship with God, the universe, and consequently, ourselves and other people. Understanding these relationships is the key to balancing our emotions, thoughts, and styles of relating to others. Unhappiness is viewed as the result of a serious imbalance in our understanding of the true nature of our place in our community, society, and life itself. While many different forms of psychotherapy help people to develop insight into their personality and relationships, Kabbalah proposes to go beyond insight. Once again, for those people who live life with a deep spiritual faith, ignoring one's faith makes it all but impossible to find balance in one’s life. Only a spiritual path, perhaps augmented by a traditional psychotherapeutic emphasis on everyday problems and stressors, can help to balance the entire life of the spiritual person. Thus, Kabbalah need not be viewed as an alternative to psychotherapy, but rather as a bridge between psychology and spirituality (Weiss, 2005).
There is, however, a problem facing most psychologists when it comes to the study of Kabbalah. Being based on spirituality and the unquestioned belief in Yahweh, Kabbalists are willing to examine questions that are decidedly unscientific, such as Jung’s concept of synchronicity. They also study the higher dimensions of human existence, such as awakening ecstasy (Hoffman, 2007). In this regard their goals are similar to those of Maslow, and his desire to understand self-actualization and its relationship to spiritual experiences, and to the whole field of positive psychology, and its emphasis on doing more for people than simply addressing the adjustment disorders and/or mental illness of those suffering psychological distress. Yet Kabbalah goes even further into the realm of parapsychology, fully believing in reincarnation (Besserman, 1997; Hoffman, 2007; Laitman, 2005; Weiss, 2005). In 1988, psychiatrist Brian Weiss, Chairman Emeritus of Psychiatry at the Mount Sinai Medical Center in Miami, published Many Lives, Many Masters. In this book, he described a case in which he was able to help a young woman through the use of past-life therapy. Since the Kabbalistic view of reincarnation suggests an explanation for Jung’s concept of the collective unconscious (see also, Halevi, 1986), the use of past-life therapy may not be as strange as many would insist it must be. In continuing to study this phenomenon, Dr. Weiss does not suggest simply accepting anyone’s word that reincarnation is real or that past-life therapy will help:
It is vital to carry your logical, rational mind on this journey. To accept everything without reflection, contemplation, and thoughtfulness would be just as foolish as rejecting everything in the same manner. Science is the art of observing carefully with an unbiased, non-prejudicial eye. (pg. 7; Weiss, 2000)
Similar thoughts occurred to Carl Jung and Elisabeth Kubler-Ross, both of whom were nervous about discussing their experiences with patients who reported near-death experiences. However, they were so common that Jung and Kubler-Ross felt compelled to discuss them. Carl Rogers also reported similar experiences as his wife was dying. Thus, the Kabbalists are not simply a group of spiritualists reporting events that are not considered real by any well-known psychologists or psychiatrists. The truth, however, is likely to remain elusive for those who do not accept the evidence on faith.
discussion question \(2\)
Whether or not you actually believe in reincarnation, can you believe in it? Can past-life therapy be helpful even if it isn’t real, or is it always a harmful delusion? Could reincarnation be the explanation for Jung’s collective unconscious, and if not, is there a conceivable middle ground? | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/15%3A_Religious_Perspectives_on_Personality/15.02%3A_Judaism_and_Kabbalah.txt |
Although there are many denominations within Christianity, at times generating significant conflict between each other, Christianity as a whole has been a profoundly successful and influential religion. Approximately one-third of the world’s population, over 2.2 billion people, are Christian, and it has spread around the entire world. At its heart, Christianity is a simple religion, and those who live a truly Christian life are guided by one simple philosophy: love your neighbor.
The Foundation of the Christian Faith
Approximately 2,000 years ago a man named Jesus of Nazareth was born. For 30 years he lived a simple life, but then embarked on a religious crusade that lasted for only 3 short years. At the end of those three years, he was crucified for having challenged the right of the religious and political authorities to lead the people, as well as their decency in so doing. However, he never outright challenged anyone, always teaching love, mercy, and peace. Following his death and resurrection he has been called the Christ (meaning Messiah, or anointed), hence the term Christianity.
Christians believed that Jesus was no ordinary man, but rather the son of God (Yahweh, the God of Judaism). They also believe that he was born of a virgin, through the power of the Holy Spirit. Thus, although Christians believe in one God, they view God in a Trinitarian way: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (Wilkins, 1967). Although Judaic prophecy had foretold of the coming of a Messiah, they do not believe that Jesus was that person. Yet, having arisen out of Judaism, Christians believe much of the Jewish faith, including the importance of the Ten Commandments. However, when Jesus was challenged to identify the most important of the commandments, he surprised those listening:
“The first is, ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one; and you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength.’
The second is this, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.”
from Mark, Chapter 12; Holy Bible
What is surprising about this answer is that Jesus simplified the Ten Commandments even further, emphasizing just two, but those two commandments encompass both the spiritual and the social worlds - love God, and love all people (the famous Good Samaritan parable teaches that all people are one another’s neighbors). Thus, it seems appropriate for us to address the social and psychological aspects of loving and/or caring for other people, as well as for ourselves, as something separate from religious/spiritual pursuits. And yet at the same time, we cannot, and need not, separate our psychological studies from a religious/spiritual context (at least when trying to understand those people for whom religion and spirituality are important daily factors).
discussion question \(1\)
Love God, and love your neighbor as yourself. Is it really that simple?
Christian Mysticism
Christian Mysticism is as old as Christianity itself, for Jesus led a mystic life (Walker, 2003). Since that time there have been many Christian mystics, but two particular groups stand out: the desert fathers and the women mystics (Chervin, 1992; Clement, 1993; Waddell, 1998). As the Christian faith became legal, following the conversion of the Roman emperor Constantine the Great late in the third century, Christianity became caught up in the politics of the empire. Soon enough, a group of spiritual men sought to escape worldly politics and secular distractions by becoming hermits. They traveled out into the Egyptian desert and began monastic lives. In order to be with God, they did not merely seek solitude, but they also sought to eliminate their sense of ego. This was attempted through what we might call contemplative prayer, or simply meditation. However, the sense of ego does not go away easily:
The ego doesn’t want us looking for God because when we find God, the illusion of being an ego will be destroyed. It will mean the end of our self-centered existence and all of its negative emotions…One cannot see God and continue to live as a separate person. (pg. 49; Walker, 2003).
Thus, a battle arises between the sense of ego and one’s efforts to immerse oneself in the Deity. This spiritual combat, essentially the battle between good and evil, exists because of our freedom to choose our path in life (Clement, 1993). It was in recognition of this challenge that the desert fathers sought the solitude of the desert. There they were able to pursue the ecstasy of unknowing, that which is beyond the boundaries of any human ability to comprehend or rationalize the experience:
At one time Zachary went to his abbot Silvanus, and found him in an ecstasy, and his hands were stretched out to heaven. And when he saw him thus, he closed the door and went away: and coming back about the sixth hour, and the ninth, he found him even so: but toward the tenth hour he knocked, and coming in found him lying quiet…the young man held his fee saying, “I shall not let thee go, until thou tell me what thou hast seen.” The old man answered him: “I was caught up into heaven, and I saw the glory of God. And I stood there until now, and now am I sent away.” (pg. 130; Sayings of the Fathers, in Waddell, 1998)
Although there have been many mystics who were men, including the desert fathers, Meister Eckhart (a favorite of Erich Fromm), and the anonymous author of The Cloud of Unknowing (see Kirvan, 1996a), there have also been a number of well-known women mystics, such as Blessed Julian of Norwich (see Chilson, 1995), Saint Teresa of Avila (see Kirvan, 1996b), Saint Therese of Lisieux (Kirvan, 1996c), and most famous of them all, Saint Joan of Arc (see Chervin, 1992). Given the patriarchal history of the Roman Catholic Church, and the beginning of mysticism with the desert fathers, it is enlightening to see that so many women were blessed by God’s grace and presence in a profound mystical fashion, and that this was recognized by the Catholic Church (as many of these women became saints). Thus, God does not discriminate based on gender. Indeed, in one mystical experience, St. Hildegard of Bingen (who lived from 1098-1179 A.D.) was instructed to use the majesty of her mystical gift to instruct men in the true meaning of faith:
…as I was gazing with great fear and trembling attention at a heavenly vision, I saw a great splendor in which resounded a voice from Heaven, saying to me, “O fragile human…Cry out and speak of the origin of pure salvation until those people are instructed, who, though they see the inmost contents of the Scriptures, do not wish to tell them or preach them, because they are lukewarm and sluggish in serving God’s justice…Burst forth into a fountain of abundance and overflow with mystical knowledge, until they who now think you contemptible because of Eve’s transgression are stirred up by the flood of your irrigation.” (pp. 17-18; St. Hildegard of Bingen, cited in Chervin, 1992)
Christian Meditation
The practice of meditation as a form of contemplative prayer has continued to the present day, thanks in part to two influential monks who lived during the twentieth century: Thomas Merton, OCSO (1915-1968) and John Main, OSB (1926-1982). Fr. Merton was a Trappist monk who wrote extensively on the monastic life, contemplation and silence, and connections between Western and Eastern spiritual philosophies (e.g., Merton, 1948, 1951, 1977; Montaldo, 2001; Nouwen, 1972). Always supportive of these various approaches to life, Fr. Merton adopted one of Jung’s objections to Freud’s discounting of religion: the observation that many people in psychoanalysis (whether Catholic, Protestant, or Jewish) had at the core of their dysfunction a religious crisis. Whereas Freud blamed this problem on the failure of religion, Fr. Merton blamed the problem on a failure of faith:
The real religious problem exists in the soul of those of us who in their hearts believe in God, and who recognize their obligation to love Him and serve Him - yet do not! (pg. 4; Merton, 1951)
While a monastic life may have allowed Fr. Merton to serve God with all his heart and soul, not everyone can be a monk or a nun. The Benedictine monk John Main sought to offer an easy path to meditation practice for the average person. Having become interested in mantra meditation following his early career in the Far East and his study of the writings of the desert fathers, Fr. Main began leading meditation groups at a monastery in London. He continued these meditation groups in Montreal after establishing the Benedictine priory there, and he also began sharing his interest in meditation through the publication of books such as Word Into Silence (Main, 1980), Moment of Christ (Main, 1984), and The Way of Unknowing (Main, 1989). Following Fr. Main’s death, his devoted student Laurence Freeman, OSB continued teaching Christian Meditation. In 1991, Fr. Freeman helped to establish the World Community for Christian Meditation, with its headquarters in London, England, and he continues to serve as its director. Fr. Freeman has written his own books on Christ as the inner source teaching us about life (Freeman, 1986, 2000), as well as some very practical books on meditation practice and establishing a meditation group (Freeman, 1994, 2002, 2004). Both Fr. Main and Fr. Freeman recommended a simple mantra meditation, using the Aramaic word “Maranatha,” one of the oldest Christian prayers, which means simply “Come Lord.” This simple, yet spiritually deep, form of meditation comes quite easily to those who are willing to pursue this silent path to contentment and being one with God.
discussion question \(2\)
There is a long and ongoing history of Christian meditation. Were you aware of this, or did you think that meditation and Christianity were unrelated? Does it seem appropriate to compare meditation to contemplative prayer? | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/15%3A_Religious_Perspectives_on_Personality/15.03%3A_Christianity_and_Christian_Mysticism.txt |
The last of the Abrahamic religions to be established, Islam has also been a profoundly successful religion. It ranks second in numbers only to Christianity, with some 1.5 billion followers around the world. Muslims, those who practice the Islamic faith, consider Jesus Christ to have been a great prophet, but they do not consider him to be the Son of God. They follow the teachings of the one whom they believe to be the last and greatest prophet: Muhammad (Wilkins, 1967).
The Foundation of the Islamic Faith
Muhammad was born around 571 A.D., in Mecca (in modern-day Saudi Arabia). An upright and honest man, Muhammad used to take refuge in a cave at Mount Hera, where he would contemplate (meditate?) good and evil. The religion of his time and region worshipped many spirits in the desert, including one called Allah. Muhammad came to believe that Allah was the one and only God, the creator of the universe. Muhammad devoted the rest of his life to preaching Allah’s message, and was soon literally run out of town by the authorities. He fled to the city of Medina, in the year 622 A.D., a date which marks the beginning of Muhammad’s formal efforts to establish the religion of Islam. Muhammad became a great leader, in the name of Allah, and when he died in the year 632 he controlled most of Arabia. Within one hundred years, Islam had spread around the Mediterranean to Europe, throughout North Africa, and to India in the East (Wilkins, 1967).
Muslims believe that Muhammad was directly descended from Abraham, through Abraham’s son Ishmael. Ishmael was the half-brother of Isaac, through whom the Jewish people trace their heritage to Abraham. He received his revelation from Allah through the angel Gabriel, and wrote it down in the Holy Qur’an, the holy book of Islam (the first English translation by a Muslim generally available in the West was originally published in 1917, and has seen numerous new editions since then; Ali, 2002). Like Judaism and Christianity, Islam has a fairly simple set of guidelines for living one’s life (Fadiman & Frager, 1997; Wilkins, 1967), known as the Five Pillars of Islam:
1. Bearing Witness, or the Confession of Faith, to Allah and to his chosen prophet Muhammad.
2. Daily Prayer, which occurs five times a day (dawn, noon, midafternoon, dusk, and night).
3. Fasting, for those who are able, during the month of Ramadan (the ninth month of the Muslim calendar).
4. Charity, or almsgiving, which involves giving one fourtieth (2½%) of one’s accumulated wealth to the poor at the end of the month of Ramadan.
5. Pilgrimage to Mecca, once during the lifetime for those who are able and can afford to do so.
Two elements seem to stand out from the Five Pillars. First, Islam requires an active demonstration of one’s faith in Allah. Second, every Muslim must follow through on that faith with good works, particularly the fasting during Ramadan and the giving of charity to the poor. Thus, neither faith nor good works alone are adequate for those who claim to be Muslim, they must incorporate both into their lives.
discussion question \(1\)
The Five Pillars of Islam seem to be much more directly related to demonstrating one’s faith in God than we saw with Judaism or Christianity. Do Muslims seem more religious than other religions? Is your answer just an impression, or is it based on real experience? In your opinion, how do the Five Pillars of Islam compare to the Ten Commandments or Jesus’ two commandments?
Connections Across Cultures: Islamic Faith, Jihad, Ascesis, and Democracy
When considering the Five Pillars of Islam, it is hard to imagine why there is such a negative view of the Islamic religion in the Western world, particularly in the United States. The answer is actually quite simple, but it is based on a terrible misunderstanding: radical Islamic fundamentalism, and its common element of terrorism, is viewed in the West as being synonymous with Islam itself. As noted in the main text, Maulana Muhammad Ali was the first Muslim to translate the Holy Qur’an into English (originally in 1917; see Ali, 2002). In addition, Ali published another lengthy book entitled The Religion of Islam (originally in 1936; see Ali, 1990).
Many Americans believe that Muslims have a religious duty to wage jihad, a holy war, on all people who do not follow Islam and put their faith in Allah. This belief is mistaken. First, the word jihad is not synonymous with war, but rather it means to exert oneself, or to have the ability to resist one’s enemies. The enemies that must be resisted include the devil and one’s self (our weaknesses and our ignorance, which keep us from the path toward truth). This striving for the truth is reflected, of course, in the verses of the Holy Qur’an:
And those who strive hard for Us, We shall certainly guide them in
Our ways. And Allah is surely with the doers of good.
Chpt. 29:69; Holy Qur’an (Ali, 2002)
What might come as a surprise to many Christians is that this internal battle between oneself and evil is by no means unique to Muslims. In Christianity the same need to strive for God exists, and the word used to describe this striving is ascesis, a word with essentially the same meaning as jihad (Clement, 1993). In St. Paul’s letter to the Ephesians he tells them to put on the armor of God and do battle with the devil. As for whom this striving is valuable, even Jesus makes it clear that one does not have to be Jewish or Christian. In a passage quite similar to the quote above from the Qur’an:
John said to him, “Teacher, we saw a man casting out demons in your name, and we forbade him because he was not following us.”
But Jesus said, Do not forbid him, for no one who does a mighty work in my name will be able soon after to speak evil of me. For he that is not against us is for us. For truly I say to you, whoever gives you a cup of water to drink because you bear the name of Christ, will by no means lose his reward.”
Mark 6:38-41; Holy Bible
There are times, nonetheless, when one must fight in order to defend oneself. When this occurs, the Qur’an makes it clear that Muslims should prepare to accept peace when it is possible to do so:
And if they incline to peace, incline thou also to it, and trust in Allah.
Surely He is the Hearer, the Knower.
Chpt. 8:61; Holy Qur’an
So if the Islamic and Christian faiths are not so different, and both are supposed to seek peace, why have we become so deeply involved with repeated military conflicts in the Middle East? The problem may simply lie with democracy, and our belief that it should be the basis for all government. In America we purport to believe in separation of church and state, though the reality of this is quite debatable. In Islam, however, every aspect of one’s life must involve submission to Allah’s will. Thus, any attempt to spread democracy to Islamic countries, particularly with the American emphasis on separation of church and state, is an act of war against Islam (Shedinger, 2004; see also Esack, 1999; Moghaddam, 2006). No matter how much we might want to disagree with this perspective, if it is their perspective, then we are the aggressors, and they are justified, according to the Qur’an, in fighting back. We believe that we are fighting back, and so the vicious circle of politics continues.
However, there are those who believe that democracy is inevitable in Islamic societies. The critical difference is that they will be pluralistic democracies, not the secular democracy of America (Aslan, 2005, 2006; see also Manji, 2003). The Qur’an makes it clear that “There is no compulsion in religion…” (Chpt. 2:256; Holy Qur’an). Thus, the key to peace in the Middle East may lie in learning to understand one another, and in accepting the guidance of Yahweh, God, Christ, Allah, or whatever name you prefer for the Deity. The mystics sought to avoid the politics of the world, and to place themselves entirely within the presence of God.
Sufism
Keep your hands busy with your duties in this world,
and your heart busy with God.
Sheikh Muzaffer (pg. 35; in Fadiman & Frager, 1997)
This simple expression of the Sufi way demonstrates how one can seek Allah while remaining actively engaged in life, allowing for continued spiritual growth and opportunities to practice awareness, generosity, nonattachment, and love (Fadiman & Frager, 1997). The beginning of Sufism, as with the other mystical approaches, is somewhat shrouded in mystery. Since Islam is a continuation of the monotheistic religion of Judaism and Christianity, the Judaic and Christian mystics might be viewed as early Sufis. Sufism in its proper sense, however, exists within Islam. When the prophet Muhammad died, there was conflict between the primarily Arab and the primarily non-Arab followers of Islam. The primarily Arab Muslims emphasized the teachings of Muhammad’s colleagues, and became known as sunni, whereas the primarily non-Arab Muslims followed Ali, the son of Muhammad, and became known as shi’ah. These two groups drifted apart, and their disagreements became serious, to say the least (Nurbakhsh, 1990). Those sociopolitical differences continue today, and provide much of the basis for the continuing violence in the Middle East. However, a third group also arose, a group that ignored the sociopolitical arguments of the sunni and shi’ah, and focused instead on inner prayer and devotion to Allah. These were the first Sufis.
Practice and understanding in Sufism goes through four stages, with each one building upon the others: understanding the teachings of Islam, practicing Sufism by making the teachings part of one’s everyday life, discovering the Truth (or realizing the inner meaning of the teachings and practices), and finally, having the deep level of inner knowing, or superior wisdom, that transcends the Truth. The great Sheikh Ibn El-Arabi has described these stages as a progression from “yours and mine” through “mine is yours and yours is mine” and then there is “no mine and no yours,” and finally there is “no me and no you” (Fadiman & Frager, 1997; see also Shah, 1971). This perspective is reminiscent of a combination of Kohlberg’s stages of moral development (Kohlberg, 1963) and Eastern perspectives on nonattachment and selflessness.
Similar to Christianity, Sufism considers love to be of utmost importance in transforming the self. As we pursue a path of love in our lives, God begins to reach out and draw us in toward the divine presence. If we are willing to surrender to God, we will awaken and be taken in by Him. To assist with this loving pursuit of God, a number of great Sufi teachers have also been poets. Most notable among these Sufi teachers are Jalaluddin Rumi and Omar Khayyam (see Fadiman & Frager, 1997; Hall, 1975; Khan, 1999; Shah, 1971; Yogananda, 1994). In addition to his poetry, Rumi is recognized as the founder of the Order of the Whirling Dervishes. The whirling dance that distinguishes this group of Sufis is intended to help the Dervish achieve religious ecstasy, and it is far more ritualized than might be apparent at first sight. As strange as such a practice may seem in the Western world, the practice was apparently used on at least one occasion by the renowned St. Francis of Assisi, who lived at the same time as Rumi (Shah, 1971). Omar Kayyam is most famous for a collection of verses known as The Rubaiyat (see Yogananda, 1994). This strange and deeply symbolic poem almost defies interpretation, particularly for those raised in the Western world, unfamiliar with Sufi mysticism. The renowned Indian guru Paramahansa Yogananda, who also made an extensive study of the relationship between Christian gospel and Yoga (Yogananda, 2004a,b), has provided a marvelous interpretation of The Rubaiyat. For example, consider verse VII:
Come, fill the Cup, and in the Fire of Spring
The Winter Garment of Repentance fling:
The Bird of Time has but a little way
To fly - and Lo! the Bird is on the Wing.
Translation by Edward Fitzgerald, reprinted in Yogananda, 1994
In this verse, fill the cup refers to filling one’s consciousness (as one does during meditation), in the warmth of spiritual enthusiasm (the fire of spring). One should set aside regret caused by unfulfilled desires and disillusioning sensory indulgences (the winter garment of repentance fling). The bird of time represents fleeting, ever-changing human life, and it is flying away, leaving little time to establish purpose in one’s life. In other words, don’t waste your life worrying about, or punishing yourself for, either the past or your own shortcomings. Life is short, and there is a great spiritual truth to be discovered!
As with the Christian mystics, there have been many well-known Sufi women, including a number of Black women (Nurbakhsh, 1990). The following is an amusing story that both teaches a Sufi lesson and demonstrates that a woman can be every bit as faith-filled and wise as any man:
Maymuna was reputed to be her brother’s equal in asceticism, piety and reliance on God. Ahmad Ebn Salem recounts the story of a man who went to see Ebrahim Khawass. When he knocked on the door, he was met by Maymanu, Ebrahim’s sister, who asked his name and what he wanted. He introduced himself and asked for Ebrahim Khawass.
“He has gone out,” she told him.
“When will he return?”
Maymuna replied, “How can someone who has surrendered his life to another know when he is returning?”
(pg. 182; Nurbakhsh, 1990)
Discussion Question: What impression have you had of the whirling dervishes? Can you think of any religious groups within Christianity that demonstration such fervent, physical worship in their churches? What effect might this have on the sense of community within the church? | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/15%3A_Religious_Perspectives_on_Personality/15.04%3A_Islam_and_Sufism.txt |
One of the most pleasing aspects of studying Yoga, Buddhism, Kabbalah, Christian mysticism, and Sufism is the recognition that all of these spiritual approaches to life respect one another. An examination of the works of many authors, representing each of these mystical approaches, suggests that there is but one God of the mystics (Armstrong, 1993). Sufi, Kabbalistic, and Zen practices often seem quite similar, as do select Hindu, Yogic, Buddhist, Judaic, Taoist, and Christian teachings (Holy Bible; Khan, 1999; Lao Tsu, c. 600 B.C./1989; Mitchell, 2000; Walker, 2003). Renowned Buddhist teachers, such as His Holiness the Dalai Lama (1996) and Thich Nhat Hahn (1995, 1999), have offered extensive comparisons of Buddhism to Christianity, as Paramahansa Yogananda has compared Yoga to Christianity (Yogananda, 2004a,b). Two of Fr. Laurence Freeman’s books on Christian mysticism have forewords written by the Dalai Lama and Sir Yehudi Menuhin. Menuhin, who was Jewish, was also a personal friend of the guru B. K. S. Iyengar, and wrote the foreword for one of his books (Iyengar, 1966). Fr. Freeman has written an introduction for one of the Dalai Lama’s books. Fr. Thomas Merton was friends with D. T. Suzuki, wrote Mystics & Zen Masters (Merton, 1967), traveled extensively throughout the Far East (Burton, Hart, & Laughlin, 1973), and the Dalai Lama praised Merton as having a more profound understanding of Buddhism than any other Christian he had known. In addition, Merton had a keen interest in Sufism, and taught a course on it, though he claimed not to understand it very well (Baker & Henry, 2005).
Similar to the importance of a guru, Sufis also emphasize the importance of a teacher, or sheikh. The sheikh must be someone who practices what they preach, in order to be an example for their students. A Sufi sheikh understands not only the complexity of Sufism, but also the complexity of the individual seeking Allah. In Sufism there are no self-appointed sheikhs, and all orders can trace their heritage to the prophet Muhammad (Fadiman & Frager, 1997). In Judaism, a priest is typically called Rabbi, which means teacher, and Jesus was often called Rabbi as well. Rabbis often believed that the whole of Israel (as in the Jewish people), were called to be Rabbis (Armstrong, 1993), and most Christians have heard that they are all called to be evangelists, or those who teach the faith and try to convert others to Christianity. As confusing as the mystical approach to the Deity can be, it should hardly be surprising that mystics believe in the need for a teacher to help others understand this path. When it is done sincerely, for those who are indeed seeking the Deity, it is a wonderful gift to be able to give, and even more so to be able to receive.
discussion question \(1\)
Does the fact that mystics from so many different faiths can come together and share their faith offer hope to the future of humanity? Or will human nature always be a source of prejudice, discrimination, conflict, and war? If religion and/or spirituality cannot help, can psychology surpass them in the service of peace and contentment?
A Final Thought
One of the great challenges facing the world today, as it has been for thousands of years, is the belief that one religion is right, and all others are wrong. A Jesuit priest named Fr. Anthony de Mello, SJ (1931-1987), who lived in Poona, India, compared Christian contemplative prayer to a variety of Eastern practices, and wrote marvelous stories to convey this message of diversity (de Mello, 1978, 1982, 1990). The following story, from The Song of the Bird, exemplifies the folly of insisting upon a single religion being the only way to God:
A Christian once visited a Zen master and said, “Allow me to read you some sentences from the Sermon on the Mount.” “I shall listen to them with pleasure,” said the master. The Christian read a few sentences and looked up. The master smiled and said, “Whoever said those words was truly enlightened.” This pleased the Christian. He read on. The master interrupted and said, “Those words come from a savior of mankind.” The Christian was thrilled. He continued to read to the end. The master then said, “That sermon was pronounced by someone who was radiant with divinity.” The Christian’s joy knew no bounds. He left, determined to return and persuade the master to become a Christian.
On the way back home he found Jesus standing by the roadside. “Lord,” he said enthusiastically, “I got that man to confess that you are divine!” Jesus smiled and said, “And what good did it do you except to inflate your Christian ego?”
Unfortunately, Fr. de Mello’s writings led to him being censured by the Roman Catholic Church. Regardless, Fr. de Mello continued to consider the Catholic Church his spiritual home, and he dedicated The Song of the Bird to the church. Clearly, he believed and practiced what he was teaching to others. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/15%3A_Religious_Perspectives_on_Personality/15.05%3A_Connections_Between_Mystical_and_Eastern_Perspectives.txt |
Completing the Personality Theory Journey
At the end of Chapter 1 you were given an exercise to explore who you think you are, and whether other people see you as you see yourself. In the various chapters of this book, you have been introduced to many different ways of viewing personality and its development. You have probably been able to see elements of each major perspective in your own personality, which can make it difficult to think of one theory as being the right one. In these final chapters, you have been introduced to mystical approaches that suggest that there is no real personality or ego; it is an illusion, which separates us from the reality that we have within us an essence of divinity, a soul if you will. In order to help us realize our soul, and to be one with the divine reality, these mystical approaches suggest paths for personal development designed to help be at peace with who we are, and with our place in the universe.
So, have you ever contemplated, or have you practiced, actively developing your personality in a way that will lead to contentment in your life and peaceful, friendly relationships with other people? If you have, was your religious faith an essential element, and do you think that such a “spiritual” approach can also be effective if done “humanistically” by people who are atheists? And now the big question: Do you believe this topic belongs in the field of psychology, or should it only be considered by theologians and philosophers?
As before, there is no right or wrong answer to this last question. The mystics emphasized that the divine is divine, and the physical world is the world in which we live. Sometimes the two come together without conflict, but other times the conflict that arises from religious/political differences leads to terrible tragedies. Consider this: you have not completed your personality journey, despite the title of this section. Your life continues, your education continues, and you have significant control over the direction that both of those endeavors follow. How does that make you and your classmates feel?
15.S: Chapter Summary
Review of Key Points
• The Abrahamic religions include over 3.5 billion people around the world. Thus, they are an essential cultural consideration when examining the factors that influence personality.
• Judaism offers a simple set of guidelines for living one’s life, known as the Ten Commandments.
• Kabbalah is the mystical form of Judaism, which emphasizes blending one’s daily, worldly life with one’s spiritual life.
• Kabbalists encourage a way of incorporating the Ten Commandments into one’s life, in a manner reminiscent of Buddhist mindfulness. The meaningless alternative is to simply view the commandments as a static set of rules to be obeyed.
• Kabbalah, as an approach to the problems of daily life, compares favorably with cognitive psychotherapy.
• Past-life therapy relies on accepting the Kabbalistic belief in reincarnation, and using that knowledge to help people reconnect with their past lives.
• Christianity is the largest religion in the world, with over 2.2 billion followers.
• Jesus simplified the Ten Commandments to just two: love God, and love your neighbor as yourself.
• The early Christian mystics were desert hermits, who helped to establish both Christian mysticism and the monastic life.
• In Christian mysticism there have been many influential women saints, including some who challenged the patriarchal attitudes of men and one who became a great military leader (St. Joan of Arc).
• Fr. John Main, and his student Fr. Laurence Freeman, have actively worked to help bring simple Christian meditation techniques to people all around the world.
• Islam is the world’s second largest religion, with over 1.5 billion followers.
• Muslims follow a set of guidelines known as the Five Pillars of Islam.
• Sufism arose amongst those Muslims who did not wish to be drawn into the political and social battles that continue today between the sunni and shi’ah. Instead, Sufis seek to be drawn into Allah.
• Sufism has developed some most interesting practices, including sheikhs who became renowned poets and the whirling dervishes.
• In contrast to the conflicts between organized religions, and their supposed followers, there is extraordinary peace and both spiritual and intellectual interaction between mystics of many paths (Hindu, Taoist, Jewish, Christian, Muslim, etc.).
• Mystics recognize the difficulty that often arises in the form of confusion regarding their ways. Accordingly, they routinely emphasize the need for a teacher (guru, rabbi, sheikh, master, etc.) for those who wish to pursue a mystic path.
• Jihad is neither a holy war nor a requirement of Muslims. It is an urging to strive for faith, especially in the presence of those who are unfaithful. Christianity shares the same element, and it is known as ascesis. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/15%3A_Religious_Perspectives_on_Personality/15.06%3A_Personality_Theory_in_Real_Life.txt |
To suggest that there is such a thing as an African personality may be misleading. Africa is the second largest continent, with just over 1 billion people spread out among over fifty different countries. It has been the target of extensive colonization over the centuries, and the struggle for liberation from European countries has surely left an indelible mark on the nature of the people there. In addition, the Sahara Desert creates a significant natural division of the people in the north from those in the south. The people of North Africa are primarily Arab-Berber Muslims, with ready access to southern Europe across the Mediterranean Sea. This region can rightly be viewed as an extension of Western Asia, in terms of culture, spirituality, and race/ethnicity (Chatterji, 1960; Senghor, 1971). In contrast, the Black Africans live south of the Sahara Desert, and they are the people usually referred to when we think about Africans. Indeed, for the remainder of this section I will use the term African to refer to Blacks living in Sub-Saharan Africa. Though many people in Africa identity themselves in terms of their unique ethnicity, history, and geography, this book would be incomplete if no effort was made to address the people of this continent. Keep in mind, however, that there is a great deal more work to do regarding our understanding of indigenous people around the entire world.
In 1999, James Lassiter wrote a very helpful article covering many of the historical problems that have affected the study of personality in Africa. Unfortunately, many studies sought to identify the nature of personality among Africans in terms of Western ideals, values, and socioeconomic and technological advancement. This biased view created a very negative attitude toward the people of Africa, a negative attitude that the people of Africa often adopted themselves. Thus, the study of personality fell into disrepute, and largely came to a halt. However, a number of professionals from other disciplines, such as sociology and anthropology, continued to examine whether or not there were characteristics common to the people of Africa, a unique and valuable personality distinct from other regions of the world. Though some controversy remains, and the definitions of what personality is from an African perspective are quite different than those we might recognize in traditional Western psychology, this work has led to some interesting insights. Fundamentally, these perspectives are summarized by the following simple proverb:
Umuntu ngumuntu ngabantu (a person is a person through other persons)
- Xhosa proverb (cited in Lassiter, 1999 and Tutu, 1999)
16.02: The African Worldview and Spirituality
For many authors, a common African personality derives from a common African worldview.
According to Khoapa (1980), an African’s existential reality is one of collective being, they seek to understand the world through their intersection with all aspects of the world and other people. This worldview is holistic and humanistic, and it focuses on interdependence, collective survival, harmony, an important role for the aged, the oral tradition, continuity of life, and rhythm. In addition, there is a fundamental belief in a metaphysical connection between all that exists within the universe, through an all-pervasive energy or “spirit” that is the essence of all things (Chatterji, 1960; Grills, 2002; Grills & Ajei, 2002; Khoapa, 1980; Mwikamba, 2005; Myers, 1988; Obasi, 2002; Parham et al., 1999; Senghor, 1965, 1971; Sofola, 1973).
At the center of the African worldview is spirit, or life itself, a vital force that animates the universe and that imparts feeling to all things from God down to the smallest grain of sand. Although this spirit pervades all things, there is a distinct hierarchy among the things that make up the universe. At the top of the hierarchy is God, followed by the ancestors (including the founders of the tribes, aka the “god-like ones”) and the living. Then come the animals, plants, and minerals. Being in the center, humans hold a privileged position. As living beings, people are able to increase their being (using this term in the same context as in existentialism). The source of spirit, and the spiritness within each person, is divine, and transcends both the physical universe and time. Thus, it can connect us to any person, place, or thing. This is part of the basis for African veneration of their ancestors. In order for the ancestors to avoid becoming “completely dead,” they must devote themselves to strengthening the lives of the living. As a result, they can still participate in life. When a person recognizes that through spirit all things become one, and if they adhere to this realization, they lose all sense of individual ego/mind. Instead, they experience the harmony of collective identity and a sense of extended self that includes ancestors, those not yet born, all nature, and their entire community (Busia, 1972; Grills, 2002; Grills & Ajei, 2002; Jahn, 1972; Myers, 1988; Obasi, 2002; Parham, 2002; Parham et al., 1999; Senghor, 1965).
Based on the previous paragraph, it should be clear that religion and spirituality are very important to Africans. We share a biological connection with animals, and an inherent spiritual connection with plants and minerals, but our privileged position at the junction of spirit and nature allows us to participate in a spiritual life that separates us from the animals, plants, and minerals. This is how Africans believe they are able to increase their being. According to Khoapa (1980), we link the universe with God, we awaken it, we speak to it, listen to it, and try to create harmony. This leads to a profound connection with the rhythm of the universe. Senghor (1965) describes rhythm as the “architecture of being…the pure expression of the life-force.” Rhythm has become an important aspect of African life, particularly in art, music, and poetry (also see Busia, 1972; Chatterji, 1960; Jahn, 1972; Mwikamba, 2005; Senghor, 1971; Sofola, 1973).
African music, like sculpture, is rooted in the nourishing earth, it is laden with rhythm, sounds and noises of the earth. This does not mean that it is descriptive or impressionist. It expresses feelings. (pg. 86; Senghor, 1965)
As noted above, the transcendent aspect of spirit leads to connections between past, present, and things that have not yet happened. This has led to a distinct relationship to time, one that differs dramatically from the Western world. Africans believe there is a rhythmic, cyclical pattern to life set in place by God, and God knows what is right. This includes the seasons, the rising and setting of the sun, and stages of life (birth, adolescence, adulthood, old age, and death). Events in the past are typically referred to in terms of reference points, such as a marriage or a birth. As for the future, in most African languages there is no word for the distant future, and plans for the near future are once again typically made around events rather than a specific time on a clock. Accordingly, time is something to be shared with others, there isn’t really any such thing as wasting time. Tribal elders are respected for the wisdom they have accumulated over a lifetime, and the “living” dead are kept alive by the tribe’s oral historian (Jahn, 1972; Parham et al., 1999; Sofola, 1973; Tembo, 1980).
discussion question \(1\)
The African worldview focuses on the universe and all the people within it as an interconnected whole, and seeks harmony and rhythm. Do you see life in a holistic way, do you try to relate to others as if we are all part of one creation? Do you think the world would be a better place if everyone tried to relate to others in this way? | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/16%3A_African_Perspective_on_Personality/16.01%3A_Chapter_Introduction.txt |
For Africans, the basic unit is the tribe, not the individual. Since the tribe seeks collective survival, cooperation is valued over competition and individualism. Since close, personal interconnections are so fundamental, aggression toward others is considered an act of aggression against oneself, and the concept of alienation doesn’t exist. This concern for the community is reflected in the family structure. For Africans, family includes parents, children, brothers, sisters, cousins, aunts, uncles, etc. All relatives have the responsibility to care for one another, and when parents become old it is the responsibility of their children to care for them (Khoapa, 1980; Kithinji, 2005; Lambo, 1972; Parham et al., 1999).
According to Khoapa (1980), Westerners are surprised when they observe Africans in normal conversation. There is a great deal of spontaneity, laughter, and the conversation goes on and on. They do not wait to be introduced before engaging in conversation. No reason is necessary for someone to drop by and engage in a conversation. Every gathering is an extension of the family, so there is no reason for inhibiting one’s behavior. Simply being together is reason enough to engage others. Khoapa suggests that the “deafening silence” observed when traveling in the Western world is very strange and confusing to Africans.
The cultural institution of marriage provides an interesting example of these principles in action. Marriage is a unifying link in the rhythm of life: past, present, and future generations are all represented. Having children is an obligation, and marriage provides the accepted opportunity to fulfill that obligation. Indeed, since the purpose of marriage is to have children, a marriage is not considered complete until children have been born (Khoapa, 1980; Kithinji, 2005; Lambo, 1972; Parham et al., 1999; Wanjohi, 2005). Marriages can also be a profound source of connection between people that goes far beyond the basic family unit (two parents and their children). The spirit that underlies and provides energy for the fulfillment of being experienced in a family unites that family with other families around the world. In a more practical sense, when a man and a woman from different tribes are married, the members of each tribe see themselves as all becoming one extended family through that marriage (Parham, et al., 1999; Samkange & Samkange, 1980).
The belief that we are all interconnected extends beyond one’s family and tribe to all people. Hospitality is an important characteristic that Africans expect will be extended to all visitors, including strangers. Different than in the West, however, is the expectation that hospitality will precede asking any questions. Thus, when a visitor is met at the door, they will be invited in, offered something to eat and/or drink, and friendly conversation may ensue, all before asking anything about the visit or even who the person is (if they aren’t known). Being benevolent to everyone is seen as a sign of good character or good reputation. African myth and folklore often includes stories about gods or spirits who travel in disguise, rewarding people in kind for how the god or spirit is treated. Selfishness does not promote the well being of the tribe, so a selfish person is likely to be held in contempt and stigmatized. The responsibility for becoming caring people begins with the family (Kithinji, 2005; Lambo, 1972; Sofola, 1973).
Every Yoruba, the stranger inclusive, is expected to demonstrate that he was well brought up by his parents whose emblem he carries about by the virtue of his existence and former socialisation. A good home to the Yoruba African is a place where good training and nurturing in character and good behaviour including good mode of addressing people are imparted to the young…The good child is supposed not only to accept and show good character in the home but should show the glory of the home outside through his own good behaviour… (pp. 97-98; Sofola, 1973)
discussion Question \(1\)
In African culture, marriage and family are very important. How important are they to you? How has your personal history affected your feelings about marriage and family? | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/16%3A_African_Perspective_on_Personality/16.03%3A_Family_and_Community.txt |
The traditional African concept of ubuntu is one that encompasses the best that the people of Africa have to offer in terms of social harmony. It has come into play several times during difficult periods of nation building as African countries have gained independence and moved toward democracy. Archbishop Desmond Tutu, winner of the Nobel Peace Prize in 1984, served as Chairman of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission as the nation of South Africa transitioned from Apartheid to democracy. Rather than seeking revenge and the punishment of those who had supported Apartheid, or attempting to achieve some sort of national amnesia through blanket amnesty, the South Africans chose a third alternative. Amnesty would be granted only to those who admitted what had been done in the past. While some were concerned that such an option would allow crimes to go unpunished, the deep spirit of humanity that is ubuntu can lead to being magnanimous and forgiving.
Ubuntu…speaks of the very essence of being human. When we want to give high praise to someone we say, “Yu, u nobuntu”; “Hey, so-and-so has ubuntu.” Then you are generous, you are hospitable, you are friendly and caring and compassionate. You share what you have. It is to say, “My humanity is caught up, is inextricably bound up, in yours.” We belong in a bundle of life. (pg. 31, Tutu, 1999)
Samkange and Samkange (1980) discuss how extensively ubuntu (aka, hunhu, depending on the language) is intertwined with life amongst the people of Zimbabwe. It leads to a sense of deep personal relationship with all members of different tribes related by the marriage of two individuals. It has influenced the development of nations as they achieved freedom from colonial governments, and it encourages amicable foreign policies. Ubuntu can help to guide judicial proceedings, division of resources, aid to victims of war and disaster, and the need to support free education for all people. The special characteristic that ubuntu imparts on African people can also be seen among the African diaspora, those Africans who have been displaced from their homeland. For example, Black Americans typically have something unique that distinguishes them from White Americans, something called “soul.” According to Samkange and Samkange (1980) “soul is long suffering (“Oh Lord, have mercy”); soul is deep emotion (“Help me, Jesus”) and soul is a feeling of oneness with other black people.” As a result of the Black American’s experience with slavery, we now have soul food, soul music, and soul brothers.
discussion question \(1\)
It has been suggested that the essence of personality among African people has given something special to members of the African diaspora known as “soul.” However, this may be a characteristic of all dispossessed people. Have you seen examples of this sort of “soul?” If yes, what was the experience like, and how did it affect your own views of life?
Although ubuntu is uniquely African, the peace and harmony associated with it can be experienced by all people. According to Archbishop Tutu it is the same spirit that leads to worldwide feelings of compassion and the outpouring of generosity following a terrible natural disaster, or to the founding of an institution like the United Nations, and the signing of international charters on the rights of children and woman, or trying to ban torture, racism, or the use of antipersonnel land mines (Tutu, 1999). Though ubuntu itself may belong to Africa, the essence of it is something shared by all dispossessed groups around the world (Mbigi & Maree, 1995). It embodies a group solidarity that is central to the survival of all poor communities, whether they are inner city ghettos in the West, or poor rural communities in developing countries. According to Mbigi and Maree (1995), the key values of ubuntu are group solidarity, conformity, compassion, respect, human dignity, and collective unity. They believe that African organizations need to harness these ubuntu values as a dynamic transformative force for the development of African nations and the African people. Samkange and Samkange share that view:
ubuntuism permeates and radiates through all facets of our lives, such as religion, politics, economics, etc…Some aspects of hunhuism or ubuntuism are applicable to the present and future as they were in the past…It is the duty of African scholars to discern and delineate hunhuism or ubuntuism so that it can, when applied, provide African solutions to African problems. (pg. 103; Samkange & Samkange, 1980) | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/16%3A_African_Perspective_on_Personality/16.04%3A_Ubuntu.txt |
Leopold Senghor (1965) has defined Negritude as “the awareness, defence and development of African cultural values…the sum total of the values of the civilization of the African world.” For Senghor this is not a racial phenomenon, but a cultural one, based primarily on cooperation. He distinguished this cooperation from the collectivist idea we typically associate with Asian cultures by focusing more on a communal perspective. In other words, collectivist cultures may be seen as an aggregate of individuals, but in the truly communal society, whether in the family, the village, or the tribe, there is a connection from the center of each person in their heart (see also Grills, 2002; Senghor, 1971). This is what Senghor believes has always been held in honor in Africa, and it ultimately encourages dialogue with others in Africa (the White Africans, the Arab-Berbers in North Africa) and beyond, so that we can assure peace and build the “Civilization of the Universal.”
Negritude, then, is a part of Africanity. It is made of human warmth. It is democracy quickened by the sense of communion and brotherhood between men. More deeply, in works of art, which are a people’s most authentic expression of itself, it is sense of image and rhythm, sense of symbol and beauty. (pg. 97; Senghor, 1965)
Abiola Irele has discussed the history of Negritude as a literary and ideological movement among Black, French-speaking intellectuals in Africa. It was initially a reaction to, and in opposition to, the colonial oppression of the African people. As such, it has been criticized by some as its own form of racism (see, e.g., Irele, 1981, 2001; Tembo, 1980), or as something unique to intellectuals, as opposed to more common people in Africa. However, as noted above, Negritude is about culture, not race per se. In addition, a small but nonetheless interesting study by Tembo (1980) provided evidence that scores on an African Personality Scale did not differ based on sex, marital status, having been educated in rural or urban schools, or whether they wished to pursue higher education in Africa or England. Irele compared Senghor’s view of Negritude to that of the existential philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre. Sartre viewed Negritude as a stage in the development of Black consciousness, a stage that would be transcended by the ultimate realization of a human society without racism. In contrast, according to Irele, Senghor’s Negritude is an inner state of Black people. It is a distinctive mode of being, which can be seen in their way of life, and which constitutes their very identity (Irele, 1981). Irele finds value in the concept of Negritude “insofar as it reflects a profound engagement of African minds upon the fundamental question of the African being in history…”
At a time when Africans are trying to experiment with new ideas and institutions, adapt them to their needs in the light of their traditional value systems, there is the need for a sustained belief in oneself, and this belief can be generated and kept alive by an ideology. This has been, and still is, the function of Negritude. (pg. 86; Ghanaian scholar P. A. V. Ansah, cited in Irele, 1981)
Although the concept of Negritude is not without its critics, if one accepts its premise there are important implications for people of the Black diaspora (Irele, 2001). Nigrescence has been described as the process of converting from Negro to Black, i.e., rejecting the deracination imposed by Whites and embracing traditional African values and a Black identity (Parham, 2002; Parham et al., 1999; Tembo, 1980). This process of searching for one’s identity can be very powerful, leading perhaps to a positive self-identity or, at least, serving as a buffer against racism and oppression (Parham & Parham, 2002). For additional information on the importance of identify formation and the development of negative identity, I refer you back to the discussion of negative personality development among Black Americans in the chapter on Erik Erikson. But what triggers this critical search for one’s identity?
For people of African descent in places such as the United States, the process of nigrescence seems to follow four stages: pre-encounter, encounter, immersion-emersion, and internalization (Parham, 2002; Parham et al., 1999). In the pre-encounter stage, the indivdiual views the world from a White frame of reference. They think, act, and behave in ways that devalue and/or deny their Black heritage. Then, however, they encounter personal and/or social events that do not fit with their view of society. Muhammad Ali (formerly Cassius Clay) described in vivid and shocking detail how he was refused service at a restaurant because he was Black, after he had won the Olympic gold medal in boxing and been given the key to the city by the mayor of Louisville, Kentucky (Ali & Ali, 2004)! The individual then becomes immersed in Black culture. This can be a psychologically tumultuous time. For some, everything of value must reflect some aspect of Black and/or African heritage. They withdraw from contact with other racial/ethnic groups, and strong anti-White attitudes and feelings can emerge. Eventually, however, the individual internalizes their Black identity and becomes more secure. The tension, emotionality, and defensiveness of the previous stage is replaced with a calm and secure demeanor. The individual becomes more open minded, more ideologically flexible, and although Black values move to and remain at the forefront, there is a general trend toward being more pluralistic and nonracist, and anti-White attitudes and feelings decline (Parham et al., 1999; see also Mbalia, 1995). | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/16%3A_African_Perspective_on_Personality/16.05%3A_Negritude_and_Nigrescence.txt |
In a fascinating book entitled Education for Self-Reliance, Julius Nyerere (1967) discussed the importance of building the post-colonial educational system in Tanzania. A fundamental premise, according to Nyerere, is that the educational system needed to serve the goals of Tanzania (see also Gichuru, 2005; Khoapa, 1980). Therefore, they had to decide what kind of society they were building. He said their society was based on three principles: equality and respect for human dignity, sharing of resources, and work by everyone and exploitation by none. Interestingly, these principles do not focus on academic content. The successful community life of the village was more important. Social goals, the common good, and cooperation were all emphasized over individual achievement. Nyerere considered it particularly important to avoid intellectual arrogance, so that those who became well educated would not despise those whose skills were non-academic. “Such arrogance has no place in a society of equal citizens” (pg. 8; Nyerere, 1967).
The aim of education in Tanzania became one in which students were to realize they were being educated by the community in order to become intelligent and active members of the community. Since education is provided at the expense of the community, the community is well within its rights to expect those students to become leaders and innovators, to make significantly greater contributions to the community than if they had not received an education (Bennaars, 2005; Sanyal & Kinunda, 1977). To this end, the training of teachers places ideology ahead of content. Student-teachers are taught: 1) the true of meaning of the Tanzanian concept of ujamaa (familyhood and socialism; a basis for planned, self-contained villages), 2) to be dedicated and capable teachers who understand and care for the children in their charge, and 3) to deepen the students’ general education. Since colonial rulers exploited, humiliated, and ignored the people of Africa for so long, it was believed that teachers should be of sound mind and sound body. Thus, admission into a teacher training program requires a good academic background, sound character, physical fitness, and a good all-around background (Mmari, 1979). Thus, teachers were trained to be good role models for the development of Tanzania and her people (see also Bennaars, 2005; Mbalia, 1995).
discussion question \(1\)
In post-colonial Africa, some countries trained their teachers to educate children in being good citizens, and to be role models for how children should live their lives. Do you agree that teachers should play such an intentional role in helping to raise children? If not, does it seem that this was necessary for a time, given the history of colonization in Africa?
Although most of the work covered in this section has been done by writers, anthropologists, and sociologists, is there a role for more formalized personality testing in Africa? While this may not be the ideal approach for studying personality in African, it would allow us to compare this work with our Western concepts of personality (which constitutes the large majority of this book). There is preliminary evidence that the Five-Factor Model applies well when measuring the personality traits of Africans in Zimbabwe and South Africa (McCrae, 2002; Piedmont et al., 2002). Tembo (1980) developed an African Personality Scale on which Zambian college freshman did indeed demonstrate pro-African personality views (as opposed to anti-African personality views that would have indicated negative effects as the result of colonization; see, however, Mwikamba, 2005). Thomas Parham (2002) has used two personality tests designed to focus more specifically on the concept of an African personality: the Racial Identity Attitude Scale (RIAS; which Parham helped develop) and the African Self-Consciousness Scale. The RIAS measures the nigrescence construct, whereas the African Self-Consciousness Scale is grounded in Afrocentric theory (closer to the concept of Negritude). However, Parham has come to the conclusion that both of these tests fall short of measuring the core elements of what might be a common African personality, particularly spiritness and the potential biogenetic nature of African people (Parham, 2002). Thus, if this is an appropriate field of study, there certainly needs to be further investigation to determine whether Western concepts of personality assessment apply to the essence of African personality. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/16%3A_African_Perspective_on_Personality/16.06%3A_Some_Issues_for_Modern_Africa.txt |
One of the most widely recognized cultural distinctions in psychology today is the difference between individualistic, Western cultures and collectivistic, Eastern cultures. In Western societies, such as the United States of America, the individual not only has the freedom to seek purely personal advancement, it is expected of them. In contrast, the individual in countries such as China is expected to subordinate their own desires and ambitions for the good of the family and their community. With regard to a broad view of the African personality, we find a middle ground. There is significant individual freedom, but individuals are expected to serve their family and community. As a result, the individual also benefits from the overall success of the family and community. Thus, there is an ongoing interplay between the value of the individual and the values of family and community.
When this system works to its best potential, the results are people who flourish and can be proud of themselves. In the words of Dr. J. A. Sofola:
…the philosophy, the world-view, values and thought-patterns that form the ingredients or the building-blocks of the African Personality are live-and-let-live; the emphasis on wholesome human relations; the belief of the universality of man and communality of the people in the community; the historic sense of the unity of the human society as consisting of the ancestors, the living and the future generations yet unborn; spiritual attitude to life and attachment to communal life with communal responsibilities; a keen sense of rhythm; the conception of man as one roaming spirit in the chain of spirits in the universe…This is the personality which in its expression of an inward peace and stillness maintains an external composure and gait, head and chin raised high, and with deliberate, calculated dignified steps proclaims to the world: “Black is beautiful” and “I am black and proud of being so.” (pp. 143-144; Sofola, 1973)
16.S: Chapter Summary
Review of Key Points
• Roughly speaking, African can be divided into two distinct regions: North Africa and sub-Saharan Africa.
• Black Africans are the people of sub-Saharan Africa.
• The African worldview focuses on interdependence, rhythm, harmony, and spirit.
• Religion and spirituality are very important to Africans, and humans hold a privileged position at the junction of spirit and nature.
• Time is part of the cyclical rhythm of life, set by God, who knows what is right.
• The tribe is the basic unit of life, not the individual. The family includes a broad range of relatives, and caring for one’s family, especially the aged, is an important obligation.
• Marriage is an important institution, providing a rhythmic link between past, present, and future. A marriage is only complete when the couple has children.
• Hospitality to all people, including strangers, is expected, and a sign of good character.
• Ubuntu encompasses the social harmony that is valued in African life.
• Among the people of the African diaspora, ubuntu may be seen in action as the soul referred to in soul food, soul music, and soul brothers.
• Negritude represents the active claiming of those best elements of a common African personality by the people of Africa.
• Nigrescence is the process of converting from Negro to Black among the people of the African diaspora. It appears to follow four stages: pre-encounter, encounter, immersion-emersion, and internalization.
• In post-colonial African countries, educational systems were developed based on the ideals of the new nations. Teachers were trained to embody those ideals.
• There is some evidence for the usefulness of traditional approaches to studying personality in Africa with formalized testing. However, significantly more work needs to be done.
• Common elements of personality across Africa seem to represent a middle ground between the individualistic personalities seen in the West, and the collectivistic personalities seen in the East. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/16%3A_African_Perspective_on_Personality/16.07%3A_A_Final_Thought.txt |
While psychodynamic theory was developing in Europe, American psychology was largely under the influence of behaviorism. The American psychologist John B. Watson (of “Little Albert” fame) is considered to be the father of behaviorism. Although he is not known for addressing issues of personality development, he did feel it was important for behaviorists to do so. His approach involved reducing personality to smaller and smaller units of behavior referred to as habit systems, suggesting that personality was very consistent. Nonetheless, through further conditioning the personality of an individual could change, leading Watson to make the bold statement that if he was given a dozen healthy infants he could take any one at random and train him or her for any career, including “doctor, lawyer, artist, merchant-chief and yes, even beggar-man and thief” (cited in Stagner, 1988; see also Lundin, 1979).
As the scientific study of behavior continued, it became common to try determining behavior on the basis of mathematical models. This work led to an era of grand learning theories, which culminated in the highly complex models of behavior proposed by Clark Hull (see Bower & Hilgard, 1981). This research took the behavioral study of personality in a very different direction than psychodynamic theory. The direction in which B. F. Skinner took personality theory, however, was so different that it became known as “radical behaviorism.” Skinner rejected anything he could not directly observe, so concepts such as consciousness, thought, reasoning, and the “mind,” were all considered irrelevant to the study of individuals. Only the specific behaviors performed by the individual were open to being examined in Skinner’s form of behaviorism.
In contrast, John Dollard and Neal Miller tried to find some common ground between psychodynamic theory and learning theory. Dollard was a true generalist, with interests in anthropology and sociology in addition to psychology. Miller studied with two renowned learning theorists, Edwin Guthrie and Clark Hull, and was psychoanalyzed by Heinz Hartman in Vienna, while studying in Europe in the 1930s. Together, Dollard and Miller tried to develop a theory that would encompass psychodynamic theory, learning theory, and the influence of sociocultural factors. Their effort to develop what might be called a unified theory of personality stands in stark contrast to the constraints of radical behaviorism. Most importantly, they set the stage for the social learning theorists who followed.
17.02: B.F. Skinner and the Behavioral Analysis of Personality Development
Many psychology students find it difficult to apply the strict principles of radical behaviorism to personality development. And yet, psychologists generally consider our discipline to be objective and scientific. Thus, it would seem essential that we acknowledge those psychologists who apply a strict scientific approach to the study of behavior. Skinner represents the extreme conditions under which some psychologists control the study of behavior, and his contributions to understanding the basic underlying principles of reward and punishment, and their consequences, rank him among the most influential psychologists of all time.
A Brief Biography of B. F. Skinner
Burrhus Frederic Skinner was born on March 20, 1904 in Susquehanna, Pennsylvania. He lived there for 18 years, and graduated from the same high school as his mother and father. By his own account he had a happy childhood, though it was somewhat chaotic in the rough and tumble coal town that was Susquehanna. Skinner roamed the hillsides, invented and built all sorts of gadgets, and developed a love for the wide variety of experiences that life has to offer a child living in a “warm and stable” home. He constantly satisfied his curiosity and imagination:
I was always building things. I built roller-skate scooters, steerable wagons, sleds, and rafts…I made seesaws, merry-go-rounds, and slides. I made slingshots, bows and arrows, blow guns and water pistols…and from a discarded water boiler a steam cannon with which I could shoot plugs of potato and carrot over the houses of our neighbors. (Skinner, 1970).
Skinner’s father, a lawyer, bought many books and maintained a large library in their home. Skinner enjoyed school and, under the guidance of an influential teacher named Mary Graves, eventually chose to major in English Literature in college and then to pursue a career in writing. While still at home, Skinner played the piano and the saxophone, and during high school he played in a jazz band. He also became quite interested in spirituality, particularly under the conflicting views of Miss Graves and his grandmother Skinner. Miss Graves was a devout Christian, who had taught Skinner’s Sunday school class, but held fairly liberal views on the Bible. Grandmother Skinner took a more fire-and-brimstone approach, showing Skinner the burning coals in the stove to make sure he understand the dangers of Hell! Ultimately Skinner came to his own perspective, and from that point forward he no longer believed in God (Bjork, 1997; Skinner, 1970, 1976).
Skinner attended Hamilton College, where he majored in English and minored in Romance languages. He felt that he never quite fit in at college, largely because he was no good at sports and because Hamilton College required students to attend daily chapel. By his senior year, he and his friends became involved in some serious pranks, ultimately being threatened with not being allowed to graduate. He did graduate, however, and began a brief attempt at a career as an author. A professor with whom Skinner had taken a summer course introduced him to the renowned poet Robert Frost. Frost offered to review some of Skinner’s stories, and he sent a favorable reply that greatly encouraged Skinner (the letter is reprinted in Skinner, 1976). However, Skinner had only one success as an author. His father had always hoped Skinner would practice law with him, and together they published a private book on legal decisions in the ongoing battles between the coal companies and the unions. Skinner then spent 6 months living a bohemian lifestyle in New York’s Greenwich Village, followed by some time in Paris, France. Ultimately, however, he gave up his career as an author because he simply “had nothing important to say” (Bjork, 1997; Skinner, 1970, 1976).
As a child, Skinner had always been interested in the behavior of animals and kept many wild pets. In high school he was very interested in philosophy, and in college a professor had introduced him to comparative psychology and Pavlov’s work on classical conditioning. He began reading Pavlov and Watson while living in Greenwich Village, and eventually went to Harvard University to study psychology. At Harvard Skinner developed the rigorous work schedule that was to become one of his personal hallmarks. After leaving Harvard he taught at the University of Minnesota, where, during World War II, he conducted research on using pigeons as the guidance system for missiles. He then moved on for a brief period as the chairman of the psychology department at Indiana University. In 1948 he was asked to return to Harvard, where he worked for the remainder of his career (Bjork, 1997; Skinner, 1970).
Throughout the rest of his career, Skinner attempted to apply aspects of his radical behaviorism to a variety of issues, including child care, education, and the very nature of society itself. His influence has been substantial, particularly with regard for his emphasis on psychology as a science. However, his views on scientific methodology and other fields of psychology have been controversial. For example:
…I suppose it was only my extraordinary luck which kept me from becoming a Gestalt or (so help me) a cognitive psychologist. (pg. 8; Skinner, 1970)
The Freudian mental apparatus doesn’t make much sense to me…I don’t believe that he devised a useful conceptual system… (pp. 5-7; Evans, 1968)
Dreaming…is almost always weak behavior and hence determined by trivia. (pg. 193; Epstein, 1980)
New, deep, real, growth, harmony, understanding potential, unfoldment - an opiate soothing syrup for humanistic psychologists, hashish for the searchers for identity. (an informal review of a new journal for transpersonal psychology; pg. 291; Epstein, 1980)
I’m not at all impressed by the model builders, the information theory analysts, the systems analysts, and so on. They still haven’t shown me that they can do anything important. (pg. 82; Evans, 1968)
In general, scientific methodology is not an accurate reflection of what the scientist really does…it doesn’t reflect the actual behavior of the scientist. Fortunately for science, scientific method and statistics weren’t formulated until the middle of the nineteenth century. (pg. 89; Evans, 1968)
In Skinner’s defense, however, he often felt that his position was misunderstood. One of the most important approaches to the study of behavior that he emphasized was to focus on individuals, not on average measures of behavior that show “none of the characteristic individuality of the organism you’re studying” (pg. 92; Evans, 1968). Despite harsh criticism, Skinner did not take attacks on his scientific perspectives personally. As he described it, he simply reported the facts that arose from his research, and chose not to debate those who disagreed. One exception, however, was Carl Rogers. On several occasions he debated Rogers, whom he described as a friend, about the dignity of man and the control of men (Bjork, 1997; Evans, 1968). He also sent a letter to E. L. Thorndike, who described the Law of Effect after studying cats escaping from puzzle-boxes well before Skinner was born (published in 1898; see Bower & Hilgard, 1981), apologizing for perhaps having failed to give Thorndike proper recognition for establishing the basic concepts that led to the study of operant conditioning. Thorndike replied that he was more honored to have been of service to new scientists than if he were to have received credit for founding a new “school” of psychology (Skinner, 1970).
In 1970, American Psychologist listed Skinner second only to Freud in his influence on twentieth-century psychology, and in 1989 Skinner seemed to express some pride in being cited more often than Freud (Bjork, 1997). Near the end of 1989, however, Skinner was diagnosed with leukemia. He continued to work as best he could, and expressed no anxiety about his approaching death. In August, 1990 he spoke for 20 minutes to a standing-room only audience at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association. Eight days later he died (Bjork, 1997).
Placing B. F. Skinner in Context: Radical Behaviorism
B. F. Skinner shares at least one thing in common with Sigmund Freud: he provided a target for the behavioral and cognitive theorists who followed him. Freud, of course, was a target for everyone in psychiatry and psychology, including Skinner. Although some might say that Skinner established the experimental analysis of behavior, as far as personality is concerned, Freud also thought that he was being very scientific in his studies of human behavior and the human mind. In order to absolutely define his understanding of behavioral principles, Skinner rejected anything he could not observe. Although this allowed him to claim a level of precision never before possible in the study of behavior, it disallowed the study of the mind, consciousness, thinking, emotion, the very things that most people consider to be the domain of psychology! It also disallowed doing many types of research on humans, and so Skinner, his students, and his colleagues focused much of their effort on studying rats and pigeons.
Like Freud before him, Skinner faced his critics and defended his theories. He certainly had solid scientific data to support his position, but when he went so far as to propose that he could solve the problems of society (in his novel Walden Two), perhaps he was asking for criticism. Nonetheless, in psychology today, behavioral and cognitive approaches to understanding mental illness and conducting psychotherapy are popular and effective. Although behavioral and cognitive theorists incorporate the very things Skinner rejected (emotions, thought, etc.), they have built upon the unquestioned behavioral principles studied first by Skinner. In addition, the application of many of Skinner’s theories, such as reinforcement and punishment, has had a major influence on child rearing and education, or at least in our understanding of those processes.
Although Skinner was not the first behaviorist, that honor goes primarily to John B. Watson (since Pavlov was first and foremost a physiologist), his name is typically the first that comes to mind when recognizing behaviorism as one of three great forces in psychology (the others being psychodynamic and humanistic psychology). Thus, Skinner stands with Freud and with Rogers and Maslow as a giant in the history of psychology. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/17%3A_Learning_Theory_and_Personality_Development/17.01%3A_Chapter_Introduction.txt |
Late in Skinner’s life (in 1988 to be exact), his former graduate student A. Charles Catania had this to say:
Of all contemporary psychologists, B. F. Skinner is perhaps the most honored and the most maligned, the most widely recognized and the most misrepresented, the most cited and the most misunderstood. (pg. 3; Catania & Harnad, 1988)
Skinner emphasized, above all else, approaching human behavior scientifically. However, he acknowledged that human behavior is complex, and that our familiarity with it makes it difficult for us to be truly objective. In addition, he recognized that many people find it offensive to suggest that human behavior can be understood and predicted in terms of environmental stimuli and their consequences. Still, Skinner took the scientific approach very seriously, and he knew that science is about more than just determining a set of facts or principles. In Science and Human Behavior (Skinner, 1953), Skinner wrote that:
Science is concerned with the general, but the behavior of the individual is necessarily unique. The “case history” has a richness and flavor which are in decided contrast with general principles…A prediction of what the average individual will do is often of little or no value in dealing with a particular individual…The extraordinary complexity of behavior is sometimes held to be an added source of difficulty. Even though behavior may be lawful, it may be too complex to be dealt with in terms of law. (pp. 20-21; Skinner, 1953)
Given this complexity, Skinner focused on “cause” and “effect” relationships in behavior. In common use, these terms have come to carry a meaning far beyond the original intention. For Skinner, a cause is a change in an independent variable, whereas an effect is a change in a dependent variable. Skinner argued that the terms cause and effect say nothing about how a cause leads to an effect, but rather, only that there is a specific relationship in specific order. If we can discover and analyze the causes, we can predict behavior; if we can manipulate the causes, then we can control behavior (Skinner, 1953). By focusing entirely on observable behavior, Skinner felt that psychologists have an advantage, in that they will not waste time and effort pursuing either inner psychic forces or external social forces that may not even exist. Focusing on actual behavior is simply more direct and practical. Before examining some of the larger implications of this approach, however, let’s review the basic principles of operant conditioning as defined by Skinner.
discussion question \(1\)
Skinner emphasized a scientific approach to the study of behavior, in part, because individual behavior is so unique. Understanding what the average person might do may tell us nothing about a certain individual. However, a science of personality that treats everyone as unique seems to become hopelessly complex, because we must study everyone individually. Does this really seem like a scientific approach, and whether it is or not, can it really help us to understand other people?
Principles of Operant Conditioning
Operant conditioning begins with a response, known as an operant, which has some effect in the organism’s environment. These responses have consequences that determine whether or not the probability of the response will increase or decrease in the future. Reinforcers increase the probability of a given response that precedes them, whereas punishers decrease the probability of a response that precedes them. In common terms we might say that good consequences increase behaviors, or that the behavior is rewarded. However, Skinner avoids words like reward due to their psychological implications, preferring instead to use the technical term reinforcer (Holland & Skinner, 1961; Skinner, 1953).
Both reinforcement and punishment come in two forms: positive and negative. Positive reinforcement involves the application, or administration, of a favorable consequence to a response. For example, when a child cleans their room, they receive some money as an allowance. The response of cleaning the room results in the application of a tangible reinforcer: money. Negative reinforcement involves the removal of an aversive or noxious stimulus. We are commonly told not to scratch itchy bug bites, because we might get them infected. However, an itch is a very noxious stimulus, and it is not easy to ignore them. When we finally give in and scratch, the itching goes away (at least for a while). The response of scratching is negatively reinforced by the removal of the noxious stimulus (no more itching). In both of these examples, the response (the operant of room cleaning or scratching) is followed by a consequence (reinforcement) that increases the likelihood that we will clean our room or scratch our itchy bug bite.
Punishment can also be positive or negative. If a child misbehaves and is spanked, that is a positive punishment. In other words, an aversive consequence is applied (the spanking) as a result of the misbehavior. With negative punishment, favorable stimuli are withdrawn. For example, a child who misbehaves receives a time-out, thus removing them from toys, playmates, snacks, etc. Other common examples of a negative punishment are being grounded or losing privileges (such as television or video games). Once again, in positive punishment the response (misbehavior) results in the application of an aversive stimulus (a spanking), whereas in negative punishment the response misbehaving results in the removal of favorable consequences (loss of privileges). One of the most common mistakes that psychology students make is to confuse negative reinforcement with punishment. This is understandable, because of the use of the word “negative.” So it is essential to determine first whether a consequence is a reinforcer or a punisher. Then determine whether the reinforcer is positive or negative, or whether the punisher is positive or negative. It is also generally accepted that punishment is not as effective as reinforcement, and it is more difficult to precisely control the cause-effect relationship (Skinner, 1953, 1974, 1987). This is partly due to discriminative stimuli, which signal the contingencies that may be in effect at a given time. In other words, the presence or absence of a parent (a discriminative stimulus) may determine whether one will be punished for a given response (if the cat’s away, the mice will play). In addition, the possibility always exists that punishment can cross the line into abuse (physical and/or emotional). As Skinner noted, science is not just about the facts, there is always something more. In theory punishment may seem equivalent to reinforcement, but in practical matters, such as raising children, every situation may require a more detailed analysis.
In order to reliably measure the behavior of animals (typically rats or pigeons) in his laboratory, Skinner built a special piece of equipment commonly known as a Skinner box (though its technical name is an operant conditioning chamber). This apparatus allowed for the precise measurement of how subjects responded over time under varying conditions, and produced a special measure of behavior known as a cumulative record. Although continuous reinforcement is certainly effective for increasing behavior, in most situations we are not reinforced every time we engage in a certain behavior. Skinner identified four basic schedules of reinforcement, based on variations in the number of responses necessary for reinforcement, so-called ratio schedules, or the time intervals between making reinforcers available, so-called interval schedules. Both ratio and interval schedules can be either fixed or variable.
Although the principles of reinforcement may seem relatively straightforward, they can lead to either complex or odd behavior. Complex behavior can be developed with operant conditioning through the process of shaping. Shaping involves reinforcing chains of behavior in a specific sequence, with each change being relatively small and, therefore, relatively simple. As a result, complex behavior can be explained in terms of shaping a series of simple changes in behavior. As Skinner describes it:
Operant conditioning shapes behavior as a sculptor shapes a lump of clay. Although at some point the sculptor seems to have produced an entirely novel object, we can always follow the process back to the original undifferentiated lump, and we can make the successive stages by which we return to this condition as small as we wish. At no point does anything emerge which is very different from what preceded it. (pg. 91, Skinner, 1953)
Sometimes, however, this process goes awry. When an individual accidentally associates a consequence with a response, even though no actual relationship existed, superstitious behavior can result. For example, if you provide a few seconds of access to food for a hungry pigeon every 20 seconds, regardless of what the pigeon is doing at the time, the pigeon will develop some form of food-getting ritual. Since the food is delivered regardless of what the pigeon does, the ritual that develops is superstitious. The development of superstition in humans is believed to follow the same principles (Skinner, 1953, 1987). For a straightforward description of the principles of operant conditioning, and the prime example of how Skinner believed these principles might be applied to education, see the programmed instruction book entitled The Analysis of Behavior by Holland and Skinner (1961).
discussion question \(2\)
It has become commonly accepted, at least in psychology, that children should never receive positive punishment (e.g., a spanking). Instead, parents should use negative punishment (e.g., a timeout) and then redirect their child’s behavior in positive ways. How does this compare to how you were punished, and do you agree that this is always true?
Personality Development
Based upon the principles of operant conditioning, Skinner proceeded to address the full range of human behavior, including personality development, education, language, mental illness and psychotherapy, and even the nature of society itself.
Skinner believed that the terms “self” and “personality” are simply ways in which we describe the characteristic patterns of behavior engaged in by an individual. Skinner also referred to the self as “a functionally unified system of responses” (Skinner, 1953), or “at best a repertoire of behavior imparted by an organized set of contingencies” (Skinner, 1974). Skinner acknowledges that critics of the science of behavior claim that behaviorists neglect the person or the self. However, Skinner claims that the only thing neglected is a vestige of animism, which in its crudest form attributes behavior to spirits. If behavior is disruptive, the spirit is a demon; if behavior is creative, the spirit is a muse or guiding genius (Skinner, 1974). Indeed, Skinner’s arguments describing the self sound quite similar to the Buddhist perspective we will examine later in this book:
When a man jams his hands into his pockets to keep himself from biting his nails, who is controlling whom? When he discovers that a sudden mood must be due to a glimpse of an unpleasant person, who discovers whose mood to be due to whose visual response? Is the self which works to facilitate the recall of a name the same as the self which recalls it? When a thinker teases out an idea, is it the teaser who also eventually has the idea? (pg. 283; Skinner, 1953)
If the self, or the personality, does not exist, but is instead simply a collection of behavioral attributes and functions, then it is an irrelevant concept that needs to be discarded. Skinner did not discount the value of Freud’s explanation of human behavior, since Skinner acknowledged that many sciences take time to develop. But now that behavioral science was advancing, according to Skinner, it became time to discard Freudian concepts of an unconscious mind and mental functioning. Curiously, this is very similar to the way in which Freud addressed religion: as something that had served its purpose in the course of human development, but which should now be discarded in favor of the science of psychoanalysis.
Since no two people have exactly the same experiences (not even identical twins, who do share an identical genetic make-up), each individual is truly unique. When any one of us seems to have an experience of identity, a feeling of self, it always exists within the unique circumstances of our experiential contingencies, the reinforcers, punishers, discriminative stimuli, etc. that have determined our behavioral patterns. Thus, Skinner argues that we do have a unique individuality, but we are not an originating agent, not a self that decides to act a certain way. Instead, we are a locus, a point of convergence for genetic and environmental conditions which have come together and that will determine our next act (Skinner, 1974).
Education
Skinner’s theories have direct applications to education, particularly with regard to controlling classroom behavior and motivating students to learn. Indeed, when looking at the big picture, the challenges facing educators that Skinner wrote about in the 1970s sound very much like the challenges in education today (Skinner, 1978). Teachers are being asked to do more, to address new and different material in their classrooms, and schools face dwindling budgets and rising costs. A reasonable solution: make education more efficient.
Skinner’s approach to increasing the efficiency of teaching was to rely on programmed instruction, either through teaching machines (see, e.g., Skinner, 1959) or specially designed books (e.g., Holland & Skinner, 1961). When I was a teaching assistant at Wayne State University in Detroit, we used The Analysis of Behavior by Holland and Skinner for laboratory sections of the learning course. It proved to be both efficient and effective. Unfortunately, however, programmed instruction is just that, a systematic program, and it takes up time that might otherwise allow for meaningful and stimulating relationships between professors and students. Interestingly, one of the strongest trends in higher education today is to shift from lecture-based classes to learner-centered education. But this is done with the intent of increasing the active participation of students within the classroom, not to isolate them in programmed instruction.
In defense of Skinner’s approach, it is true that his simple teaching machines and books were only a start. Today we have access to marvelous educational programs on computer, and most of them are anything but boring. Some of the educational programs available for children are fascinating and fun games, and that may be wonderful for children. But is the same approach appropriate for college-level students? In time, perhaps, technology will bring us yet other innovative approaches that combine the best of programmed instruction and human interaction.
discussion question \(3\)
Skinner proposed that education could be made more efficient and effective through the use of programmed learning and teaching machines. Have you ever experienced either of these approaches? Did you feel that you were getting the most out of your education in these situations?
Language
One of the most controversial areas to which Skinner applied his behavioral theories was that of language. It took Skinner over 20 years to write Verbal Behavior (Skinner, 1957), but in the end he presented an analysis of language in which he argued that even our most complex verbal behavior could be understood in terms of simple behavioral contingencies. Skinner began by considering whether there is any difference between speech and any other behavior. For example, what is the difference between using the word water when asking for a glass of water and using the arm to reach for that glass of water? In looking at the beginnings of verbal behavior in childhood, Skinner emphasized the simplicity of a young child’s early use of single words to convey meaning far beyond the particular word. For example, when a 2-year old says “cookie,” they are asking for, and expecting to receive, a cookie that they cannot get for themselves. Skinner referred to such simple one word utterances as a mand, which he said was short for several related concepts: command, demand, countermand, etc. When the child says “cookie,” they will then receive one (reinforcement) or they will not. If it is too close to dinner, or if the child has already been told no, the child may receive a loud “No!” (punishment). To make a long story short, all complex verbal behavior develops from this simple beginning, taking its more complex variations from the process of shaping, just like any other behavior.
Perhaps even more controversial, Skinner assigned “thought” to the role of subaudible speech. In other words, thinking was nothing more than talking to one’s self, or behaving in the roles of both the speaker and the listener, but doing so without making any sounds out loud. As strange as it may sound to consider thought as nothing more than another behavior subject to reinforcement or punishment, if one is willing to accept Skinner’s theory on verbal behavior in the first place, he then makes a compelling argument:
…speech is only a special case of behavior and subaudible speech a further subdivision. The range of verbal behavior is roughly suggested, in descending order of energy, by shouting, loud talking, quiet talking, whispering, muttering “under one’s breath,” subaudible speech with detectable muscular action, subaudible speech of unclear dimensions, and perhaps even the “unconscious thinking” sometimes inferred in instances of problem solving. There is no point at which it is profitable to draw a line distinguishing thinking from acting on this continuum. (pg. 438; Skinner, 1957).
There are those, of course, who do not accept Skinner’s theory on verbal behavior. The renowned linguist Noam Chomsky published critical reviews of both Verbal Behavior and, later, Beyond Freedom & Dignity (Skinner, 1971). Bower and Hilgard (1981) consider Chomsky’s critiques to be perhaps the most effective in challenging Skinner’s viewpoint. Chomsky argued that our knowledge of a series of input-output relationships tells us nothing of behavior in general, but rather we should be examining the internal structure, states, and organization of the organism that produced these unique input-output relationships (the very concepts that Skinner rejected). Most importantly, rather than accepting that Skinner had taken an appropriate scientific approach, Chomsky felt that Skinner had placed unnecessary fetters on the scientific process. Chomsky also adopted the cognitive perspective that addresses whether a stimulus in the environment really exists in isolation from the individual. In other words, is the nature of a stimulus affected by the perception of the individual (e.g., how might a paranoid person react to a friendly greeting)? Attempts at supporting Skinner’s view and answering Chomsky’s critique have, according to Bower and Hilgard, simply failed to be effective or persuasive. And so, experimental psycholinguistics has remained with the general disciplines of linguistics and cognitive psychology, rather than becoming a branch of behavioral learning theory (Bower & Hilgard, 1981).
Old Age and Walden Two
Although much of our conditioning takes place during the early years of life, Skinner did not neglect the later years. However, he addressed issues of aging in a decidedly unscientific way, mostly by describing ways in which he had personally dealt with the intellectual challenges of aging. Skinner wrote about a variety of techniques he had found useful in dealing with forgetfulness, fatigue, and a lack of motivation (see Skinner, 1987). More importantly, however, was the need to prepare for old age when young. By preparing for old age, we can meet its challenges in the best possible health and frame of mind. In Enjoy Old Age, co-authored with Dr. Margaret Vaughan, one finds the following advice:
Nevertheless, it is probably easier to be happy when you are young...We do not live in order to be old, and for young people to expect that “the best is yet to be” would be a great mistake. But what comes can be enjoyed if we simply take a little extra thought. (pg. 28; Skinner & Vaughan, 1983)
In this relatively brief book, Skinner and Vaughan recommend a series of practical steps that one might take: do something about old age, keep in touch with the world, keep in touch with the past, think clearly, keep busy, have a good day, get along with people, feel better, recognize death as a necessary end, and play the role of old age with dignity. An important part of the latter step is to have a sense of humor. The realities of old age can be frustrating, but when you can laugh at the lighter side of these challenges, then everyone around you has the chance to feel better too (Skinner & Vaughan, 1983).
Having addressed the full range of human life, Skinner also addressed the very nature of society itself. Actually, it was rather early in Skinner’s career that he wrote the controversial novel Walden Two (Skinner, 1948). And yes, this book was a novel, not a scientific study, though it certainly addresses Skinner’s scientific endeavors. Walden Two is about a utopia, a society based entirely on behavioral principles. Similar to the challenges Skinner faced in his failed attempt at a career as an author, Walden Two was rejected by two publishers, and it was accepted by Macmillan only when Skinner agreed to also write an introductory textbook for them. Few critics were impressed by the book, and it failed to sell for a dozen years. But eventually it did sell, and became a well known, if still controversial, book (Skinner, 1978). Skinner himself has written interesting reflections on Walden Two and its implications, including a fictional conversation between one of the characters and the late George Orwell (author of 1984; Skinner, 1978, 1987).
Perhaps the most interesting aspect of Skinner’s behavioral, utopian society is that it has not remained fictional. At least two communities have been established based on the ideas presented in Walden Two. The first, established in 1967, is the Twin Oaks Intentional Community, located in rural Virginia (www.twinoaks.org). The second, established in 1973, is Los Horcones, located in Sonora, Mexico (www.loshorcones.org.mx). Los Horcones has, among its many interesting programs, developed special education programs for developmentally delayed children, particularly those suffering from autism. Although both communities have been successful, they have found it difficult to expand.
Mental Illness and Behavior Therapy
Although the topics of mental illness and behavior therapy are better left to a course in abnormal psychology, let’s take a brief look at some of the more dramatic applications of Skinner’s theories to this important topic. Today, an important trend in psychology is community mental health, in which it is common for a team of mental health practitioners, including psychologists, psychiatrists, social workers, and mental health nurses, to come together and combine their unique specialties in the treatment of a variety of mental health issues. Following two conferences in 1953 and 1954, on the development and causes of mental disease, Skinner wrote that it is important for psychology to maintain a narrow focus, not an interdisciplinary one.
Specifically, Skinner believed that psychologists should focus on the significant properties of “mental disease.” He describes the organism (or person) as being under the influence of hereditary and environmental influences, and engaging in behaviors. How we define these variables depends on our perspective. We can refer to genetic influences as instincts or, in humans, as traits and abilities. We can refer to environmental variables, both past and present, as memories, needs, emotions, perception, etc. But we do not have to interpret those factors we cannot observe, and Skinner felt it was not useful to do so (Skinner, 1959).
Skinner did not actually reject the possibility of the existence of a mental apparatus, as described by Freud, but he did consider it outside the realm of psychological science. And as with complex verbal behavior, Skinner believed that if we could sufficiently break down the behavioral contingencies that underlie psychotic behavior, then we would be able to describe its significant properties in behavioral terms. This analysis may someday involve a more detailed understanding of what happens in the nervous system (and in the brain), but that analysis may appropriately belong in psychiatry and/or neurology, not in psychology (Skinner, 1959).
Skinner felt that mental illness centered on issues of control, and the development of abnormal contingencies in the control of behavior. Most people fear control, and Skinner posed the somewhat amusing question: How often do psychotics have delusions about benevolent controllers? (pg. 234; Epstein, 1980). When faced with being controlled, under excessive conditions, individuals may attempt to escape, revolt, or resist passively. Given the complexity of human life, these behaviors can take many forms and can result in many emotional by-products, such as fear, anxiety, anger or rage, or depression (Skinner, 1953). When these conditions become maladaptive or dangerous, a need for psychotherapy arises. Skinner viewed psychotherapy as yet another form of control, but one in which the therapist creates a non-punishing situation that allows the patient to address problematic behaviors. The therapist and the patient can then work out programs that reduce occasions of punishment and increase occasions of reinforcement in the patient’s life. As such, Skinner considered psychotherapy to be somewhat the opposite of religion and governmental agencies, both of which tend to rely on punitive measures to control the behavior of people (Skinner, 1953).
Through it all, Skinner was optimistic about the future of humanity, and he felt that behaviorism would help people to achieve their full potential. In this regard, he was similar to Freud, who felt that psychoanalysis was a fully scientific endeavor, which would also help to advance the development of humanity. The difference between these two great scientists of human behavior lies in how this might come about:
An experimental analysis shifts the determination of behavior from autonomous man to the environment - an environment responsible both for the evolution of the species and for the repertoire acquired by each member…but we must remember that it is an environment largely of his own making. The evolution of a culture is a gigantic exercise in self-control…But no theory changes what it is a theory about; man remains what he has always been. And a new theory may change what can be done with its subject matter. A scientific view of man offers exciting possibilities. We have not yet seen what man can make of man. (pp. 214-215; Skinner, 1971) | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/17%3A_Learning_Theory_and_Personality_Development/17.03%3A_Scientific_Analysis_of_Behavior_and_Personality.txt |
John Dollard was one of three theorists whom we will cover in this book who made significant contributions to studying racial issues and minority groups. However, unlike Erik Erikson (see Chapter 7) and Gordon Allport (see Chapter 13), both of whom addressed these issues later in their careers, Dollard (trained in sociology and anthropology) began these studies before he made his significant contributions to psychology. This fact had an important influence on his later approach to how personality is learned, and the use he and Miller made of cross-cultural examples in the books they published together. Indeed, as something of a prelude to his work with Miller, Dollard ends the book Caste and Class in a Southern Town (Dollard, 1937) with the following passage:
…It is one of the urgent needs of social psychology to see the life-history problem against the background of class structure and to get life records from persons who are also described from the sociological standpoint. (pg. 459; Dollard, 1937)
Dollard made an important distinction between class and caste, as it applies to Blacks and Whites living in the Southern United States in the 1930s. Class generally refers to a group of people of similar economic and political status, such as lower (or working) class, middle class or upper class. A caste is a group defined by some social and/or hereditary factor, such as being ethnically Black or White. There are lower class Blacks and Whites, and there are middle class Blacks and Whites. However, in our society it has been the Blacks who were most dramatically oppressed, through the institution of slavery. Thus, Blacks have been relegated to a lower caste, regardless of whether their economic success qualifies them for middle class status, or even whether they are wealthy. This has had a detrimental influence on family structure in the Black community, and with it an important influence of personality development:
Personality formation must be intelligible in terms of patterns in the family. The study of the family as a formal unit has been slighted in this research, but some things are known. One is that the lower-class Negro family differs from the middle-class white family and seems by comparison to be “disorganized.” This is undoubtedly a result of the fact that during slavery days it was impossible for Negroes to approximate white family structure. (pp. 413-414; Dollard, 1937)
Dollard discusses a variety of ways in which White plantation owners worked to eliminate all trace of the African family structure and culture among their slaves, not the least of which was the dramatic removal of them from Africa to America. In many ways the slave owners encouraged pleasure-seeking, lack of discipline, and independence from family. These values helped to keep male slaves somewhat satisfied in spite of their conditions, and they encouraged the independence of children so that they might begin working at a young age (Dollard, 1937). These values slowly established a new culture for Blacks in America, often with negative consequences. After the Civil War, some Blacks also began to adopt the values of the White culture, but they were not accepted by many people in America. This conflict is what ultimately led the Supreme Court of the United States, in the 1954 ruling Brown v. Board Education, to declare that separate is not equal.
Dollard also co-authored Children of Bondage, with a social anthropologist named Allison Davis (Davis & Dollard, 1940). Davis was one of the first Black professors to receive tenure at a university that was not an historically Black institution (the University of Chicago). He successfully challenged the racial bias in IQ tests of the past, helping to eliminate their use in the school systems of many cities, and he was recognized by the U. S. government with a postage stamp in a series that included Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and Jackie Robinson. In their work together, Davis and Dollard focus on describing the personalities and socialization of eight adolescent Blacks in the deep south. They emphasize the demands placed on these youth by both their particular caste position and the social class into which they were born. Individuals may attempt to rebel against their feelings of inferiority with regard to class, and class mobility is possible, but not so with one’s racial identity:
In studying the status controls operating upon an individual one finds that most persons in our society are disposed to conceal, even from themselves, any inferiority in their social rank…Refusal to acknowledge one’s inferior status, and the building of defenses to decrease anxiety on this score are especially complex with regard to class status…Color caste, however, is so clearly and so rigidly defined that persons in the lower-caste society (as well as the general American reader of this book) will exhibit much less psychological resistance to the fact of caste status than to that of class position. (pg. 17; Davis & Dollard, 1940)
It was within this context, recognizing caste and class as socializing factors influencing personality development, that Dollard went on to study learning theories related to personality development:
“But what,” one may ask, “is the practical use of studying these class patterns of behavior?”…what good is such knowledge to the student of human nature, and to our society?…is it a valuable tool which will help us to predict behavior in any given situation and in the end to change it?
The writers’ studies of the class conditioning of Negro children have convinced them…that when properly understood the sanctions of the class position, as enforced by the family, the clique, and the larger class environment, are among the most important controls in the formation of human habits. In order to understand the powerful grip of this class behavior, we must first examine the social environment in which Negro children learn their habits and the specific methods by which this learning is reinforced. (pg. 259; Davis & Dollard, 1940) | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/17%3A_Learning_Theory_and_Personality_Development/17.04%3A_Connections_Across_Cultures-_Personality_within_Society.txt |
Sigmund Freud felt that only his approach to psychodynamic theory and psychoanalysis would allow for an understanding of human behavior. B. F. Skinner felt the same way about radical behaviorism. But very few psychologists have felt so strongly about one, and only one, approach to psychology. John Dollard and Neal Miller attempted to blend psychodynamic theory with learning theory, and the results were quite successful. Their theories on the relationship between frustration and aggression, social learning (developed more fully by Bandura, Rotter, and Mischel, whom we will cover in the next chapter), and conflict are standard topics in introductory psychology textbooks.
Brief Biographies of John Dollard and Neal Miller
John Dollard (1900-1980) and Neal Miller (1909-2002) were born just a few years and a few miles apart in Wisconsin, though Miller’s family soon moved to Washington. Dollard was a generalist, with interests in psychology, anthropology, and sociology, who conducted important research on racial discrimination in the American south. Miller was particularly interested in physiological psychology, and his pioneering work on biofeedback is as famous as anything we will discuss in this chapter. Though pursuing very different careers, their paths crossed at Yale University’s Institute of Human Relations.
Dollard received his bachelor’s degree from the University of Wisconsin in 1922, and then went to the University of Chicago, where he earned his M.A. and Ph.D. degrees in sociology in 1931. His interests at the time were primarily in sociology and anthropology, and he accepted an assistant professorship in anthropology at Yale University. A year later he became an assistant professor of sociology at Yale’s newly formed Institute of Human Relations. Dollard remained at Yale throughout his career, earning the status of professor emeritus in 1969. In addition to his work with Miller, Dollard studied the effects of racial segregation and discrimination in the southern United States, resulting in two landmark books. Dollard also traveled to Germany between completing graduate school and beginning his position at Yale. While there, he studied psychoanalysis and was psychoanalyzed at the Berlin Institute.
Miller received his bachelor’s degree from the University of Washington in 1931, where he studied with the well-known learning theorist Edwin Guthrie. He received an M.A. from Stanford University, and his Ph.D. from Yale in 1935. While a graduate student at Yale he studied with Clark Hull, one of the most influential learning theorists. Like Dollard, Miller traveled to Europe after graduate school, and was psychoanalyzed at the Vienna Institute for Psychoanalysis (reportedly he could not afford to be analyzed by Freud himself). Upon returning, Miller joined the faculty at Yale’s Institute of Human Relations. He remained there from 1936 to 1941, and it was during these years that worked closely with Dollard.
During World War II Miller conducted psychological research for the Army Air Force, while Dollard remained at Yale and studied the effects of combat on fear. Miller returned to Yale as a professor of psychology, and remained there until 1966. He then left Yale to establish the Laboratory of Physiological Psychology at Rockefeller University, where he retired as professor emeritus. Among his many honors, Miller served as president of the American Psychological Association, he received an award for Outstanding Lifetime Contribution to Psychology from APA, and he received a National Medal of Science from President Johnson in 1964.
Placing Dollard and Miller in Context: Learning Theory in Moderation
Dollard and Miller brought important perspectives into the study of learning and personality. Dollard was a sociologist with strong interests in anthropology. Miller was trained as a learning theorist with a future in physiological psychology. Although two such men might seem an unlikely pairing, their combined perspective opened the door for eclectic approaches to psychology. Both Dollard and Miller had also studied psychoanalysis. This combination of psychoanalysis, sociology, and learning led to some of the most famous theories in psychology: the frustration-aggression hypothesis, social learning, and a theoretical basis for understanding behavior in conflict situations. These studies laid the foundation for social learning and cognitive personality theorists.
In addition, Dollard studied cultural effects on personality development, particularly under oppressive conditions. Once again, his work laid the foundation for an appreciation of cross-cultural studies in psychology. However, despite occasional studies by noted theorists, such as Erik Erikson and Gordon Allport, the field of psychology has only recently begun to make a concerted effort to study cross-cultural issues (Sue, 1999). Thus, in some ways, the fulfillment of Dollard and Miller’s legacy remains to be realized.
Learning Theory and the Influence of Clark Hull
As mentioned above, Miller was a student of Clark Hull, one of the most influential learning theorists. As an example of just how influential Hull was, five theorists who advanced his ideas (including Miller, Orval Mowrer [a co-author on Dollard and Miller’s first book together], and Ernest Hilgard [whose learning theories text, co-authored with Gordon Bower, is cited in this chapter]) went on to the presidency of the American Psychological Association and also received distinguished scientific contribution awards from APA (Stagner, 1988). Hull’s theory is not easy to understand, as it is a complex mathematical model of the variables impinging upon an organism’s behavior. Unlike Skinner, Hull focused on the organism that exists between the input and output that were the sole focus of radical behaviorists.
According to Hull, the strength of a response (net response strength; E), or its probability of occurring, is determined by the strength of an internal drive (D) and the strength of relevant habits (H), all within the context of conditioned inhibition (extinction; sIr) and the organisms overall level of response inhibition (e.g., fatigue; Ir). Hull expressed this relationship by using a formula:
E = (H x D) - (sIr + Ir).
Hull later modified his theory to take into account non-learning factors, such as the effectiveness of an evoking stimulus (V) and the incentive motivation of stimuli (K), resulting in the modified formula:
E = H x D x V x K.
For a more detailed discussion of learning theory see Theories of Learning by Bower and Hilgard (1981). Clearly, Hull’s consideration of psychological factors, such as the quality of stimuli, their value as motivators, internal drives and habits, all of which influence the nature of input-output relationships stands in stark contrast to Skinner’s theories. It was within this context that Dollard and Miller attempted to blend learning theory with psychodynamic phenomena.
discussion question \(1\)
Clark Hull proposed a mathematical formula for understanding behavior, based in part on habit and the incentive of rewards. Look at the formula E = H x D x V x K, and consider whether you agree that human behavior can be reduced to mathematics. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/17%3A_Learning_Theory_and_Personality_Development/17.05%3A_John_Dollard_and_Neal_Miller-_Psychodynamic_Learning_Theory.txt |
Frustration-Aggression; Social Learning and Imitation; Conflict
Dollard and Miller collaborated on three books, in which they attempted to apply Hull’s principles of learning theory to Freudian psychoanalysis: Frustration and Aggression (Dollard, Doob, Miller, Mowrer, & Sears, 1939), Social Learning & Imitation (Miller & Dollard, 1941), and Personality and Psychotherapy (Dollard & Miller, 1950). Like Hull before them, Dollard and Miller emphasized drives and habits. They also addressed theoretical differences in the strength of reinforcers and punishers, and they equated Freud’s concept of displacement to the behavioral concept of generalization. Rather than considering psychoanalysis and behaviorism as fundamentally opposed, as Skinner had, Dollard and Miller allowed for a synthesis of these two major schools of psychology. Their vision led to influential and popular perspectives (Bower & Hilgard, 1981; Lundin, 1979; Stagner, 1988).
Dollard, Miller, and their colleagues believed that the relationship between frustration and aggression is absolute. In other words, aggression is always the result of frustration. Equally true, but not always as obvious, is the fact that frustration always leads to some form of aggression. While it may appear that some people very quickly accept situations in which they do not get their own way (i.e., they are frustrated), it is also true that we learn early in life to restrain our aggressive impulses. Although we may appear to be successful in not responding to frustration with aggression, this restraint is most likely only temporary. We may then aggressively respond after some delay, or toward some other target, but there will eventually be an aggressive response as a result of the initial frustration (Dollard et al., 1939). In addition, such aggression does not have to involve active responses, since passive-aggressive behavior is all too common. Indeed, a passive-aggressive personality disorder (identified by Theodore Millon as the negativistic personality disorder [Millon, 1996; Millon and Grossman, 2005]; see the Appendix) was included in the DSM-IV-TR for further study, although it did not make it into the DSM-V (American Psychiatric Association, 2000, 2013). This is an essential contrast to the view of Skinner. Radical behaviorism does not do a very satisfying job of relating responses and stimuli following long delays, not does it easily address the displacement of aggression. However, by accepting internal psychological processes, more flexible learning theories can incorporate factors such as memory, reasoning, emotion, etc. into the relationships between us and our environments.
Aggression comes in many forms, and Dollard, Miller, and their colleagues addressed a wide variety of social factors, including child and adolescent development, criminality, differences between democracy, fascism, and communism, and the nature of aggression amongst the Ashanti. The Ashanti are a West African tribe of people who were considered powerful and warlike. Their fierceness in intertribal battle was said to strike terror into their enemies. Based on anthropological records (primarily the writings of a Captain Rattray), Dollard, Miller, et al. (1939) described a variety of aspects of the Ashanti culture within the framework of the frustration-aggression hypothesis. For example, being captured during war was considered treason, and treason was punishable by death. Thus, it was expected that a warrior would never surrender, but rather would fight to the death. However, a warrior’s primary goal during war was to win, and then return home to the family and way of life they were fighting for. If it became clear to a warrior that he was going to lose, his desire to survive should be foremost in his mind. However, surrendering was punishable by death, so it was not an option. This created profound frustration! The response might then be an aggressive rejection of the culture that demanded his death, and he might go ahead and surrender (as often happened). Another shocking example involved the claiming of infants. In Ashanti culture children were cherished. For the first eight days after birth, an infant was kept in very simple conditions, hidden from any outside observers. Then, after the 8 days, the parents would claim the child in a public ceremony. The child would be named, dressed in fine clothes, given a special sleeping mat, and brought out into the community. If the child died during those first 8 days, while the family was making its preparations for the celebration, the result was a very painful frustration. Consequently, the custom was to violently abuse the body, whipping and mutilating it, and finally burying it in the women’s latrine! As shocking as this may seem, it represents an extreme example of the frustration-aggression hypothesis in a culture where aggression plays an important role.
In a study relating Freud’s defense mechanism of displacement to the behavioral concept of generalization, Miller conducted a study in which rats were trained to strike each other (see Lundin, 1979). Very simply, a mild electrical shock was applied to the floor of a cage containing two rats, and as soon as the rats bumped into each other the shock was turned off. The rats quickly learned to strike each other as soon as the electrical current was turned on. A white, plastic doll was then added to the cage, and when the electrical current was turned on the rats quickly struck each other. Then, when one of the rats was placed in the cage alone, and the electrical current was turned on, the rat struck the doll. Whether this is displacement or generalization depends simply on whether it is defined by a Freudian or a behaviorist, respectively. Although Dollard, Miller, et al. defined the frustration-aggression hypothesis as we know it today, they credit Freud with “the most systematic and extensive use of the frustration-aggression hypothesis,” which led to Freud’s proposal of the death instinct and its underlying aggressive energy (Dollard, et al., 1939).
In their second book together, Social Learning & Imitation (Miller & Dollard, 1941), Miller and Dollard addressed the roles of culture and society in the learning process:
…To understand thoroughly any item of human behavior - either in the social group or in the individual life - one must know the psychological principles involved in its learning and the social conditions under which this learning took place. It is not enough to know either principles or conditions of learning; in order to predict behavior both must be known. The field of psychology describes learning principles, while the various social science disciplines describe the conditions. (pg. 1; Miller & Dollard, 1941)
Given Dollard’s background in sociology and anthropology, it should not be surprising that they gave such emphasis to the social conditions surrounding learning. Indeed, in the preface to this book they discuss the difficulty they had communicating with one another, since they each brought very different backgrounds into this combined effort. They then defined learning theory as the study of the circumstances under which responses and cue stimuli become connected, and they focused their studies on imitation and copying.
According to Miller and Dollard (1941), there are four essential factors involved in learning: the cue, the response, drive, and reward. In simple terms, in the presence of an appropriate signal (the cue), the person responds with a particular behavior, if there is an adequate reward (based on learning). The entire process will not take place, however, if the individual does not want a reward (drive). The normal order, after learning has taken place, would then be: drive → cue → response → reward; when we want something, and we see a signal that it is available, we try to get it, and are rewarded for our actions. Another important aspect of social learning is that both drives and rewards can be acquired. For example, food choices are highly cultural. Would you enjoy a dinner of grubs, whale blubber, and sheep entrails, followed by a few crunchy grasshoppers for dessert? And yet, each of these items is commonly eaten in some cultures, so they must be reinforcers for hungry people there.
As an additional example of the importance of social learning, Dollard and Miller once again turned to the anthropological literature. The Semang people of the Malay Peninsula are quite different than the Ashanti described above. The Semang are known as excessively shy and timid people. When faced with hostility they never respond in kind. Instead, they just retreat farther into the jungle. Dollard and Miller questioned whether this behavior was due to some personality trait or to learning. The Semang often dealt with the more powerful Malay tribe. The Malay often cheated the Semang, stole their land, and enslaved some of their people. When the Semang resisted, they were severely punished by the Malay. As a result, escape behavior among the Semang was rewarded, whereas aggression was severely punished. As this became engrained within the culture of the Semang, it was no longer necessary for each generation to re-learn these contingencies, withdrawal and escape became the cultural norm for the Semang people (Dollard & Miller, 1941). To put it in the terms used above, there is a drive for survival. In the presence of aggressive Malays (a cue), escape (the response) is rewarded with safety (drive → cue → response → reward).
In perhaps their most influential book, Personality and Psychotherapy, Dollard and Miller (1950) advocated an eclectic approach to psychology. They believed that the “ultimate goal is to combine the vitality of psychoanalysis, the rigor of the natural-science laboratory, and the facts of culture” (Dollard & Miller, 1950). They also felt it was important for all psychologists, even experimental psychologists, to understand psychotherapy, since it provides a window to higher mental life. They proposed that psychiatric clinics are full of patients showing three common signs: misery, stupidity (in some ways), and neurotic symptoms. Basically, Dollard and Miller believed that conflict produces the misery, that repression produces the stupidity (perhaps we should say “unconsciousness” or “unaware”), and that neurotic symptoms reduce conflict. However, neurotic symptoms do not solve conflicts, they only mitigate the conflict. In order to better understand these conflicts, Dollard and Miller presented a detailed analysis of conflict, which became the best-known portion of their final book together (Dollard & Miller, 1950).
Psychotherapy may take place in a therapist’s office, but misery and conflict can only be relieved in real life. Dollard and Miller give credit to Freud for making this observation, but there is a distinct difference between how Freud viewed conflict, as something primarily intrapsychic (between the id, ego, and superego), and how Dollard and Miller viewed conflict, as a choice between opposing options. Conflict arises when we must make a choice. Some stimuli are rewarding, some are punishing, and some can be both. We tend to approach a rewarding stimulus, and that tendency grows stronger as we get closer to it. Likewise, we tend to move away from a punishing stimulus, and our tendency to move away is stronger if we are close to it. Two other important differences, according to Dollard and Miller (1950), are that the strength of avoidance increases more rapidly as we get closer to punishing stimuli than does the strength of approaching a rewarding stimulus, and the strength of both varies with their associated drives. These relationships are easier to understand when viewed graphically.
Three types of conflict are most commonly discussed. In approach-approach conflicts, the individual must make a choice between two rewarding stimuli, such as having ice cream or cookies for dessert. This type of conflict is easily resolved, since one reward is likely to be more inviting (perhaps you haven’t had ice cream for a while). A much more difficult situation is an approach-avoidance conflict. In this situation, from a distance the rewarding aspect of the stimulus is stronger, so we approach the stimulus. As we approach, however, the drive to avoid the stimulus grows rapidly, until we move away. For example, when an abusive parent tries to comfort a child (something an abused child cannot trust), there is a drive to move toward the parent for comfort (approach) as well as a drive to avoid further abuse (avoidance). Thus, the child may begin to approach the parent, but as they move closer they become more fearful and anxious, so they back away. This type of conflict can clearly create the sort of misery that Dollard and Miller were writing about. Finally, we have avoidance-avoidance conflicts, where both of our choices will result in punishment. For example, if a child has misbehaved, and their parent is going to punish them, the natural response is to run away. With young children this situation can be very easy to observe. However, many parents will then yell: “Don’t you dare run away from me!” Now the child must choose between being punished (avoidance) or running away and being punished worse (avoidance). In this situation, the typical response is to freeze, and make no choice at all. The child may still be punished, but they will not have chosen the punishment.
Addressing the nature of an individual patient and their levels of approach and avoidance in conflicting situations is critical. According to Dollard and Miller, neurotic patients generally have high levels of avoidance. The key here is that these people have become patients. Many people suffer, and are urged by their friends to work on improving their situation. When those individuals have relatively low levels of avoidance motivation, they may well be successful in taking care of their problems. It is the ones who cannot overcome their avoidance issues who end up in therapy. Thus, if the therapist attempts to encourage the patient to approach their feared goals, the therapist will only increase the patient’s fear and conflict, and the resulting misery will drive the patient out of therapy (Dollard & Miller, 1950). Instead, the therapist must focus on reducing the fears that motivated the patient’s avoidance in the first place.
Overall, Dollard and Miller emphasized that psychotherapists must be well-trained, open-minded, stable individuals who put the interests of their patients first.
We have emphasized the precautions important to psychologists who work as psychotherapists. In the same connection we stress that the ability to treat organic disease does not automatically carry with it a skill at psychotherapy. Nor does the possession of any degree such as Ph.D. or M.D. routinely confer such skill. Only the knowledge of theory, the kind of character, and the supervised training discussed here can make a man a psychotherapist. Anyone who undertakes psychotherapy without such training is exposing his patient to real danger and committing a moral, if not yet a legal, fraud. (pg. 422; Dollard & Miller, 1950)
discussion question \(1\)
Dollard and Miller described how the Semang culture seems to lack aggression, as a result of their learning the danger of challenging the Malay. Can you recognize examples in your own life where a certain group seems to act in a predictable way as the result of how another group acts? If yes, how has one group reinforced or punished the behavior of the other in consistent ways, in keeping with the predictable behavioral outcomes?
Psychoanalysis, Behavior Therapy, and Relational Models
Paul Wachtel has continued studying the relationship between psychoanalysis and behavior therapy, following in the footsteps of Dollard and Miller, and he has also extended this comparison into the “relational world” (Wachtel, 1977, 1997). Wachtel emphasized that psychotherapy should be understood in terms of the theory that guides it, and that the practice of therapy provides the true test of any psychological theory related to personality and/or mental illness. Behavior therapy is appealing in terms of being direct and practical, but Wachtel feels that it can gain in several ways from being blended with psychoanalysis. He questions whether pure behavior therapists can really assess psychological conditions, whether they achieve narrow gains at the expense of broader psychological change, and he addresses the ethical implications of being involved in specifically changing another person’s behavior. He also addresses several problems that behaviorists see for psychoanalysis, such as the focus on internal states that cannot be observed, whether underlying causes are really treated instead of symptoms, and the application of the medical model to psychological processes.
It is my general premise that psychodynamic and behavioral approaches to psychotherapy, and to the understanding of personality, are far more compatible than is generally recognized, and that an integration of the concepts and observations accumulated by these two approaches can greatly enrich our clinical work and our understanding of human behavior…It is my experience that workers guided by either of these two broad frames of reference tend to have only a rather superficial knowledge (and sometimes none at all) of the important regularities observed by those guided by the other viewpoint. (pg. 5; Wachtel, 1977)
In Psychoanalysis, Behavior Therapy, and the Relational World, Wachtel (1997) discusses advances in the recognition of object relations theory in American psychology, and how object relations theory fits into connections between traditional psychodynamic perspectives and learning theory. Although it was not necessarily the intent of object relations theorists, object relations theory has shifted the focus of psychoanalysis from internal psychological conflicts to relationships with other people. Thus, there has been a shift from an internal focus to an external focus, which is more compatible with learning theory (and the input-output contingencies that are essential to learning). Wachtel also considers this shift as favorable for connections between psychoanalysis and family systems approaches to therapy. Surprisingly, Wachtel makes no mention of relational-cultural theory and the work of the Stone Center Group, which seems ideally suited to the integration of approaches proposed by Wachtel. Regardless of the nature and extent to which these various approaches might be integrated, it remains of the utmost importance that the focus of the therapist remains on helping the patient (Wachtel, 1997). | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/17%3A_Learning_Theory_and_Personality_Development/17.06%3A_Dollard_and_Miller%27s_Psychodynamic_Learning_Perspective.txt |
As shown above, Dollard and Miller regularly incorporated interesting cultural examples in their work relating learning theory to psychodynamic processes. Though it may not be obvious, Skinner’s radical behaviorism is as intercultural as any theory. A detailed analysis of environmental influences on behavior, including past contingencies and present cues, must incorporate an examination of the unique cultural factors that are part and parcel of those contingencies in different cultural groups. In addition, of course, some psychologists today continue to study relationships between culture and learning.
Tweed and Lehman (2002) compared Western and Chinese learning styles by using two extraordinary teachers from ancient times as examples of these potentially different styles: Confucius and Socrates. Their article begins with an attempt to address the likely controversy that accompanies such a study. They carefully and thoughtfully point out that one can easily misunderstand any contrast between cultures that are difficult to define. For example, what does “Western” mean? Does it really mean European-Americans, or does that leave out Canadians, Australians, and non-European Westerners? So, Tweed and Lehman prefer the terms culturally Western and culturally Chinese, openly admitting that another important issue is that some Western people may be culturally Chinese and vice versa. They also point out their study was meant to be descriptive, not judgmental. Having presented such caveats, they proceeded with their study, and yet received some criticism nonetheless (Gurung, 2003; Li, 2003; see also the response to these critiques by Tweed & Lehman, 2003).
Tweed and Lehman offer the following generalizations about culturally Western and culturally Chinese learning: culturally Western learning focuses on overt and private questioning, expressing personal hypotheses, and a desire for self-directed tasks, whereas culturally Chinese learning emphasizes effort-focused learning, pragmatic orientations, and acceptance of behavior reform as an academic goal (Tweed & Lehman, 2002). In keeping with their non-judgmental attitude, they suggest that these disparate approaches both have their place in education, and that the ideal situation for students would be one that is academically bicultural, an environment that offers the opportunity for the strengths of each approach to learning to come out:
…These students would be in a sense academically bicultural and could operate adaptively within environments requiring Confucian or Socratic approaches…Educators…would encourage both thoughtful acquisition (Confucian) and inquiry (Socratic) such that students acquire knowledge and thinking skills that become fully understood, active, and elicited in many domains beyond the academic context. (pg. 97; Tweed & Lehman, 2002)
One of the individuals who commented on Tweed and Lehman’s article, Jin Li, has focused more directly on how cultural factors influence learning itself. As essential difference between culturally Western and culturally Chinese learning is that Socrates proposed that the best learners develop and use their minds to inquire into the world, whereas the great Chinese tutor Mencius taught that becoming a better, more virtuous person is the most essential quality for a learner (Li, 2005). This perspective is reminiscent of Wober’s study on intelligence amongst the Baganda people in Africa. They consider intelligence to be something closer to what we would call wisdom, and their educational system is focused on an individual’s ability to succeed by conforming to the expectations of society, rather than on the ability to solve new and independent problems (Wober, 1974). Since cultural attitudes and beliefs develop early in life (Ferraro, 2006a; Matsumoto & Juang, 2004), a valuable educational objective would be to emphasize the strengths of each approach to learning as early as possible in the school years (or even during the preschool years).
In addition to broad-based effects of culture on learning in general, culture also comes into play for many of the aspects of learning we have examined in this chapter. Henrich et al. (2006) recently demonstrated that a wide variety of societies are willing to participate in costly punishment in order to encourage cooperation among groups. In other words, each party to an agreement is motivated to abide by the agreement because the consequences of breaking it are severe. This study involved fifteen different cultural groups from Africa, North America, South America, Asia, and Oceania, suggesting that willingness to cooperate as a function of severe punishment is universal. Language, which Skinner believed is learned just like any other behavior, appears to be essential for the development of autobiographical memory, which serves primarily social and cultural functions and is intimately related to social and cultural development (Fivush & Nelson, 2004). Presenting an interesting perspective on conflict, Eidelson and Eidelson (2003) have identified five belief domains that propel groups toward conflict. When individuals experience feelings of superiority, injustice, vulnerability, distrust, or helplessness, there is a good chance they will feel frustrated. When their individual-level core beliefs parallel the group-level worldview, the situation may trigger or constrain conflict or, possibly, trigger violent struggle (Eidelson & Eidelson, 2003). In such situations, the worldview of the larger group may be serving as a discriminative stimulus that it is acceptable to act out on one’s individual frustration, since the society in which one lives is likely to reinforce any subsequent aggression (since they share the individual’s frustration). In the next two chapters, we take a closer look at how the social environment and cognitive processes contribute to the development of our personality. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/17%3A_Learning_Theory_and_Personality_Development/17.07%3A_Cultural_Effects_on_Learning.txt |
Positive Reinforcement Keeps Us Behaving!
The presence of positive reinforcement in our lives can be seen in a multitude of ways. We use it to encourage our children and train our pets, it is quite common in education, from the earliest grades through college, and it enters into our lives as adults in many ways. Often the application of reinforcement is not intentional, we give it out of habit, and partly because it leads to reinforcement for us as well. Although learning theorists may disagree about the nature of reinforcement, no one can deny it.
There are many ways in which positive reinforcement is given to children. Infants respond favorably to attention, and as they coo and smile back, that attention is itself reinforced. This helps to create an essential bond between the child and its caregivers. In the case of premature infants, gentle physical contact (massaging or stroking) by the parents is typically reinforced as a result of the babies gaining weight more rapidly and being more active (Field, 1993). In other words, caring for an at-risk infant is reinforced, and thus the caring behavior continues. Infant massage is quite popular in many countries around the world, and it is part of the total approach to therapy recommended by Wilhelm Reich (Field, 2000, 2001).
As children grow a little older, secondary reinforcers such as encouraging words (“You can do it!”) or clapping are commonly used to reinforce taking first steps or solving a simple puzzle. Of course, primary reinforcers (e.g., crackers or juice) remain very popular as well. Such simple examples of reinforcement are certainly not unique to humans. Small pieces of food are often used to train dogs, and the reinforced behavior increases as a result, just like it does with children. While this demonstrates the basic universality of behavioral principles, it does not suggest that dogs have a personality. However, if you were to ask most pet owners, they will tell you that their animals do have personalities. And junk yard dogs don’t become vicious as a result of being treated with loving kindness.
In educational settings, positive reinforcement is used quite intentionally, and can be a lot of fun with young children. Teachers can use a wide variety of stars, smiley face stickers, student of the week awards, and other little treats that children find very rewarding. Sometimes children receive “good citizen” awards when their teachers observe an occasion of prosocial behavior (such as helping another child who was hurt on the playground). Each of these reinforcers is intended to increase those behaviors that are viewed favorably in the educational environment (completed assignments, good grades, and good citizenship). As students get older, the reinforcers come less often (as with schedules of reinforcement). Grades are given out at the end of a term or semester (reinforcing, of course, only if they are good grades). Measures such as being Valedictorian, in the top 10 of the class, being on the Dean’s List in college, or graduating summa cum laude are the pinnacles of this positive reinforcement hierarchy, yet they depend on long time intervals (some as long as the typical four years of high school or college).
As adults, our reinforcement often becomes more complicated. Based on Hull’s formula H x D x V x K, consider the effect of being offered chocolate for dessert. After eating dinner, our drive for food should decrease, and we should not be likely to eat more. However, chocolate is a powerful incentive, so we may go ahead and eat it even if we are no longer hungry. Skinner’s radical behaviorism cannot account for the phenomenon of eating something we really like when we have already eaten our fill. And yet many of us have experienced that desire to continue eating something we really like, even after we feel uncomfortably stuffed with food! One might also consider Dollard and Miller’s frustration-aggression hypothesis, and the problem many people face when trying to lose weight. It is extremely difficult to stay on a low calorie diet, especially if we cannot eat the foods we like. Very simply, this is frustrating. According to Dollard and Miller, frustration always leads to aggression. How might this aggression be manifested? We return to overeating, even though it is bad for us. In other words, we are harming ourselves and/or rebelling against a culture that seems to demand being thin in order to be attractive. Interestingly, many diet programs have responded to this problem (whether or not they understood it this way) by providing either tantalizing recipes or by offering the food itself in prepackaged form. The hope is that the meals will themselves be reinforcing, thus eliminating the frustration caused by munching endless amounts of celery and rice cakes. Of course, these days you can buy quite an interesting variety of flavored rice cakes, so even they can be reinforcing for some people! | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/17%3A_Learning_Theory_and_Personality_Development/17.08%3A_Personality_Theory_in_Real_Life.txt |
Review of Key Points
• Skinner emphasized the experimental analysis of human behavior, despite its complexity. He addressed causes and effects, but was very precise in describing a cause as a change in an independent variable and an effect as a change in a dependent variable.
• Reinforcers increase the likelihood of behaviors that precede them; punishers decrease the likelihood of behaviors that precede them.
• Positive reinforcement involves giving a reinforcer, negative reinforcement involves removing an aversive or noxious stimulus.
• Positive punishment involves applying a punisher, negative punishment involves removing reinforcers.
• Discriminative stimuli signal the behavioral contingencies in effect at a given time.
• Skinner automated much of his research, inventing the operant conditioning chamber (aka, the Skinner box). The data were typically collected in the form a cumulative record.
• The operant conditioning chamber was designed to control the schedule of reinforcement. These schedules could be either fixed or variable, and based on either ratios (number) or intervals (time).
• Operant conditioning can lead to complex behavior by shaping the behavior in a series of small steps.
• When a subject accidentally forms an inappropriate association, superstitious behavior can result.
• Skinner claimed that our typical idea of the person, or the self, is a vestige of animism, the belief that we are inhabited by spirits. Instead, he believed we are simply a locus for the convergence of genetic and environmental conditions.
• According to Skinner, education can be made more efficient by using programmed instruction and teaching machines.
• Language, according Skinner, begins with the association of simple word elements known as mands.
• Skinner believed that behavioral principles could be applied to improve life in old age as well as to improve society itself.
• In attempting to address mental illness, Skinner did not rule out the possibility of a disordered mind. However, he felt that such a construct served no useful purpose in understanding abnormal behavior. He also believed that mental illness focused on issues of control.
• Clark Hull, a major influence on Dollard and Miller, proposed a mathematical model of learning that included the nature of the mind and experience.
• Dollard and Miller believed that frustration always led to aggression, and that aggression could always be traced back to frustration. They applied their frustration-aggression hypothesis to a variety of cultural groups.
• Dollard and Miller began the field of social learning, with an emphasis on the learning processes of imitation and copying.
• When addressing psychological disorders, Dollard and Miller emphasized conflict. They provided a theoretical basis for understanding approach-approach conflicts, approach-avoidance conflicts, and avoidance-avoidance conflicts.
• By incorporating an appreciation for the contribution of object relations theory, Wachtel has advanced our understanding of how learning theory and psychodynamic theory can be combined in an eclectic approach to psychotherapy.
• Tweed and Lehman caution against regional stereotypes when examining cultural aspects of learning. They propose using the terms “culturally Western” and, for their particular study, “culturally Chinese.”
• Since culture is learned early in life, any attempt to incorporate the best aspects of different cultural approaches to education must begin early. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/17%3A_Learning_Theory_and_Personality_Development/17.S%3A_Chapter_Summary.txt |
The social learning theorists observed that the complexity of human behavior cannot easily be explained by traditional behavioral theories. Bandura recognized that people learn a great deal from watching other people and seeing the rewards and/or punishments that other people receive. Social learning theorists do not deny the influence of reinforcement and punishment, but rather, they suggest that it can be experienced through observation and does not require direct, personal experience as Skinner would argue. In addition, observational learning requires cognition, something that radical behaviorists consider outside the realm of psychological research, since cognition cannot be observed. Bandura took a broad theoretical perspective on social learning, whereas Rotter and Mischel focused more closely on specific cognitive aspects of social learning and behavior.
It is also important to point out an artificial distinction that is difficult to avoid in the chapters of this section. Chapters 10, 11, and 12 are roughly set up as chapters on radical behaviorism and formal learning theory, followed by social learning, and then concluding with cognitive theories on personality development. However, as will be evident, the chapters overlap a great deal. For example, Dollard and Miller’s attempt to find a middle ground between Freud and Skinner led to their initial descriptions of social learning, which provided a prelude to this chapter. Bandura, Rotter, and Mischel address a number of aspects of cognition in their theories, but they are not as completely focused on cognition as are Kelly, Beck, and Ellis, hence the separation of this chapter from the following one. In Social Learning Theory, Bandura had this to say:
A valid criticism of extreme behaviorism is that, in a vigorous effort to avoid spurious inner causes, it has neglected determinants of behavior arising from cognitive functioning…Because some of the inner causes invoked by theorists over the years have been ill-founded does not justify excluding all internal determinants from scientific inquiry…such studies reveal that people learn and retain behavior much better by using cognitive aids that they generate than by reinforced repetitive performance…A theory that denies that thoughts can regulate actions does not lend itself readily to the explanation of complex human behavior. (pg. 10; Bandura, 1977).
18.02: Albert Bandura and Social Learning Theory
Bandura is the most widely recognized individual in the field of social learning theory, despite the facts that Dollard and Miller established the field and Rotter was beginning to examine cognitive social learning a few years before Bandura. Nonetheless, Bandura’s research has had the most significant impact, and the effects of modeling on aggressive behavior continue to be studied today (see “Personality Theory in Real Life” at the end of the chapter). Therefore, we will begin this chapter by examining the basics of Bandura’s social learning perspective.
Brief Biography of Albert Bandura
Albert Bandura was born in 1925, in the small town of Mundare, in northern Alberta, Canada. His parents had emigrated from Eastern Europe (his father from Poland, his mother from the Ukraine), and eventually saved enough money to buy a farm. Farming in northern Canada was not easy. One of Bandura’s sisters died during a flu pandemic, one of his brothers died in a hunting accident, and part of the family farm was lost during the Great Depression. Nonetheless, the Bandura family persevered, and maintained a lively and happy home.
Although Bandura’s parents lacked any formal education, they stressed its value. Despite having only one small school in town, which lacked both teachers and academic resources, the town’s children developed a love of learning and most of them attended universities around the world. Following the encouragement of his parents, Bandura also sought a wide variety of other experiences while he was young. He worked in a furniture manufacturing plant, and performed maintenance on the Trans-Alaska highway. The latter experience, in particular, introduced Bandura to a variety of unusual individuals, and offered a unique perspective on psychopathology in everyday life.
When Bandura went to the University of British Columbia, he intended to major in biology. However, he had joined a carpool with engineering and pre-med students who attended classes early in the morning. Bandura looked for a class to fit this schedule, and happened to notice that an introductory psychology course was offered at that time. Bandura enjoyed the class so much that he changed his major to psychology, receiving his bachelor’s degree in 1949. Bandura then attended graduate school at the University of Iowa, in a psychology department strongly influenced by Kenneth Spence, a former student of Clark Hull. Thus, the psychology program at the University of Iowa was strongly behavioral in its orientation, and they were well versed in the behavioral research conducted in the psychology department at Yale University.
As we saw in the previous chapter, John Dollard and Neal Miller had established the field of social learning at Yale in the 1930s, but they had done so within the conceptual guidelines of Hullian learning theory. Bandura was not particularly interested in Hull’s approach to learning, but he was impressed by Dollard and Miller’s concepts of modeling and imitation. Bandura received his Ph.D. in clinical psychology in 1952, and then began a postdoctoral position at the Wichita Guidance Center. Bandura was attracted to this position, in part, because the psychologist in charge was not heavily immersed in the Freudian psychodynamic approach that was still so prevalent in clinical psychology.
Following his postdoctoral training, Bandura became a member of the faculty at Stanford University, where he spent the rest of his career. The chairman of Bandura’s department had been studying frustration and aggression, and this influenced Bandura to begin his own studies on social learning and aggression. This research revealed the critical role that modeling plays in social learning, and soon resulted in the publication of Adolescent Aggression (co-authored by Richard Walters, Bandura’s first graduate student; Bandura & Walters, 1959). This line of research also led to the famous “Bobo” doll studies, which helped to demonstrate that even young children can learn aggressive behavior by observing models. Bandura then became interested in self-regulatory behavior in children, and one of the colleagues he collaborated with was Walter Mischel, whose work we will address later in this chapter. During his long and productive career, Bandura became more and more interested in the role played by cognition in social learning, eventually renaming his theory to reflect his social cognitive perspective on human learning. He also examined the role of the individual in influencing the nature of the environment in which they experience life, and how their own expectations of self-efficacy affect their willingness to participate in aspects of that life.
Bandura has received numerous honors during his career. Included among them, he has served as president of the American Psychological Association and received a Distinguished Scientific Contribution Award from APA. He received the William James Award from the American Psychological Society (known today as the Association for Psychological Science), a Guggenheim Fellowship, the Distinguished Contribution Award from the International Society for Research in Aggression, and a Distinguished Scientist Award from the Society of Behavioral Medicine. Bandura has also been elected to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, to the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences, and he has received numerous honorary degrees from universities around the world. The list goes on, not the least of which is his Outstanding Lifetime Contribution to Psychology Award, received from APA in 2004.
Placing Bandura in Context: Social Learning Theory Establishes Its Independence
Although social learning theory has its foundation in the work of Dollard and Miller, they addressed social learning in the context of Hullian learning theory (complete with mathematical formulae). Bandura shifted the focus of social learning away from traditional behavioral perspectives, and established social learning as a theory on its own. Bandura also freely acknowledged cognition in the learning process, something that earlier behaviorists had actively avoided. By acknowledging both the external processes of reinforcement and punishment and the internal cognitive processes that make humans so complex, Bandura provided a comprehensive theory of personality that has been very influential.
Although Bandura criticized both operant conditioning and Pavlovian conditioning as being too radical, he relied on a procedure that came from Pavlovian conditioning research for one of his most influential concepts: the use of modeling. The modeling procedure was developed by Mary Cover Jones, a student of John B. Watson, in her attempts to counter-condition learned phobias. Subsequent to the infamous “Little Albert” studies conducted by Watson, Jones used models to interact in a pleasant manner with a rabbit that test subjects had been conditioned to fear. After a few sessions, the test subjects were no longer afraid of the rabbit (see Stagner, 1988). This may have been the first use of behavior therapy, and Bandura’s use of the procedure helped to bring together different behavioral disciplines.
Perhaps one of Bandura’s most significant contributions, however, has been the application of his theory to many forms of media. Congressional committees have debated the influence of modeling aggression through violent television programs, movies, and video games. We now have ratings on each of those forms of media, and yet the debate continues because of the levels of aggression seen in our schools, in particular, and society in general. Bandura’s Bobo doll studies are certainly among of the best known studies in psychology, and they are also among the most influential in terms of practical daily applications. The long list of awards that Bandura has received is a testament to both his influence on psychology and the respect that influence has earned for him. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/18%3A_Social_Learning_Theory_and_Personality_Development/18.01%3A_Chapter_Introduction.txt |
One of the most important aspects of Bandura’s view on how personality is learned is that each one of us is an agent of change, fully participating in our surroundings and influencing the environmental contingencies that behaviorists believe affect our behavior. These interactions can be viewed three different ways. The first is to consider behavior as a function of the person and the environment. In this view, personal dispositions (or traits) and the consequences of our actions (reinforcement or punishment) combine to cause our behavior. This perspective is closest to the radical behaviorism of Skinner. The second view considers that personal dispositions and the environment interact, and the result of the interaction causes our behavior, a view somewhat closer to that of Dollard and Miller. In each of these perspectives, behavior is caused, or determined, by dispositional and environmental factors, the behavior itself is not a factor in how that behavior comes about. However, according to Bandura, social learning theory emphasizes that behavior, personal factors, and environmental factors are all equal, interlocking determinants of each other. This concept is referred to as reciprocal determinism (Bandura, 1973, 1977).
Figure \(1\) Early theories considered behavior to be a function of the person and their environment, or a function of the interaction between the person and their environment. Bandura believed that behavior itself influences both the person and the environment, each of which in turn affects behavior and each other. The result is a complex interplay of factors known as reciprocal determinism.
Reciprocal determinism can be seen in everyday observations, such as those made by Bandura and others during their studies of aggression. For example, approximately 75 percent of the time, hostile behavior results in unfriendly responses, whereas friendly acts seldom result in such consequences. With little effort, it becomes easy to recognize individuals who create negative social climates (Bandura, 1973). Thus, while it may still be true that changing environmental contingencies changes behavior, it is also true that changing behavior alters the environmental contingencies. This results in a unique perspective on freedom vs. determinism. Usually we think of determinism as something that eliminates or restricts our freedom. However, Bandura believed that individuals can intentionally act as agents of change within their environment, thus altering the factors that determine their behavior. In other words, we have the freedom to influence that which determines our behavior:
…Given the same environmental constraints, individuals who have many behavioral options and are adept at regulating their own behavior will experience greater freedom than will individuals whose personal resources are limited. (pg. 203; Bandura, 1977)
Discussion question \(1\)
According to the theory of reciprocal determinism, our behavior interacts with our environment and our personality variables to influence our life. Can you think of situations in which your actions caused a noticeable change in the people or situations around you? Remember that these changes can be either good or bad.
Observational Learning and Aggression
Social learning is also commonly referred to as observational learning, because it comes about as a result of observing models. Bandura became interested in social aspects of learning at the beginning of his career. Trained as a clinical psychologist, he began working with juvenile delinquents, a somewhat outdated term that is essentially a socio-legal description of adolescents who engage in antisocial behavior. In the 1950s there was already research on the relationships between aggressive boys and their parents, as well as some theoretical perspectives regarding the effects of different child-rearing practices on the behavior and attitudes of adolescent boys (Bandura & Walters, 1959). Much of the research focused, however, on sociological issues involved in the environment of delinquent boys. Choosing a different approach, Bandura decided to study boys who had no obvious sociological disadvantages (such as poverty, language difficulties due to recent immigration, low IQ, etc.). Bandura and Walters restricted their sample to boys of average or above average intelligence, from intact homes, with steadily employed parents, whose families had been settled in America for at least three generations. No children from minority groups were included either. In other words, the boys were from apparently typical, White, middle-class American families. And yet, half of the boys studied were identified through the county probation service or their school guidance center as demonstrating serious, repetitive, antisocial, aggressive behavior (Bandura & Walters, 1959).
Citing the work of Dollard and Miller, as well as others who paved the way for social learning theory, Bandura and Walters began their study on adolescent aggression by examining how the parents of delinquents train their children to be socialized. Working from a general learning perspective, emphasizing cues and consequences, they found significant problems in the development of socialization among the delinquent boys. These boys developed dependency, a necessary step toward socialization, but they were not taught to conform their behavior to the expectations of society. Consequently, they began to demand immediate and unconditional gratification from their surroundings, something that seldom happens. Of course, this failure to learn proper socialization does not necessarily lead to aggression, since it can also lead to lifestyles such as the hobo, the bohemian, or the “beatnik” (Bandura & Walters, 1959). Why then do some boys become so aggressive? To briefly summarize their study, Bandura and Walters found that parents of delinquent boys were more likely to model aggressive behavior and to use coercive punishment (as opposed to reasoning with their children to help them conform to social norms). Although parental modeling of aggressive behavior teaches such behavior to children, these parents tend to be effective at suppressing their children’s aggressive behavior at home. In contrast, however, they provide subtle encouragement for aggression outside the home. As a result, these poorly socialized boys are likely to displace the aggressive impulses that develop in the home, and they are well trained in doing so. If they happen to associate with a delinquent group (such as a gang), they are provided with an opportunity to learn new and more effective ways to engage in antisocial behavior, and they are directly rewarded for engaging in such behaviors (Bandura & Walters, 1959; also see Bandura, 1973).
Having found evidence that parents of aggressive, delinquent boys had modeled aggressive behavior, Bandura and his colleagues embarked on a series of studies on the modeling of aggression (Bandura, Ross, & Ross, 1961, 1963a,b). Initially, children were given the opportunity to play in a room containing a variety of toys, including the 5-foot tall, inflated Bobo doll (a toy clown). As part of the experiment, an adult (the model) was also invited into the room to join in the game. When the model exhibited clear aggressive behavior toward the Bobo doll, and then the children were allowed to play on their own, they children demonstrated aggressive behavior as well. The children who observed a model who was not aggressive seldom demonstrated aggressive behavior, thus confirming that the aggression in the experimental group resulted from observational learning. In the second study, children who observed the behavior of aggressive models on film also demonstrated a significant increase in aggressive behavior, suggesting that the physical presence of the model is not necessary (providing an important implication for violent aggression on TV and in movies; see “Personality in Theory in Real Life” at the end of the chapter). In addition to confirming the role of observation or social learning in the development of aggressive behavior, these studies also provided a starting point for examining what it is that makes a model influential.
One of the significant findings in this line of research on aggression is the influence of models on behavioral restraint. When children are exposed to models who are not aggressive and who inhibit their own behavior, the children also tend to inhibit their own aggressive responses and to restrict their range of behavior in general (Bandura, Ross, & Ross, 1961). Thus, children can learn from others, in particular their parents, how to regulate their behavior in socially appropriate ways. When the inappropriate behavior of others is punished, the children observing are also vicariously punished, and likely to experience anxiety, if not outright fear, when they consider engaging in similar inappropriate behavior. However, when models behave aggressively and their behavior is rewarded, or even just tolerated, the child’s own tendency to restrict aggressive impulses may be weakened. This weakening of restraint, which can then lead to acting out aggressive impulses, is known as disinhibition:
Modeling may produce disinhibitory effects in several ways. When people respond approvingly or even indifferently to the actions of assailants, they convey the impression that aggression is not only acceptable but expected in similar situations. By thus legitimizing aggressive conduct, observers anticipate less risk of reprimand or loss of self-respect for such action. (pg. 129; Bandura, 1973)
discussion question \(2\)
The concept of disinhibition is based on the belief that we all have aggressive tendencies, and our self-control is diminished when we see models rewarded for aggressive behavior. Have you ever found yourself in situations where someone was rewarded for acting aggressively? Did you then adopt an aggressive attitude, or act out on your aggression?
Characteristics of the Modeling Situation
When one person matches the behavior of another, there are several perspectives on why that matching behavior occurs. Theorists who suggest that matching behavior results from simple imitation don’t allow for any significant psychological changes. Dollard and Miller discussed imitation in their attempts to combine traditional learning theory with a psychodynamic perspective, but they did not advance the theory very far. A more traditional psychodynamic approach describes matching behavior as the result of identification, the concept that an observer connects with a model in some psychological way. However, identification means different things to different theorists, and the term remains somewhat vague. In social learning, as it has been advanced by Bandura, modeling is the term that best describes and, therefore, is used to characterize the psychological processes that underlie matching behavior (Bandura, 1986).
Observational learning through modeling is not merely an alternative to Pavlovian or operant conditioning:
Learning would be exceedingly laborious, not to mention hazardous, if people had to rely solely on the effects of their own actions to inform them what to do. Fortunately, most human behavior is learned observationally through modeling: from observing others one forms an idea of how new behaviors are performed, and on later occasions this coded information serves as a guide for action. (pg. 22; Bandura, 1977)
Individuals differ in the degree to which they can be influenced by models, and not all models are equally effective. According to Bandura, three factors are most influential in terms of the effectiveness of modeling situations: the characteristics of the model, the attributes of the observers, and the consequences of the model’s actions. The most relevant characteristics of an influential model are high status, competence, and power. When observers are unsure about a situation, they rely on cues to indicate what they perceive as evidence of past success by the model. Such cues include general appearance, symbols of socioeconomic success (e.g., a fancy sports car), and signs of expertise (e.g., a doctor’s lab coat). Since those models appear to have been successful themselves, it seems logical that observers might want to imitate their behavior. Individuals who are low in self-esteem, dependent, and who lack confidence are not necessarily more likely to be influenced by models. Bandura proposed that when modeling is used to explicitly develop new competencies, the ones who will benefit most from the situation are those who are more talented and more venturesome (Bandura, 1977).
Despite the potential influence of models, the entire process of observational learning in a social learning environment would probably not be successful if not for four important component processes: attentional processes, retention processes, production (or reproduction) , and motivational processes (Bandura, 1977, 1986). The fact that an observer must pay attention to a model might seem obvious, but some models are more likely to attract attention. Individuals are more likely to pay attention to models with whom they associate, even if the association is more cognitive than personal. It is also well-known that people who are admired, such as those who are physically attractive or popular athletes, make for attention-getting models. There are also certain types of media that are very good at getting people’s attention, such as television advertisements (Bandura, 1977, 1986). It is a curious cultural phenomenon that the television advertisements presented during the National Football League’s Super Bowl have become almost as much of the excitement as the game itself (and even more exciting for those who are not football fans)!
The retention processes involve primarily an observer’s memory for the modeled behavior. The most important memory processes, according to Bandura, are visual imagery and verbal coding, with visual imagery being particularly important early in development when verbal skills are limited. Once modeled behavior has been transformed into visual and/or verbal codes, these memories can serve to guide the performance of the behavior at appropriate times. When the modeled behavior is produced by the observer, the so-called production process, the re-enactment can be broken down into the cognitive organization of the responses, their initiation, subsequent monitoring, and finally the refinement of the behavior based on informative feedback. Producing complex modeled behaviors is not always an easy task:
…A common problem in learning complex skills, such as golf or swimming, is that performers cannot fully observe their responses, and must therefore rely upon vague kinesthetic cues or verbal reports of onlookers. It is difficult to guide actions that are only partially observable or to identify the corrections needed to achieve a close match between representation and performance. (pg. 28; Bandura, 1977)
Finally, motivational processes determine whether the observer is inclined to match the modeled behavior in the first place. Individuals are most likely to model behaviors that result in an outcome they value, and if the behavior seems to be effective for the models who demonstrated the behavior. Given the complexity of the relationships between models, observers, the perceived effectiveness of modeled behavior, and the subjective value of rewards, even using prominent models does not guarantee that they will be able to create similar behavior in observers (Bandura, 1977, 1986).
Figure \(2\)
Figure \(3\)
Producing complex behaviors that cannot be readily observed by the performer can prove quite difficult. John cut behind the defender to drive the ball with his knee over the goalie’s head and into the goal (above). Samuel scores a round kick in a Taekwondo tournament (right).
A common misconception regarding modeling is that it only leads to learning the behaviors that have been modeled. However, modeling can lead to innovative behavior patterns. Observers typically see a given behavior performed by multiple models; even in early childhood one often gets to see both parents model a given behavior. When the behavior is then matched, the observer will typically select elements from the different models, relying on only certain aspects of the behavior performed by each, and then create a unique pattern that accomplishes the final behavior. Thus, partial departures from the originally modeled behavior can be a source of new directions, especially in creative endeavors (such as composing music or creating a sculpture). In contrast, however, when simple routines prove useful, modeling can actually stifle innovation. So, the most innovative individuals appear to be those who have been exposed to innovative models, provided that the models are not so innovative as to create an unreasonably difficult challenge in modeling their creativity and innovation (Bandura, 1977, 1986; Bandura, Ross, & Ross, 1963b).
Discussion question \(3\)
Two of the components necessary for modeling to be effective, according to Bandura, are attention and retention. What aspects of commercial advertisements are most likely to catch your attention? What do you tend to remember about advertisements? Can you think of situations in which the way an advertiser gets your attention also helps you to remember the product?
Connections Across Cultures: Global Marketing and Advertising
Although we are constantly surrounded by modeling situations, the most obvious and intentional use of models and modeling is in advertising. As our world becomes increasingly global, the use of advertisements that work well in one place may be entirely inappropriate in a different culture. Marieke de Mooij, the president of a cross-cultural communications consulting firm in the Netherlands, and a visiting professor at universities in the Netherlands, Spain, Finland, and Germany, has undertaken the challenging task of studying how culture affects consumer behavior and the consequences of those effects for marketing and advertising in different societies around the world (de Mooij, 2000, 2004a,b, 2005).
To some, increasing globalization suggests that markets around the world will become more similar to one another. De Mooij (2000), however, contends that as different cultures become more similar in economic terms, their more personal cultural differences will actually become more significant! Thus, it is essential for global businesses to understand those cultural differences, so that marketing and advertising can be appropriately adjusted. The challenge is in recognizing and dealing with the “global-local paradox.” People in business are taught to think global, but act local. This is because most people throughout the world tend to prefer things that are familiar. They may adopt and enjoy global products, but they remain true to their own culture (de Mooij, 2005). Thus, it is important to understand local culture and consumer behavior in general before beginning an advertising campaign in a foreign country.
In her studies on culture and consumer behavior, de Mooij (2004b, 2005) addresses a wide variety of topics, including several that are covered in this chapter. In terms of the characteristics of models, many countries do not emphasize physical attractiveness and/or fashionable clothes the way we do in America. However, the overall aesthetic appeal of advertising can be more important in many Asian markets, focusing on preferences for values such as nature and harmony. Given that America is generally an individualistic culture and most Asian cultures are collectivistic, it should be no surprise that Americans tend to focus on the appeal of the model whereas Asians tend to focus on the appeal of the overall scene and relationships amongst the various aspects depicted within it. In a similar way, cultures differ in terms of their general perspective on locus of control. In cultures that tend to believe that their lives are determined by external forces, the moral authorities (such as the church and the press) are typically trusted. People in such cultures might not be responsiveness to advertisements that call for individual restraint, such as efforts to reduce cigarette smoking for better health, since they rely on their doctors (external agents) to take care of their health.
There are also significant differences in how people in different cultures think and process information, and cognitive processes underlie all aspects of social learning. Involvement theory suggests differences in how individuals and cultures differ in their approach to purchasing, and how advertising must take those differences into account. For example, amongst American consumers considering a “high involvement” product (such as a car), those who are likely to buy something respond to advertising in which they learn something, develop a favorable attitude toward the product, and then buy it (learn-feel-do). For everyday products, which are considered “low involvement,” consumers respond to advertising in which they learn something, then buy the product, and perhaps afterward they tend to prefer that brand (learn-do-feel). There is now evidence that in typically more collectivist cultures such as Japan, China, and Korea, it is important to first establish a relationship between the company and the consumer. Only then does the consumer purchase the particular product, and then they become more familiar with it (feel-do-learn). Thus, the very purpose of advertising changes from culture to culture (de Mooij, 2004b). Naturally, a number of other approaches to advertising exist, based on concepts such as: persuasion, awareness, emotions, and likeability (de Mooij, 2005). Each of these techniques relies on a different psychological approach, taking into account the observers that the advertiser hopes to influence (the so-called target demographic).
One of the most important aspects of advertising, when it is being carried from one culture to another, is the translation of verbal and written information. Different languages have different symbolic references. They rely on different myths, history, humor, and art, and failing to tap into such differences is likely to result in bland advertising that does not appeal to the local audience (de Mooij, 2004a). Other languages are simply structured differently as well, perhaps requiring meaning in a name, and this sometimes makes direct translation impossible. Thus, an international advertiser must choose a different name for their product. For example, Coca-Cola is marketed in China as the homonym kekou kele, which means “tasty and happy” (de Mooij, 2004a). Visual references also have cultural meanings. A Nokia ad, shown in Finland, used a squirrel in a forest to represent good reception and free movement in a deep forest. A Chinese group, however, understood it as depicting an animal that lives far away from people. They simply did not understand the intent of the commercial. Research on interpersonal verbal communication styles suggests that certain countries can be grouped into preferred styles. Based on a comparison of multiple dimensions of preferred verbal style, some of the countries that share similar styles are: 1) the United States, the United Kingdom, Norway, the Netherlands, Sweden, and Denmark; 2) Austria, Finland, and Germany; 3) India, China, and Singapore; and 4) Italy, Spain, Belgium, France, Argentina, Brazil, and the Arab world (de Mooij, 2004a).
As challenging as it might seem to address these issues (and the many more we have not covered), it is essential for individuals involved in global marketing and advertising:
The cultural variety of countries worldwide as well as in Europe implies that success in one country does not automatically mean success in other countries…finding the most relevant cultural values is difficult, especially because many researchers are based in Western societies that are individualistic and have universalistic values. Western marketers, advertisers, and researchers are inclined to search for similarities, whereas understanding the differences will be more profitable…There are global products and global brands, but there are no global buying motives for such brands because people are not global. Understanding people across cultures is the first and most important step in international marketing. (pg. 314; de Mooij, 2004b)
Finally, none of these approaches to international marketing and advertising is going to be successful if business relationships are not established in the first place. In The Cultural Dimension of International Business, Ferraro (2006b) offers a comprehensive guide to understanding cultural differences. In addition to the importance of being aware of such factors, which the very existence of the books and articles in this section belies, Ferraro emphasizes cultural differences in communication. For individuals working in a foreign country where English is not the first language, good communication becomes a matter of intent:
Because communication is so vitally important for conducting business at home, it should come as no surprise that it is equally important for successful business abroad. The single best way to become an effective communicator as an expatriate is to learn the local language…Besides knowing how to speak another language, expatriate candidates should demonstrate a willingness to use it. For a variety of reasons, some people lack the motivation, confidence, or willingness to throw themselves into conversational situations. [Authors note: see the section on self-efficacy] …Thus, communication skills must be assessed in terms of language competency, motivation to learn another language, and willingness to use it in professional and personal situations. (pg. 170; Ferraro, 2006b) | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/18%3A_Social_Learning_Theory_and_Personality_Development/18.03%3A_18.2-Reciprocal_Determinism.txt |
Self-regulation and self-efficacy are two elements of Bandura’s theory that rely heavily on cognitive processes. They represent an individual’s ability to control their behavior through internal reward or punishment, in the case of self-regulation, and their beliefs in their ability to achieve desired goals as a result of their own actions, in the case of self-efficacy. Bandura never rejects the influence of external rewards or punishments, but he proposes that including internal, self-reinforcement and self-punishment expands the potential for learning:
…Theories that explain human behavior as solely the product of external rewards and punishments present a truncated image of people because they possess self-reactive capacities that enable them to exercise some control over their own feelings, thoughts, and actions. Behavior is therefore regulated by the interplay of self-generated and external sources of influence… (pg. 129; Bandura, 1977)
Self-regulation is a general term that includes both self-reinforcement and self-punishment. Self-reinforcement works primarily through its motivational effects. When an individual sets a standard of performance for themselves, they judge their behavior and determine whether or not it meets the self-determined criteria for reward. Since many activities do not have absolute measures of success, the individual often sets their standards in relative ways. For example, a weight-lifter might keep track of how much total weight they lift in each training session, and then monitor their improvement over time or as each competition arrives. Although competitions offer the potential for external reward, the individual might still set a personal standard for success, such as being satisfied only if they win at least one of the individual lifts. The standards that an individual sets for themselves can be learned through modeling. This can create problems when models are highly competent, much more so than the observer is capable of performing (such as learning the standards of a world-class athlete). Children, however, seem to be more inclined to model the standards of low-achieving or moderately competent models, setting standards that are reasonably within their own reach (Bandura, 1977). According to Bandura, the cumulative effect of setting standards and regulating one’s own performance in terms of those standards can lead to judgments about one’s self. Within a social learning context, negative self-concepts arise when one is prone to devalue oneself, whereas positive self-concepts arise from a tendency to judge oneself favorably (Bandura, 1977). Overall, the complexity of this process makes predicting the behavior of an individual rather difficult, and behavior often deviates from social norms in ways that would not ordinarily be expected. However, this appears to be the case in a variety of cultures, suggesting that it is indeed a natural process for people (Bandura & Walters, 1963).
As noted above, “perceived self-efficacy refers to beliefs in one’s capabilities to organize and execute the courses of action required to produce given attainments” (Bandura, 1997). The desire to control our circumstances in life seems to have been with us throughout history. In ancient times, when people knew little about the world, they prayed in the hope that benevolent gods would help them and/or protect them from evil gods. Elaborate rituals were developed in the hope or belief that the gods would respond to their efforts and dedication. As we learned more about our world and how it works, we also learned that we can have a significant impact on it. Most importantly, we can have a direct effect on our immediate personal environment, especially with regard to personal relationships. What motivates us to try influencing our environment is specific ways is the belief that we can, indeed, make a difference in a direction we want. Thus, research has focused largely on what people think about their efficacy, rather than on their actual ability to achieve their goals (Bandura, 1997).
Self-efficacy has been a popular topic for research, and Bandura’s book Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control (1997) is some 600 pages long. We will address two key issues on this fascinating topic: the relationships between (1) efficacy beliefs and outcome expectancies and (2) self-efficacy and self-esteem. In any situation, one has beliefs about one’s ability to influence the situation, and yet those beliefs are typically balanced against realistic expectations that change can occur. Each side of the equation can have both negative and positive qualities. Suppose, as a student, you are concerned about the rising cost of a college education, and you would like to challenge those rising costs. You may believe that there is nothing you can do (negative) and tuition and fees will inevitably increase (negative). This dual negative perspective leads to resignation and apathy, certainly not a favorable situation. But what if you believe you can change the college’s direction (positive), and that the college can cut certain costs in order to offset the need for higher tuition (positive). Now you are likely to engage the college community in productive discussions, and this may lead to personal satisfaction (Bandura, 1997). In the first scenario, you are not likely to do anything, in the second scenario you will most likely be highly motivated to act, even energized as you work toward productive changes. Of course, there are two other possible scenarios. You may believe there is nothing you can do (negative), but that change is possible (positive). In this case, you are likely to devalue yourself, perhaps feeling depressed about your own inability to accomplish good. Conversely, you may believe there is something you can do (positive), but that external forces will make change difficult or impossible (negative). This may lead some people to challenge the system in spite of their lack of expected change, resulting in protests and other forms of social activism (Bandura, 1997). Since all of these scenarios are based on beliefs and expectations, not on the unknown eventual outcome that will occur, it becomes clear that what we think about our ability to perform in various situations, as well as our actual expectations of the consequences of those actions, has both complex and profound effects on our motivation to engage in a particular behavior or course of action.
As for self-efficacy and self-esteem, these terms are often used interchangeably, and on the surface that might seem appropriate. Wouldn’t we feel good about ourselves if we believed in our abilities to achieve our goals? In fact, self-efficacy and self-esteem are entirely different:
…There is no fixed relationship between beliefs about one’s capabilities and whether one likes or dislikes oneself. Individuals may judge themselves hopelessly inefficacious in a given activity without suffering any loss of self-esteem whatsoever, because they do not invest their self-worth in that activity. (pg. 11; Bandura, 1997)
For example, my family was active in the Korean martial art Taekwondo. Taekwondo emphasizes powerful kicks. Because I suffer from degenerative joint disease in both hips, there are certain kicks I simply can’t do, and I don’t do any of the kicks particularly well. But I accept that, and focus my attention on areas where I am successful, such as forms and helping to teach the white belt class. Likewise, Bandura notes that his complete inefficacy in ballroom dancing does not lead him into bouts of self-devaluation (Bandura, 1997). So, though it may improve our self-esteem to have realistic feelings of self-efficacy in challenging situations, there is not necessarily any corresponding loss of self-esteem when we acknowledge our weaknesses. And even positive self-efficacy might not lead to higher self-esteem when a task is simple or unpleasant. To cite Bandura’s example, someone might be very good at evicting people from their homes when they can’t pay their rent or mortgage, but that skill might not lead to positive feelings of self-esteem. This concept was the basis for the classic story A Christmas Carol, featuring the character Ebenezer Scrooge (Charles Dickens, 1843/1994).
The Development of Self-Efficacy
Young children have little understanding of what they can and cannot do, so the development of realistic self-efficacy is a very important process:
…Very young children lack knowledge of their own capabilities and the demands and potential hazards of different courses of action. They would repeatedly get themselves into dangerous predicaments were it not for the guidance of others. They can climb to high places, wander into rivers or deep pools, and wield sharp knives before they develop the necessary skills for managing such situations safely…Adult watchfulness and guidance see young children through this early formative period until they gain sufficient knowledge of what they can do and what different situations require in the way of skills. (pg. 414; Bandura, 1986)
During infancy, the development of perceived causal efficacy, in other words the perception that one has affected the world by one’s own actions, appears to be an important aspect of developing a sense of self. As the infant interacts with its environment, the infant is able to cause predictable events, such as the sound that accompanies shaking a rattle. The understanding that one’s own actions can influence the environment is something Bandura refers to as personal agency, the ability to act as an agent of change in one’s own world. The infant also begins to experience that certain events affect models differently than the child. For example, if a model touches a hot stove it does not hurt the infant, so the infant begins to recognize their uniqueness, their actual existence as an individual. During this period, interactions with the physical environment may be more important than social interactions, since the physical environment is more predictable, and therefore easier to learn about (Bandura, 1986, 1997). Quickly, however, social interaction becomes highly influential.
Not only does the child learn a great deal from the family, but as they grow peers become increasingly important. As the child’s world expands, peers bring with them a broadening of self-efficacy experiences. This can have both positive and negative consequences. Peers who are most experienced and competent can become important models of behavior. However, if a child perceives themselves as socially inefficacious, but does develop self-efficacy in coercive, aggressive behavior, then that child is likely to become a bully. In the midst of this effort to learn socially acceptable behavior, most children also begin attending school, where the primary focus is on the development of cognitive efficacy. For many children, unfortunately, the academic environment of school is a challenge. Children quickly learn to rank themselves (grades help, both good and bad), and children who do poorly can lose the sense of self-efficacy that is necessary for continued effort at school. According to Bandura, it is important that educational practices focus not only on the content they provide, but also on what they do to children’s beliefs about their abilities (Bandura, 1986, 1997).
As children continue through adolescence toward adulthood, they need to assume responsibility for themselves in all aspects of life. They must master many new skills, and a sense of confidence in working toward the future is dependent on a developing sense of self-efficacy supported by past experiences of mastery. In adulthood, a healthy and realistic sense of self-efficacy provides the motivation necessary to pursue success in one’s life. Poorly equipped adults, wracked with self-doubt, often find life stressful and depressing. Even psychologically healthy adults must eventually face the realities of aging, and the inevitable decline in physical status. There is little evidence, however, for significant declines in mental states until very advanced old age. In cultures that admire youth, there may well be a tendency for the aged to lose their sense of self-efficacy and begin an inexorable decline toward death. But in societies that promote self-growth throughout life, and who admire elders for their wisdom and experience, there is potential for aged individuals to continue living productive and self-fulfilling lives (Bandura, 1986, 1997).
discussion question \(1\)
Self-efficacy refers to our beliefs regarding our actual abilities, and self-esteem refers to how we feel about ourselves. What are you good at? Do others agree that you are good at that skill? When you find yourself trying to do something that you are NOT good at, does it disappoint you (i.e., lower your self-esteem)?
Behavior Modification
In Principles of Behavior Modification (Bandura, 1969), Bandura suggests that behavioral approaches to psychological change, whether in clinical settings or elsewhere, have a distinct advantage over many of the other theories that have arisen in psychology. Whereas psychological theories often arise first, become popular as approaches to psychotherapy, but then fail to withstand proper scientific validation, behavioral approaches have a long history of rigorous laboratory testing. Thus, behavioral techniques are often validated first, and then prove to be applicable in clinical settings. Indeed, behavioral and cognitive approaches to psychotherapy are typically well respected amongst psychotherapists (though some might consider their range somewhat limited).
Bandura made several points regarding the application of social learning theory to behaviorally-oriented psychotherapy. For example, Bandura notes that the labeling of psychological disorders, indeed the definition of what constitutes abnormal behavior, is made within a social context. While it has been demonstrated that common categories of mental illness are seen throughout a wide variety of cultures (Murphy, 1976), we still view those with psychological disorders based on sociocultural norms and, in the case of too many observers, with unreasonable prejudice. Bandura also opposed the medical model of categorizing and treating psychopathology, believing that the desire to identify and utilize medications has hindered the advancement of applying appropriate psychotherapies. The application of an appropriate therapy involves issues of ethical concern and goal-setting. Therapy cannot be successful, according to Bandura, if it does not have clear goals characterized in terms of observable behaviors. Choosing goals means that one must make value judgments. In making these decisions it is important that the client and the therapist share similar values (or at least that the therapist work with values appropriate for their client), and that the therapist does not try to impose their own values on the client (Bandura, 1969).
Overall, Bandura presents behavioral approaches to psychotherapy as non-judgmental applications of learning principles to problematic behavior, behavior that is not to be viewed as psychological “illness:”
…From a social-learning perspective, behaviors that may be detrimental to the individual or that depart widely from accepted social and ethical norms are considered not as manifestations of an underlying pathology but as ways, which the person has learned, of coping with environmental and self-imposed demands. (pg. 62; Bandura, 1969) | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/18%3A_Social_Learning_Theory_and_Personality_Development/18.04%3A_Self-Regulation_and_Self-Efficacy.txt |
Julian Rotter deserves at least as much credit as Albert Bandura for the establishment of social learning theory. Indeed, his book Social Learning & Clinical Psychology (Rotter, 1954) was published five years before Bandura’s Adolescent Aggression (Bandura & Walters, 1959). In addition, Rotter always focused on cognitive aspects of social learning, something Bandura gave more consideration to only later in his career. But their careers were by no means separated from one another. Walter Mischel was Rotter’s graduate student, and later joined the faculty of Stanford University where he was a colleague of Bandura. Mischel and Bandura collaborated on some of Mischel’s best known research: delayed gratification.
Brief Biography of Julian Rotter
Julian Rotter was born in 1916 in Brooklyn, NY. The son of successful Jewish immigrants, his childhood was quite comfortable. During the Great Depression, however, the family business failed, and for a few years the family struggled (as many people did). This time of struggle instilled in Rotter a profound sense of social justice, as well as an interest in the effects of situational environments.
As a child Rotter was an avid reader, and eventually he read most of the novels in the local library. He then turned to reading books on psychology, taking a particular interest in works by Freud and Adler. During his senior year in high school he was interpreting people’s dreams and he wrote a paper based on Freud’s Psychopathology of Everyday Life (Freud, 1904/1995). He attended Brooklyn College, but chose to major in chemistry instead of psychology, as it seemed more likely to provide a promising career. During college, however, he learned that Adler was teaching at the Long Island College of Medicine. He began attending Adler’s seminars, became Adler’s friend, and was invited to meetings of the Society for Individual Psychology. Another well-known psychology professor who influenced Rotter was Solomon Asch. When he graduated from Brooklyn College, he actually had more credits in psychology than in chemistry.
Rotter attended the University of Iowa, where he earned a Master’s Degree in 1938, and then took a clinical internship at the Worcester State Hospital in Massachusetts. A year later he began working on his Ph.D. at Indiana University, because a professor there, C. M Louttit, had published one of the first books advocating clinical psychology as a career. Rotter received his Ph.D. in Clinical Psychology in 1941. After a short period of time at Norwich State Hospital in Connecticut, Rotter was drafted into the Army. He spent World War II working as a military psychologist. After the war he briefly returned to Norwich, but soon Rotter accepted a position at Ohio State University.
It was during his time at Ohio State University that Rotter developed his ideas on social learning theory. He and George Kelly were the two most prominent members of the psychology department, each of them having a lasting influence in the fields of social and cognitive learning theory. Rotter attracted many excellent graduate students, including Walter Mischel. Rotter was also keenly interested in the training of clinical psychologists, and he helped to outline the training model that became the basis for how doctoral level clinical psychologists are trained today.
As much as he enjoyed his time at Ohio State University, Rotter left in 1963 to direct the rebuilding of the clinical psychology training program at the University of Connecticut. He retired as professor emeritus in 1987. One year later he received an American Psychological Association’s Distinguished Scientific Contribution Award, and one year after that he was recognized by the Council of University Directors of Clinical Psychology with their Distinguished Contribution to Clinical Training Award. He has also worked with the Peace Corps. Rotter included a brief autobiography in his self-edited compendium entitled The Development and Applications of Social Learning Theory (Rotter, 1982).
Brief Biography of Walter Mischel
Walter Mischel was born in 1930, into a comfortable home, where he enjoyed a pleasant childhood. They lived in Vienna, a short distance from Sigmund Freud’s house. However, when the Nazis invaded Austria at the beginning of World War II, the Mischel family moved to the United States, eventually settling in New York City. In college, Mischel studied to become a social worker. While working as a social worker in the Lower East Side slums, Mischel attended City College of New York and pursued a graduate degree in clinical psychology. He had been taught that Freud’s theory offered the best explanation of human behavior, but he did not find this to be true in his work with juvenile delinquents (the same practical conclusion occurred to Carl Rogers in his first clinical position).
He then attended Ohio State University, where he was a graduate student of both Julian Rotter and George Kelly. Rotter and Kelly helped to firmly establish Mischel as a member of the general social learning/cognitive learning camp, and later Mischel became a faculty member at Stanford University, alongside Albert Bandura (from 1962-1983). He then returned to New York as a faculty member at Columbia University, where he continued his work on delayed gratification and the effects of situations on personal behavior. Mischel has been recognized with a Distinguished Scientific Contribution Award by the American Psychological Association.
Placing Rotter and Mischel in Context: Cognitive Social Learning Theory
The distinction between Bandura as a social learning theorist, and Rotter and Mischel as cognitive learning theorists, is not entirely accurate. As Bandura’s career progressed, he focused more and more on cognitive factors, and Mischel collaborated with Bandura while both were at Stanford University. What distinguishes Rotter and Mischel is that cognitive factors were always the most important aspect of their learning theories. Although humans are capable of learning simply by watching a model, their expectations regarding the outcome of a situation, and the value the place on the potential reward (or punishment), determines their course of action. According to Mischel, these variables can lead to seemingly inconsistent behavior, but when examined in closer detail individuals demonstrate consistent patterns of variation, a form of consistency in itself.
Rotter and Mischel can also be seen as having encompassed Bandura’s career. Although all three men were active during the same general time frame, Rotter’s first book on social learning theory preceded Bandura’s first book by 5 years. Mischel, a student of Rotter, and then a colleague of Bandura for a while, has continued to modify his most influential theory quite recently, in the 1990s and 2000s.
Rotter and Mischel can also be considered as providing a bridge between the more traditional social learning theory of Bandura and the full-fledged cognitive theory of George Kelly. Kelly was Rotter’s colleague at Ohio State University, and Mischel studied under both men while in graduate school. Thus, social learning theory, cognitive social learning theory, and cognitive theories of personality development all occurred in close relationship to one another, and they all offered a dramatic alternative to radical behaviorism, an alternative that helped to fulfill the vision of John Dollard and Neal Miller. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/18%3A_Social_Learning_Theory_and_Personality_Development/18.05%3A_Cognitive_Aspects_of_Social_Learning_Theory-_The_Contributions_of_J.txt |
Rotter’s early research focused on the need to understand human behavior and personality so that clinical psychologists might effectively help their patients. In the preface to Social Learning & Clinical Psychology, Rotter wrote:
…the practice of clinical psychology in many instances is unsystematic and confused when viewed from logical or rigorous scientific viewpoints. This confusion, however, is not a necessary condition but the result of the failure of the clinical psychologists’ training program to translate and relate the basic knowledge of experimental and theoretical psychology into the practical situations of the clinic, the hospital, and the school… (pg. viii; Rotter, 1954)
Given his emphasis on clinical psychology, Rotter focused on the clinician’s ability to predict behavior. According to Rotter, social learning theory assumes that the unit of investigation for the study of personality is the interaction between the individual and their meaningful environment. Although personality has unity, the individual’s experiences influence each other. As a result, personality is continuously changing, since each person is always having new experiences. However, personality is also stable in some respects, since previous experiences influence new learning. Given the complexity of each individual, Rotter believed that in order to make reasonable predictions about behavior it was necessary to examine four kinds of variables: behavior potential, expectancy, reinforcement value, and the psychological situation (Rotter, 1954, 1964, 1972; Rotter & Hochreich, 1975).
Behavior potential refers to the likelihood of a certain behavior occurring in the context of specific potential reinforcement. For example, in order to earn good grades a student can rely on any number of possible behaviors, such as studying, cheating, skipping class to avoid a bad grade, etc. Each potential behavior can only be described as more or less likely than other potential behaviors, and included as potential behaviors are psychological reactions such as thoughts, emotions, and even defense mechanisms. Expectancy is defined as the probability held by the individual that reinforcement will follow one’s chosen behavior. Although Rotter preferred to avoid the concept that expectancy is subjective, he acknowledged that an element of subjectivity is involved. Regardless, it is the individual’s point of view, their expectations in a given situation, that are more important for predicting behavior than the realistic probability of a chosen behavior resulting in an expected reinforcement. Reinforcement value, quite simply, refers to the preference for a given reinforcer. To use Rotter’s own example, most people would consistently choose to be paid \$10 dollars an hour rather than \$1 an hour, if it were simply their choice. Finally, there is the psychological situation. According to Rotter, it is not enough to say that to each individual a given situation might seem different. In order to address the situation in more objective terms, psychologists need to identify a variety of cues within the situation. In an objective sense, consequently, different people can be described as attending to different specific cues in the environment (Rotter, 1954, 1972; Rotter & Hochreich, 1975).
Although Rotter broke new ground in this approach to the study of social learning theory, he did not entirely abandon the use of mathematical formulae similar to those of Dollard and Miller. Rotter proposed the following basic formula for predicting goal-directed behavior:
BPx,S1Ra = /(Ex,RaS1 & RVa,S1)
Although this formula appears complicated at first glance, it is relatively straightforward. The potential for behavior x (BPx) to occur in situation 1 with potential reinforcement a (S1Ra) is a function (/) of the expectancy (E) that reinforcement a will follow behavior x in situation 1 (x,RaS1) and the reinforcement value (RV) of reinforcement a in situation 1 (a,S1) (Rotter, 1954; Rotter & Hochreich, 1975). In other words, we are most likely to choose the behavioral option that we realistically expect will result in the most favorable outcome in our current situation.
discussion question \(1\)
Rotter believed that both the expectancy of reward and the perceived value of that reward were essential in determining whether an individual engaged in a particular behavior. Have you ever found yourself doing something even though you did not expect to get anything for your efforts? Have you ever had a job where you felt that you weren’t being paid what you deserved? In such situations, how long did you continue your behavior, and how did you feel about it?
Locus of Control
One of the most important generalized expectancies underlying behavior, and perhaps Rotter’s best known concept, is referred to as internal versus external control of reinforcement (commonly known as locus of control):
People are known to differ in their belief that what happens to them is the result of their own behaviors and attributes (internal control) versus the result of luck, fate, chance, or powerful others (external control). Clearly, persons who believe or expect that they can control their own destinies will behave differently, in many situations, than those who expect that their outcomes are controlled by other people or determined by luck. (pg. 105; Rotter & Hochreich, 1975)
Rotter pointed out that almost all psychologists recognize the role that reinforcement or reward plays in determining future behavior, but that this is not a “simple stamping-in process.” For beings as complex as humans, the effects of reinforcement depend upon an individual’s perception of a causal relationship between their behavior and the potential reward (Rotter & Hochreich, 1975).
A number of scales have been developed to measure locus of control (for an early review see Lefcourt, 1976), including one developed by Rotter himself (Rotter, 1966). Rotter’s scale, simply referred to as the I-E scale (for internal-external), consists of 29 forced-choice statements. For example:
1.a. Children get into trouble because their parents punish them too much.
1.b. The trouble with most children nowadays is that their parents are too easy with them.
In each instance, the person taking the test must choose one or the other option. After taking all 29, the person’s score is the total number of external choices. Does it seem difficult to determine whether 1.a. or 1.b. is the external choice? Good! Question 1 is actually a filler question, designed to interfere with the test taker’s ability to understand what the test is about! So, consider question 2:
2.a. Many of the unhappy things in people’s lives are partly due to bad luck.
2.b. People’s misfortunes result from the mistakes they make.
For question 2 it is quite obvious that choice a is the external choice, and if it wasn’t clear, the test has choice a marked for you! There are a total of six filler questions, leaving the test itself with 23 choices (Rotter, 1966).
Locus of control appears to arise from two primary sources: the family, and contingency awareness (Lefcourt, 1976). The role of the family in the development of locus of control is complex, and appears to be somewhat different based on the behavior of mothers and fathers. The most reliable finding appears to be that individuals with an internal locus of control had mothers who pushed them to achieve independence at an early age. This motherly push, however, must be a careful one. Children need support, guidance and nurturance, but they must not be smothered to the point of being pampered. Lefcourt (1976) cites Adler’s concern regarding two extremes in child-rearing, pampering and neglect, neither of which is conducive to the healthy psychological growth of a child. Contingency awareness refers to an understanding of instrumentality, the conception that one’s actions are indeed related to certain outcomes. In order for a child to repeat a behavior with purpose, the child must be able to recall that their prior actions resulted in a given outcome, and they must know that their actions were related to the expected outcomes. It would appear that children as young as two months old are capable of this type of social learning, and it tends to result in positive emotional reactions (Lefcourt, 1976).
Early studies on locus of control also focused on some interesting cultural questions. It is generally accepted that social class and ethnic group are important determinants of personality. Battle and Rotter (1963) found that lower class Blacks were significantly more external in their locus of control than were middle class Whites. Interestingly, middle class Blacks were closer to middle class Whites than lower class Whites were to middle class Whites, suggesting that social class may have been the primary factor in these results, rather than the race or ethnicity of the subjects. Furthermore, IQ seems to have exacerbated these results in that the most external individuals were high IQ lower class Blacks (i.e., individuals aware of social injustice in American society) and the most internal individuals were low IQ middle class Whites (who may be blaming themselves for failing to live up to their expected potential; Battle & Rotter, 1963). During the civil rights movement, Gore & Rotter (1963) examined whether locus of control might be a useful measure of social action. They found that students at a southern Black college who expressed interest in attending a civil rights rally or marching on the state capitol scored significantly more internal on the I-E scale. In other words, those who believed they could personally make a difference were more willing to try making that difference. In a study that followed soon after, Strickland (1965) compared Blacks who were indeed active in the civil rights movement to those who were not (but who were matched for sex, age, education, etc.). As predicted, the individuals who were active in the civil rights movement scored significantly more internal on the I-E scale than those who were not active. Strickland did note, however, that the individuals she studied were pioneers in the civil rights movement, and had become active, in part, because others groups had failed to demonstrate an adequate degree of commitment to the civil rights movement. Strickland’s concern seems to contradict earlier results of Mischel (1958a), who found that when individual’s make public commitments, they are less likely to change their expectancies (i.e., individuals publicly involved in the civil rights movement should have remained committed to the cause even when faced with initial failure). Still, as Mischel himself noted, one cannot rely entirely on inferences from research when considering the complexities of real-life (and, at the time, dangerous) behavior.
discussion question \(2\)
Do you consider yourself to have an internal or an external locus of control? Do you feel that locus of control is an important influence on personality; might it be good or bad?
Discussion Question: Do you consider yourself to have an internal or an external locus of control? Do you feel that locus of control is an important influence on personality; might it be good or bad?
Rotter’s Emphasis on Clinical Psychology
As noted above, Rotter was actively involved in developing the model that provided the basis for how clinical psychologists are typically trained today. Accordingly, much of Rotter’s career was devoted to clinical applications of his work, In addition to writing two books that emphasized clinical psychology (Rotter, 1954, 1964) and developing the I-E scale (Rotter, 1966), Rotter and one of his research assistants published The Rotter Incomplete Sentences Blank: College Form (Rotter and Rafferty, 1950). The book was intended to formalize the sentence completion method, particularly for use with college students. The test consists of forty simple statements that require the subject to finish the sentence. For example, one beginning is simply “My father…” The subjects responses are then scored in terms of whether they demonstrate conflict (on a scale of 1-3), are neutral, or whether they are positive (also on a scale of 1-3). The manual offers examples of possible answers for both males and females. For example, conflicted responses for males include breaking promises or being a fool (level 3), or never had much of a chance or is proud (level 1). A neutral response might simply be that the father is a salesman, or is a hard worker. Positive responses for females include that the father is quite a character or is a good man (level 1), or that he has a great sense of humor or is a lot of fun (level 3). Interpreting this test requires a great deal of experience, and an understanding of personality and human nature. Fortunately, Rotter and Rafferty include a number of individual cases as examples of how the Rotter Incomplete Sentences Blank can be used to evaluate individuals. Both the Rotter Incomplete Sentences Blank and the I-E scale have proven useful in evaluating patients, as well as normal individuals, in a variety of settings and cultures, including Africa, Sri Lanka, American Indians, Brazil, Black and White college students in America, Ukrainian doctors training in Canada, and amongst military personnel (Janzen, Paterson, Reid, & Everall, 1996; Lefcourt, 1976; Logan & Waehler, 2001; Nagelschmidt & Jakob, 1977; Niles, 1981; Picano, Roland, Rollins, & Williams, 2002; Rossier, Dahourou, & McCrae, 2005; Rotter, 1960, 1966; Trimble & Richardson, 1982). In a particularly interesting study, a unique version of the Sentence Completion Test was developed by Herbert Phillips and provided the basis for a major study on the personality of Thai peasants living in the village of Bang Chan, Thailand (Phillips, 1965). The Rotter Incomplete Sentences Blank, and other variations of the sentence completion method, remain very popular today (Holaday, Smith, & Sherry, 2000), ranking with the Rorschach Inkblot Test and the Thematic Apperception Test as the most popular projective tests for personality assessment.
Overall, Rotter emphasized the value of training clinical psychologists for just that responsibility, with a particular emphasis on the realities that will face the psychologist in an actual clinical setting (Rotter, 1954, 1964). In 1972, Rotter edited a volume including both original and previously published papers in which social learning theory was applied to psychopathology in general (Phares, 1972) and to such diverse topics as drinking amongst college students, excessively needy individuals, working with mentally retarded children, and electroconvulsive shock therapy (Cromwell, 1972; Dies, 1968; Jessor, Carman, & Grossman, 1968; Jessor, Liverant, & Opochinsky, 1963). A particularly important aspect of therapy also addressed in this volume is the issue of terminating therapy. Strickland & Crowne (1963) found that defensiveness and avoiding self-criticism are common signs in individuals who are likely to end therapy abruptly, whereas Piper, Wogan, & Getter (1972) found that the patient’s expectancy regarding improvement, and the value they place on improving, are useful predictors of terminating therapy. Although helping patient’s to achieve a level of psychological health that allows terminating therapy should be the goal of every therapist, premature termination might prove even more detrimental to the patient. For Rotter, the proper training of clinical psychologists is not an easy task. In the preface to Clinical Psychology, Rotter wrote:
…Yet psychology itself is a relatively new science and its areas of application are in rapid transition. Neither theory nor “facts” are always agreed upon, and in clinical psychology there is no single set of orthodox, approved skills for which a person can be certified as a trained practitioner…The goal is to gain comprehension without resorting to an oversimplification of the complex nature of man or of the problem of understanding him. (pg. xi; Rotter, 1964).
Behavioral Specificity and Consistency
In 1968, Walter Mischel challenged both state and trait theories of personality. Psychological states typically fall with the domain of psychodynamic theory, whereas trait theories are a perspective unto themselves. According to Mischel (1968), although state and trait theorists use very different language, they tend to approach personality in the same general way: they use responses to infer pervasive, underlying mental structures that exert enduring causal effects on behavior. Thus, both state and trait theorists emphasize consistency in behavior. However, there is a wealth of data that individuals do not act consistently from situation to situation. Instead, Mischel argues, behavior can best be predicted only when one takes into account the specific situation in which the behavior occurs:
Progress in the area of personality psychology and assessment has been hindered by the failure to apply relevant principles about the conditions that produce, maintain, and modify social behavior. The principles that emerge from basic research too often have not been seen as directly relevant to the understanding of the determinants of test responses in the clinic or the assessment project. It is as if we live in two independent worlds: The abstractions and artificial situations of the laboratory and the realities of life. (pg. 1; Mischel, 1968).
In order to support his argument, Mischel examined which aspects of behavior are or are not consistent. Generally, intellect is consistent, including academic ability, achievement, and cognitive style. In contrast, there is little evidence to support consistency of behavior across situations when examining personality variables such as attitudes, moral behavior, sexual identification, dependency, aggression, tolerance, conditionability, etc. (Mischel, 1968). How, then, might we predict behavior? Mischel suggests a dynamic perspective on how persons interact with their situations. If the environment has not changed much, we can expect past behavior to be a reasonable predictor of current behavior (and state and trait theories would seem to hold true as well). However, if the environment changes dramatically, the individual may act in unpredictable ways. In addition, the individual may begin to learn new social conditions, thus allowing for considerable change in behavior over time:
Global traits and states are excessively crude, gross units to encompass adequately the extraordinary complexity and subtlety of the discriminations that people constantly make. Traditional trait-state conceptions of man have depicted him as victimized by his infantile history, as possessed by unchanging rigid trait attributes, and as driven inexorably by unconscious irrational forces…A more adequate conceptualization must take full account of man’s extraordinary adaptiveness and capacities for discrimination, awareness, and self-regulation…and that an understanding of how humans can constructively modify their behavior in systematic ways is the core of a truly dynamic personality psychology. (pg. 301; Mischel, 1968)
Delayed Gratification
Perhaps Mischel’s most famous contribution to psychology is his research on delayed gratification. In a series of studies, begun in the late 1950s, Mischel examined the conditions under which children choose immediate gratification or whether they can delay gratification in order to obtain a larger reinforcer at a later time. The ability to delay gratification, according to Mischel, is essential for the development of self-control. From early childhood throughout the lifespan, achieving long-term goals often requires setting aside tempting distractions. Conversely, many personal and social problems result from failures of self-control, such as dropping out of school, poor job performance, and even violent and criminal behavior (Mischel & Mischel, 1980). In an amazing longitudinal study, Mischel and his colleagues offered 4 year-old children the opportunity to grab a marshmallow. But, if the child could wait until the researcher ran an errand, the child could then have two marshmallows! Some children grabbed the marshmallow as soon as the experimenter left, but others were able to wait 15-20 minutes. It was not easy, however. The children who waited demonstrated a variety of behaviors to distract themselves from the marshmallow: they would play, sing, cover their eyes so they didn’t have to look at the marshmallow, etc. The most striking results from this study were actually obtained years later. Mischel and his colleagues tracked down the former 4 year-old subjects as they were graduating from high school. The individuals who had delayed gratification as 4 year-olds were significantly more personally effective and self-assertive, and they were better able to cope with life’s frustrations (Mischel, Shoda, & Rodriguez, 1989; Shoda, Mischel, & Peake, 1990). In addition, the 4 year-old children who had been able to delay gratification were more successful as students in a variety of ways, including eventually earning significantly higher SAT scores (210 points higher, on the combined score), and the ability to delay gratification proved to be a better predictor of SAT scores than IQ (Peake, cited in Goleman, 1994).
Although the famous marshmallow-grabbing study was conducted at a preschool on the campus of Stanford University, Mischel began this research with very different groups: Black and East Indian children on the islands of Trinidad and Grenada (Mischel, 1958b, 1961). On these relatively poor, Caribbean islands, Mischel not only compared the Black and East Indian children, he also compared the children of Trinidad to the children of Grenada. The main purpose of the second study, however, was to examine the effect of fathers being absent from the home on the preference of children for immediate or delayed gratification. Overall, when fathers are absent from the home, both young boys and young girls (ages 8 to 9 years old) demonstrated a preference for immediate gratification. Mischel suggests that the inability to delay gratification amongst children who lack a father may be related to immaturity or poor psychological adjustment (Mischel, 1961).
While Mischel was at Stanford University, he also collaborated with Bandura. Blending the interests of both men, they examined whether observing models would affect children’s choices regarding immediate vs. delayed gratification. They identified two groups of children (both boys and girls) as preferring either immediate gratification (a small candy bar now) or delayed gratification (a larger candy bar later). The children were then exposed to either a live model choosing the alternative strategy, a symbolic model (a description of an adult choosing the alternative), or no model. As expected, exposure to a model choosing the alternative strategy dramatically affected the behavior of the children, and a live model was more effective than the symbolic model. The effects of this modeling appeared to be quite persistent (Bandura & Mischel, 1965). Considering the importance that modeling can play in developing the ability to delay gratification, it is perhaps easy to see why children in families lacking a complete and stable family structure don’t develop self-control as well as other children.
discussion question \(3\)
Mischel’s most famous contribution is the concept of delayed gratification. How good are you at waiting for gratification? Are some rewards easier to wait for than others? If you know anyone who is significantly different than you, either wanting immediate gratification or being able to delay it without much trouble, does the difference between you create any problems or interesting situations?
The Cognitive-Affective Processing System (CAPS)
More recently, Mischel has turned his attention to solving what has been called the “personality paradox:” How do we reconcile our intuition and theories that personality is relatively stable with the overwhelming evidence that personality varies across different situations? Mischel proposes a dynamic personality system that takes into account both: (1) the behavioral consistency that accounts for specific scores on trait tests and indicates what the individual is like in general; and (2) the consistency in how an individual varies across different situations. This consistency of variation is recognized by distinct patterns of if…then… relationships, which are characteristic of the individual’s overall personality (Mischel, 2004).
In 1995, Mischel and Shoda first presented this dynamic approach to understanding personality, referring to it then as the cognitive-affective personality system, but now preferring the term cognitive-affective processing system (CAPS; Mischel, 2004; Mischel & Shoda, 1995/2000; Shoda, Leetiernan, & Mischel, 2002). Over a number of years, Mischel, his students, and his colleagues studied children extensively in a residential summer camp. They observed both behaviors and the situations in which they occurred. Over time, they were able to identify patterns of if…then… situation-behavior relations that reflected distinctive and stable characteristics of each child’s behavior organization. These observations, therefore, gave rise to situation-behavior profiles for each child. It is essential to recognize, however, that the term “situation” in these studies does not refer to simple environmental stimuli, as they might for a behaviorist such as B. F. Skinner. Instead, these situations activate a whole set of internal reactions, including cognitive and emotional elements. They are also not limited to the external world; they can be generated in thought, fantasy, planning, etc. Accordingly, Mischel and Shoda referred to these personality variables as cognitive-affective units (or CAUs). These CAUs include encodings, expectancies and beliefs, affects, goals and values, and competencies and self-regulatory plans.
Mischel and Shoda (1995/2000) did not neglect the individual’s development in this theory. Our ability to recognize distinct aspects of the environment are influenced by genetic/biological factors, cultural factors, and the interactions between them. These genetic/biological/cultural factors also influence the CAPS, as does our social learning history. In a sense, bringing all of these factors together begins to move us beyond the person-situation debate, since both sides of the debate are correct in the proper context. The future of personality theory may lie in an as yet undetermined synthesis of these perspectives (Fleeson, 2004). For now, according to Mischel, this dynamic approach to understanding personality has at least helped to bring together the major aspects of different schools of personality theory:
The two goals - dispositions and dynamics - that have so long been pursued separately do not require two fields from this perspective. In this theory, dispositions are conceptualized not in semantic terms but as processing structures characterized by stable cognitive affective organizations in the processing system that becomes activated when the individual encounters relevant situational features. (pg. 170; Mischel & Shoda, 1995/2000) | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/18%3A_Social_Learning_Theory_and_Personality_Development/18.06%3A_Basic_Constructs_in_Rotter%27s_Social_Learning_Theory.txt |
It would be difficult to overestimate the impact of social learning theory on psychology, because the human species is so inherently social. Social life seems to come automatically, mediated via mental processes that are largely unconscious (Bargh & Williams, 2006), and our social norms appear to arise from social behavior that is adaptive within local ecologies (Kameda, Takezawa, & Hastie, 2005). It is important to note, however, that social organization is by no means unique to the human species. There are many animal species that live in social groups, some demonstrating a surprising degree of intelligence, suggesting that social living itself may have helped to foster the development of intelligence (Pennisi, 2006). Further evidence for the impact of social learning theory on psychology can be found in the simple name recognition enjoyed by Bandura, certainly one of the most famous psychologists.
There are also interesting lines of research within the field of neuroscience that provide support for Mischel and Shoda’s cognitive-affective processing system. Utilizing functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), Decety & Jackson (2006) have found that empathy appears to involve activation of the same brain regions involved in experiencing the situation about which one is feeling empathy toward another person. For example, there is significant activation of brain regions involved in pain when an individual views pictures of someone else in a clearly painful situation. This would seem to provide neurobiological evidence in support of Mischel and Shoda’s cognitive-affective units, the functional components of the cognitive-affective processing system. Similarly, Knoblich & Sebanz (2006) have demonstrated that perceptual, cognitive, and motor processes are enhanced by social interaction, and that such interactions can be measured using event-related potentials that measure brain electrical activity. Some of the data presented in the study by Knoblich & Sebanz are essentially situation-behavior profiles for the individuals in their study.
Finally, let’s address the role of expectancy in one of the most challenging social issues facing the world today: diversity. We hear more and more about the value of diversity in higher education and in the workplace, but pursuing diversity is often challenged by prejudice. Expectations of prejudice enhance attention to social cues that threaten one’s social identity. In other words, when individuals expect that engaging in diversity will lead to prejudice, and perhaps then to discriminatory behavior, they are more likely to notice evidence of that very outcome (Kaiser, Vick, & Major, 2006). In addition, contact between diverse groups does less to displace feelings of prejudice among members of minority groups than it does among members of the majority group (likely due to the minority group members’ recognition of the ongoing effects of prejudice and discrimination; Tropp & Pettigrew, 2005). These represent difficult situation-behavior circumstances, since it can obviously be very difficult for team members to predict the behavioral responses likely to follow the artificial establishment of diversity. In making recommendations to the leaders of organizational teams, Mannix & Neale (2005) suggest clearly defining the team’s tasks and goals, providing bridges across diversity, and enhancing the influence of the minority. Perhaps most importantly, there is a need to provide incentives for change. Taken together, these approaches both increase the expectancy of success and raise the reinforcement value of working toward successfully diversifying the team. As such, principles that have arisen from social learning theory can clearly play a positive role is reshaping society.
18.08: The Future of Psychology- Bandura's Vision as Compared to Freud
In Toward a Psychology of Human Agency, Bandura (2006) agrees with Freud that religion played a significant role in the advancement of civilization, and that the scientific revolution that began with Darwin’s Theory of Evolution shifted our focus toward natural and scientific approaches to understanding and improving human life. However, evolution emphasizes random effects on genetically determined structures and traits, and does not allow for the choices made by individuals, though sociobiologists argue that genetics can exert influences on those choices. Rather than relying on psychoanalysis in order to understand the impulses of the id that drive us to survive, as Freud proposed (1927/1961, 1930/1961), Bandura believes that people are agents of change in their own lives, and that they can choose the direction that change takes.
Being an agent involves intentionally influencing one’s functioning and life circumstances, and there are four core properties of human agency. Intentionality refers to our ability to form action plans and the strategies necessary for accomplishing them. Forethought is the temporal extension of agency, in which we set goals for ourselves and anticipate likely outcomes of our actions to both guide and motivate our behavior. Once having chosen a course of action, of course, we do not simply sit back and wait for the right things to happen. Agency also involves both self-reactiveness and self-reflectiveness, processes in which we regulate our behavior, monitor our courses of action, and examine whether we are capable of being successful in our various endeavors (Bandura, 2006). As much as human agency involves our own thoughts, goals, motivation, and expectations, however, we do not exist autonomously. All human behavior occurs within social structures, and there is a reciprocal interplay between personal, behavioral, and environmental determinants (reciprocal determinism). This means that human agency, the exercise of self-influence, is part of the causal structure of our lives. As Bandura points out, this is not “free will,” which would be a throwback to medieval theology, but rather a matter of acting as an agent, the role of an individual in making causal contributions to the course of events in their life (Bandura, 2006).
…Social cognitive theory rejects a duality of human agency and a disembodied social structure. Social systems are the product of human activity, and social systems, in turn, help to organize, guide, and regulate human affairs. However, in the dynamic interplay within the societal rule structures, there is considerable personal variation in the interpretation of, adoption of, enforcement of, circumvention of, and opposition to societal prescriptions and sanctions…freedom is conceived not just passively as the absence of constraints, but also proactively as the exercise of self-influence… (pg. 165; Bandura, 2006) | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/18%3A_Social_Learning_Theory_and_Personality_Development/18.07%3A_The_Impact_of_Social_Learning_Theory.txt |
Media Violence and Its Effects on Children
The second Bobo doll study conducted by Bandura and his colleagues presented videotapes of the models behaving aggressively toward the Bobo doll (Bandura, Ross, & Ross, 1963a). The observation in this study that children did, indeed, imitate the aggressive behavior of models seen on film, but not in person, has become one the most influential articles in history, both in terms of stimulating further research on the modeling of aggression and in terms of practical applications (e.g., ratings on television programs, video games, and CDs with controversial lyrics). In their introduction to an issue of Psychological Science in the Public Interest (PSPI) on media violence and its effects on children, Ceci and Bjork (2003) describe how the authors of this particular PSPI issue were a collection of experts brought together to prepare a portion of the U.S. Surgeon General’s report on youth violence. However, political concerns led the Surgeon General’s office to radically alter the report. The authors protested, and attempted to satisfy the concerns of the politicians. Ultimately, however, this portion of the report was dropped from the final version. So, the editors of PSPI chose to publish this valuable psychological information, which clearly causes political concerns for some, so that psychologists, psychiatrists, law enforcement officials, teachers and school administrators, government policy makers, parents, indeed anyone who has a vested interest in youth violence, might have the most current information available on the effects of media violence on America’s youth. I would also like to acknowledge an important point made by the authors themselves. This issue of PSPI was a collaborative project by eight experts on the effects of media violence. The authors decided that the fairest way to list their names was alphabetical order. Thus, as I refer to the article as Anderson, et al. (2003), please note that the “et al.” includes widely respected experts, chosen by the National Institute of Mental Health for this project, each of whom contributed significantly to this article.
It would be difficult to do justice to this report by summarizing it here, since the report, which is a review itself, is nearly thirty pages long and cites 245 research studies. Clearly, the attention drawn by this question, the role of media violence in affecting violent behavior among children, provides a testament to the significance of this research. Anderson, et al. (2003) provide an overview of the empirical research, offer theoretical explanations, they address moderating effects, media use and content, and they examine research on interventions.
Empirical research on media violence and aggression has covered of wide variety of media types, including dramatic television and movies, television news violence, music videos and their lyrics, video games, and the internet. The review of this extensive body of research has shown a statistically significant association between exposure to media violence and aggression and violence among youth. Exposure to media violence, and the findings are consistent across the various types of media, increases the likelihood that children have aggressive thoughts and, indeed, engage in aggressive behavior. Most importantly, longitudinal studies have consistently shown that exposure to media violence in childhood, even beginning in late adolescence, are predictors of increased aggression and violent behavior in adulthood. Although the effects are at best small to medium, the authors note that they are as high as other problems that are considered significant public health issues, such as cigarette smoking and exposure to asbestos.
Several theories have been put forth to explain the manner in which exposure to media violence increases aggression in children, not the least of which is Bandura’s theory of observational learning. Observational learning appears to be so important to the humans, and other primate species, that we have developed a specific neurological system to learn from watching others: the mirror-neuron system (see Rizzolatti & Craighero, 2004). Additional theories suggest that exposure to media violence prepares an individual to engage in aggressive behavior. This can occur either because the media violence primes the individual by activating aggressive thoughts and scripts or by generally arousing the individual, and that arousal then carries over into heightened aggressive behavior in situations that provoke aggressive actions. Finally, there is the widely used, and often misunderstood, term “desensitization.” Anderson et al. (2003) prefer the term emotional desensitization to refer to a reduction in distress-related reactions to observing or thinking about violence. Although emotional desensitization may result in an individual being more willing to engage in aggressive or violent behavior, there is no evidence that it stimulates aggression. Thus, although emotional desensitization may be related to the disinhibition discussed in the chapter (it may even be the same thing), its role remains unclear.
Not all children are affected by media violence in the same way, and not all examples of media violence are equally effective in enhancing aggression. Thus, there must be moderating factors that come into play in the relationship between exposure to media violence and subsequent aggressive behavior. For example, the effects of media violence decline as children grow older, media violence is less likely to affect children who are less aggressive to begin with, and, although there is not a direct effect of intelligence, children of lower intelligence are more likely to watch television and to be at risk for other factors enhancing aggressiveness. The way in which the violence is presented in the media is also important, as is any portrayed justification for the violence as well as its consequences. However, all of these relationships are complex, and have not been studied in great detail. Thus, there is much more work to be done. Finally, one of the most important moderating factors is parental control. When parents discuss the content of media violence with their children, when they comment regularly on the reality of violence, children are much less likely to demonstrate aggressive tendencies.
This entire discussion would be moot, if not for the prevalence of media in our society and the content of that media. Data reported by Anderson, et al. (2003) from three national surveys provide an amazing view of media availability in America. Virtually all families with children have a television set, most have at least one VCR or DVD player, and about three quarters of those families subscribe to cable or satellite television. Approximately 70 percent of families with children have a video game system and a computer, and most American children have a television in their room (including 30 percent of children age 0 to 3 years old!). Watching television is the third most common activity for children, after sleeping and going to school. A significant number of children watch more than 40 hours of television a week, and children ages 0 to 6 years spend more time engaged in media entertainment than engaged in reading, being read to, and playing outside combined! And what’s included in that media content? Plenty of violence: 61 percent of programs contain violence, and only 4 percent of programs contain an anti-violence theme:
…put in another way, 96% of all violent television programs use aggression as a narrative, cinematic device for simply entertaining the audience…Moreover, most aggression on television is glamorized and trivialized…and nearly 75% of all violent scenes feature no immediate punishment or condemnation for violence. (pg. 101; Anderson, et al., 2003)
Similar findings have been reported for violence in video games, both in America and in Japan. Parents seldom recognize the popularity of those violent games, and only about one third of parents even knew the name of their child’s favorite video game (Anderson, et al., 2003).
Despite the wealth of information on the relationship between exposure to media violence and aggressive behavior, and a number of potential approaches for intervention, there has been little empirical research on potential interventions. In general, there are three approaches to reducing the influence of violent media: changing attitudes to counter violent messages, encouraging parental monitoring and guidance, and providing education on the content and effects of various forms of media. But once again, none of these potential interventions has been studied in detail. It must also be remembered that this is only one of many factors that contribute to aggressive and violent behavior amongst youth, though it may be the least expensive to address, since it involves little more than making choices about the media children are exposed to:
…However, the troubling truth is that violent media are entering the home and inviting active participation of even very young children - often with little parental supervision…Although additional research to address unresolved questions is needed, it is clear that media violence is a causal risk factor that should be addressed in thoughtful ways…parents can reduce and shape their children’s consumption of violent media…from a public-health perspective, today’s consumption patterns are far from optimal. And for many youths, they are clearly harmful. (pgs. 105-106; Anderson, et al., 2003)
Research on this important issue certainly did not end with the publication of the PSPI issue in 2003. In a more recent study, Carnagey and Anderson (2005) had college students play one of three versions of a race-car video game: one version rewarded all violence, one punished all violence, and one was non-violent. Overall, rewarding violent actions in the game increased hostile emotion, aggressive thinking, and aggressive behavior. In contrast, punishing violence still increased hostile emotion, but did not increase aggressive thoughts or behaviors. The authors suggest that an important mechanism through which violent media increases aggressive behavior is to first increase aggressive thoughts and states of mind. Another interesting result in this study was that the non-violent game did not result in as much violence as the game in which violence was rewarded, suggesting that the violent behavior in the game was not simply the result of competitiveness by the players. Of course, not everyone responds aggressively when aggression is modeled. It appears that individuals who score high on the trait of agreeableness (one of the “Big Five” traits, see Chapter 13) are able to short-circuit the effects of aggression-related cues and curb their aggression (Meier, Robinson, & Wilkowski, 2006). Meier, et al. go on to suggest that teaching other people to associate aggression-related cues with prosocial behavior might become a valuable intervention in continued efforts to reduce aggression and violence in our society. First, however, it might prove important to reduce the number of weapons present in American society (or at least our relationship with them). Klinesmith, Kasser, and McAndrew (2006) recently demonstrated that when male college students were exposed to a gun there was an increase in both their testosterone levels and their aggressive behavior. Media violence is clearly not the only aggression-related cue present for most people. However, as noted above, it may well be one area in which a distinct reduction in such cues can easily be accomplished without substantial financial costs (but certainly with substantial benefits) to society. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/18%3A_Social_Learning_Theory_and_Personality_Development/18.09%3A_Personality_Theory_in_Real_Life.txt |
Review of Key Points
• Reciprocal determinism refers to the concept that behavior, personal factors, and environmental factors are equal, interlocking determinants of each other.
• Observational learning is a specific type of social learning in which observers view the behavior of models.
• Highly aggressive children appear to learn this behavior at home, having experienced their parents modeling aggressive behavior.
• When models are rewarded for aggressive behavior, the result can be the disinhibition of aggression that had previously been restrained.
• Social learning is different than either simple imitation or identification, in that social learning implies underlying psychological processes (cognition).
• In order for social learning to occur, conditions must be met that support the components of this process: attention, retention, production, and motivation.
• Since observers do not copy behavior perfectly, and since they may choose to mix and match the behavior of different models, observational learning can lead to new and different behaviors.
• Self-regulation refers to the processes of self-reinforcement and self-punishment. Self-reinforcement works primarily through its motivational effects.
• Self-efficacy is the belief in one’s capabilities to perform specific behaviors in order to accomplish specific outcomes.
• Self-efficacy and self-esteem are separate concepts. An individual may lack a certain ability and be well aware of it, but if one’s concept of self-worth is not tied to that skill, there will be no corresponding loss of self-esteem.
• Bandura referred to the ability to act as an agent of change in one’s environment as personal agency.
• Bandura believed that behavioral approaches have an advantage over other methods of therapy because of their basis in rigorous, scientific testing.
• Behavioral therapies can only be successful if they focus on goals characterized by clear and observable behaviors.
• Rotter proposed that one must understand four kinds of variables in order to make reasonable predictions about behavior: behavior potential, expectancy, reinforcement value, and the psychological situation.
• Internal versus external control of reinforcement (aka, locus of control) may be the most important generalized expectancy underlying behavior, according to Rotter.
• Rotter developed the I-E scale in order to measure locus of control.
• A key element in locus of control is contingency awareness, the knowledge that one’s behavior is capable of producing specific outcomes.
• Rotter also developed the Rotter Incomplete Sentences Blank, specifically designed to measure the personality and psychological adjustment of college students.
• Delayed gratification refers to the concept of working (or restraining oneself) at the present time for a reward that will be granted only at a later time.
• Working together, Mischel and Bandura showed that modeling can alter the preference of children for delayed or immediate gratification.
• Mischel addressed what is known as the personality paradox, the appearance that behavior is inconsistent, while our intuition suggests that behavior is consistent.
• Mischel and Shoda proposed the Cognitive-Affective Processing System (CAPS) in order to address the personality paradox. By developing situation-behavior profiles, it is possible to identify patterns in the apparent inconsistency of individual behavior.
• fMRI studies have demonstrated specific brain activity that appears to correspond to the cognitive-affective units that underlie the CAPS.
• Situation-behavior characteristics have helped to address some of the problems that arise in situations in which diverse groups do not come together easily. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/18%3A_Social_Learning_Theory_and_Personality_Development/18.S%3A_Chapter_Summary.txt |
George Kelly’s personal construct theory goes beyond the cognitive elements addressed by social learning theorists and provides a full-fledged cognitive theory. Kelly believed that individuals act very much like scientists studying personality: they create constructs, or expectations about the environment and people around them, and then they behave in ways that “test” those beliefs and expectations. For Kelly, the personal constructs are more important than actual reality, since it is the construct that guides cognition and behavior, not the actual situation. His theory was unique, and quite unrelated to others that came before and after. This was, in part, Kelly’s very intention:
It is only fair to warn the reader about what may be in store…the term learning, so honorably embedded in most psychological texts, scarcely appears at all. That is wholly intentional; we are for throwing it overboard altogether. There is no ego, no emotion, no motivation, no reinforcement, no drive, no unconscious, no need…all this will make for periods of strange, and perhaps uncomfortable, reading. Yet, inevitably, a different approach calls for a different lexicon... (pg. x; Kelly, 1955a)
Albert Ellis and Aaron Beck are best known for developing therapeutic techniques that are based on a cognitive perspective of personality and behavior. Although they are not known for developing actual theories of personality, their clinical approaches are based on underlying theoretical perspectives, which shed light on how they view the nature of personality. Thus, their influential work is naturally connected to that of Kelly, whose theory of personality was entirely cognitive (as compared to the cognitive social learning theorists Bandura, Rotter, and Mischel). More recently, there have been cognitive approaches to therapy put forth that are connected to much older approaches to human understanding. Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) takes an experiential approach to changing behavior that shares many similarities to Buddhist approaches (Hayes & Smith, 2005; Hayes, Strosahl, & Wilson, 1999), whereas Radical Acceptance relies directly on Buddhist teachings to encourage people to embrace their own lives (Brach, 2003).
19.02: Personal Construct Theory
Kelly’s personal construct theory departs from cognitive social learning in that he proposes it is not simply enough to know what a person is likely to do in a given situation, even when your predictions are correct. More importantly, we need to know what a person might have done (Kelly, 1966). Thus, unlike the cognitive social learning theorists who consider cognitive processes as an aspect of the environmental circumstances associated with behavior, Kelly focused on the cognitive constructs first and foremost.
Kelly presented his personal construct theory in a two volume set, which was published in 1955 (Kelly, 1955a,b). In the mid-1960s Kelly was preparing a new book that was to include talks and papers he had presented around the world, many of which were never published. Unfortunately, he did not survive to complete this task, but the project was later completed by Brendan Maher (Maher, 1969), thus furthering the information available on this unique theory.
Brief Biography of George Kelly
Not much is known about George Kelly as a person, particularly regarding his childhood. Later in life he instructed his wife to destroy all of his personal correspondence. Thus, it has been somewhat difficult to piece together a picture of how this fascinating individual became the man he was. He was born in 1905 on a farm near Perth, Kansas. His father had been educated for the Presbyterian ministry, but after getting married his parents moved to the farm in Kansas, where they had their only child. The Kelly family moved around from farm to farm, including a failed farm in Colorado on some of the last free land given to settlers in the West. Kelly’s education was erratic, and he learned what he could when the family would occasionally spend a few weeks in town. He attended four different high schools, and apparently never established any long-term relationships. He was, however, favorably influenced by the exciting stories told by his maternal grandfather, who had been the captain of a sailing ship in the North Atlantic (Fransella, 1995).
Despite his erratic education, Kelly attended college at Friends University and then Park College, where he received a Bachelor’s degree in physics and mathematics. Despite studying math and science, the collegiate debates he experienced had sparked a keen interest in social problems. So, he entered the University of Kansas to earn a Master’s degree in educational sociology, and in 1927 he completed his thesis on the distribution of leisure time activities of workers in Kansas City. He then moved to Minneapolis and supported himself by teaching one night a week in each of three different night schools. He began studying sociology and biometrics at the University of Minnesota, but when the university found out that he couldn’t pay his tuition he was told to leave. He was then hired to teach psychology and speech at Sheldon Junior College in Iowa, where he spent a year and a half. He then returned to the University of Minnesota for a semester of studying sociology, but then went back to Wichita, Kansas and worked as an aeronautical engineer for a few months. He then received an exchange scholar fellowship to study at the University of Edinburgh in Scotland, where he earned a Bachelor’s degree in education in 1930, having written his thesis on predicting teaching success. He then returned to the United States, attended the State University of Iowa, and in 1931 he received a Ph.D. in psychology, with a focus on reading and speech disabilities. Two days later he married Gladys Thompson (Fransella, 1995; Maher, 1969).
As uncharacteristic as it may seem, Kelly finally settled down. He spent the next ten years teaching at Fort Hays Kansas State College. His research and writings during this time focused on the practical aspects of providing clinical psychological services for schools. Much like Alfred Adler had in Austria, he developed traveling clinics to provide training around the state of Kansas, and his model had a dramatic influence on the future of rural school psychology. With the advent of World War II, however, Kelly entered the Navy as an aviation psychologist. At first he helped to train local civilian pilots, but then he transferred to the Bureau of Medicine and Surgery of the Navy in Washington to help select naval air cadets. After the war he spent a year at the University of Maryland, but in 1946 he was appointed Professor and director of Clinical Psychology at Ohio State University, where he spent the next 20 years (Fransella, 1995; Maher, 1969).
During his first few years at Ohio State he focused on making their clinical psychology training program into one of the best in the country. One of his colleagues in the department was Julian Rotter, also known for his role in shaping the training programs used in psychology today, and one of their students was Walter Mischel (who admired both Rotter and Kelly). Kelly then turned his attention to the theory that made him famous, the two volume work entitled The Psychology of Personal Constructs (Kelly, 1955a,b). Kelly’s theory gained immediate recognition as both unique and significant, and he was invited to teach and lecture around the United States and in Europe, the Soviet Union, South America, Asia, and the Caribbean. He was elected president of both the Clinical Division and the Consulting Division of the American Psychological Association, and he served as president of the American Board of Examiners in Professional Psychology. In 1965, Kelly left Ohio State for Brandeis University, where he was appointed to the Riklis Chair of Behavioral Science. He began working on a collection of his papers and lectures from the past decade, but he died unexpectedly in March, 1966. As mentioned above, that collection of works was completed by the man who succeeded Kelly as Riklis Professor of Behavioral Science, and was published under the title Clinical Psychology and Personality: The Selected Papers of George Kelly (Maher, 1969).
Placing Kelly in Context: A Cognitive Theory of Personality
Simply put, Kelly’s personal construct theory represents the culmination of the shift from animalistic behaviorism to humanistic cognition. In American psychology, behaviorism was a powerful force, and began with the very traditional approach of theorists such as John B. Watson and B. F. Skinner. Alongside the experimental behaviorists were the learning theorists, such as Clark Hull. As Dollard and Miller tried to find some common ground between psychodynamic theory and traditional learning approaches, they were inevitably led to consider the role of social factors in human learning. Bandura, Rotter, and Mischel built on the legacy of Dollard and Miller, but added to it the active role of cognition in the human species. Finally, Kelly moved to a purely cognitive description of how individuals become who they are.
However, we must address an important caveat. Just as Skinner’s radical behaviorism was an extreme position of ignoring cognitive processes, perhaps Kelly’s position is equally extreme for attributing significant cognitive processing to all aspects of personality and personality development. Although the man-the-scientist concept may hold a certain curious appeal for some, who doesn’t sometimes knowingly try acting in different ways to see what effect it has on others? Likewise, who isn’t attracted to a theory that says we desire the ability to both predict and control the events in our lives? However, as Kelly the therapist was keenly aware, many people cannot predict or control the events surrounding them. Is this always the result of failed construct systems, or is it possible that sometimes we just aren’t thinking? Regardless of the answer, Kelly is the recognized leader of a significant development in the field of personality, a development that contributed to the highly regarded cognitive therapies of Ellis and Beck.
It is also interesting to note that the basis for his theory of constructive alternativism questions the reality of the self in a manner similar to Eastern/Buddhist concepts of consciousness and self. Carl Jung was dramatically influenced by the ancient Vedic traditions of India, and Carl Rogers, the founder of humanistic psychology, was influenced by the spiritual traditions of China. And now we have Kelly, whose theory represents the culmination of behavioral-cognitive theories, sharing a fundamental similarity with Buddhist psychology. Clearly, throughout the history of personality theory, there have been important theorists who looked beyond the constraints of their own training and their own culture.
Constructive Alternativism
Kelly begins by questioning the role that psychologists have assigned to themselves. Psychologists consider themselves to be scientists, engaged in the systematic study of human behavior and thought. Kelly questions why we, as psychologists, don’t extend the same perspective to all people. According to Kelly, doesn’t every person seek to predict and control the course of events in their lives? Doesn’t every person have their own theories about situations in life, don’t they test their own hypotheses, and weigh the experimental evidence gained through experience?
…it is as though the psychologist were saying to himself, “I, being a psychologist, and therefore a scientist, am performing this experiment in order to improve the prediction and control of certain human phenomena; but my subject, being merely a human organism, is obviously propelled by inexorable drives welling up within him, or else he is in gluttonous pursuit of sustenance and shelter.” (pg. 5; Kelly, 1955a)
Since Kelly proposes that each individual is theorizing about and testing their own life circumstances, he suggests the term man-the-scientist for understanding how all people (including, of course, women) approach the world around them.
In trying to understand the world around us, using arguments that sound either existential or like Eastern philosophy, Kelly questions the existence of the universe. Of course it exists, he says, but so do the thoughts of each individual, and the correspondence between what people think exists and what does, in fact, exist is constantly changing. Thus, Kelly suggests that it is better to say that the world around us is existing, rather than to say it exists. Likewise, life can only be understood in the context of time, if it is to make sense. However, life is not simply the changes that occur over time. Rather, it is a relationship between living things and their environment. Kelly emphasizes the creative capacity of living things to represent their environment, as opposed to simply reacting to it. These representations are known as constructs, patterns that we create in our mind and attempt to fit over the realities of the world. Since our constructs don’t always fit with reality, we are constantly modifying them, as well as trying to increase our repertoire of constructs. Over time, we test our constructs for the ability to predict what will happen in our lives. With sufficient time and experience, and if we are willing to learn from our mistakes, we can evaluate all of our interpretations of the world in which we live (Kelly, 1955a).
Kelly believes that all of our present interpretations of the environment are open to revision or replacement; there are always alternative constructs that may help us deal with new or difficult situations. It is this philosophical position that Kelly refers to as constructive alternativism. It is important to keep in mind, of course, that not just any alternative will work in a given situation. Therefore, each potential alternative construct must be evaluated in terms of its specific predictive efficiency, as well as in terms of overall predictive efficiency of the system it would become part of, if that alternative construct were adopted (Kelly, 1955a).
discussion question \(1\)
According to Kelly, it is more important to know what a person might have done, and he believed that people act as scientists, testing their constructs in order to become better at predicting and controlling their lives. Can you think of situations in which someone did what you expected, but you really wanted to know what they had thought about doing as alternatives?
Basic Theory of Personal Constructs
Personal construct theory begins with a fundamental postulate, which is then elaborated with eleven corollaries. The fundamental postulate states that “a person’s processes are psychologically channelized by the ways in which he anticipates events” (Kelly, 1955a). The carefully chosen words in this postulate define the nature of personal construct theory. The words person and he emphasize the individuality of this theory, the unique nature of each person’s constructs. Each person is then recognized as a process. The mind does not stop and start, simply reacting to stimuli, but rather it is constantly in motion, constantly experimenting with constructs. These processes operate through a network of pathways, or channels, according to the devices, or ways, a person constructs in order to achieve their goals. Since these processes, ways, and channels have not been identified as specific physiological mechanisms or anatomical structures, Kelly emphasizes that this is a psychological theory. So when we discuss this mechanism we are not necessarily addressing neuroscience on one hand or sociology on the other hand, we are working within the constraints of the field of psychology. We then have anticipation, the “push and pull of the psychology of personal constructs” (Kelly, 1955a). Being man-the-scientist, each of us seeks to predict the future and choose our actions accordingly. Finally, we have real-life events. Kelly was always very practical about both his personality theory and his approach to psychotherapy. Thus, the psychology of personal constructs is not an ethereal theory. Psychological processes, according to Kelly, are tied down to reality, and anticipation is carried forward in order to better represent future reality. Having established the fundamental postulate, Kelly then described eleven corollaries, or propositions, which both follow from the postulate and amplify his system by elaborating on the fundamental idea (Kelly, 1955a).
Construction Corollary: A person anticipates events by construing their replications. Construing refers to placing an interpretation upon an event. Since a new event will not occur exactly as a past event, our anticipation involves interpreting what the new event will be like. Kelly uses the example of a day. Today is not the same as yesterday, tomorrow will not be the same as today, but each day follows something of a similar pattern. Thus, our anticipation of tomorrow involves constructs based on both the similarities and differences between days we have experienced in the past. It is important to note that this process is not the same as cognition, it is not simply thinking about tomorrow. Much of this process is preverbal, or unconscious, and in that sense occurs automatically.
Individuality Corollary: Persons differ from each other in their construction of events. No matter how closely associated two people are, they cannot play exactly the same role in any situation. Therefore, they will interpret events differently. Although Kelly acknowledges that people often share similar experiences, particularly as they attend to the experiences of others in the same or similar situations, this corollary emphasizes the unique, subjective nature of interpreting and anticipating events.
Organization Corollary: Each person characteristically evolves, for his convenience in anticipating events, a construction system embracing ordinal relationships between constructs. When faced with conflict, there may be solutions that contradict one another. Thus, the constructs we develop may contradict each other. Kelly suggested that we develop our constructs in a systematic and organized way, with some constructs being ranked more highly than others. For example, some constructs may be good vs. bad, or stupid vs. intelligent. A stupid construct might work in a given solution, but an intelligent one would probably be preferred. For instance, suppose you have an electric garage door opener, and the power is out. You could put your car in the garage by driving through the garage door. However, it might be preferable to get out of the car, go into the garage through the house or side door, and then disconnect the garage door from the opener and open it by hand.
Dichotomy Corollary: A person’s construction system is composed of a finite number of dichotomous constructs. Every construct has both positive and negative aspects. In the example used above, both ways of putting your car in the garage have advantages and disadvantage. Driving through the garage door is quick and easy in the short term, but results in needing a new garage door. Getting out of the car and using another entrance takes more time and effort, and may be unpleasant in a bad storm, but it protects your property (and saves time and money in the long run). The essential nature of contrast was eloquently described some 2,600 years ago by Lao Tsu:
Under Heaven all can see beauty as beauty only because there is ugliness.
All can know good as good only because there is evil.
Therefore having and not having arise together.
Difficult and easy complement each other.
Long and short contrast each other;
High and low rest upon each other;
Voice and sound harmonize each other;
Front and back follow one another.
Lao Tsu, c600 B.C.
(pg. 4; Lao Tsu, c600 B.C./1989)
Choice Corollary: A person chooses for himself that alternative in a dichotomized construct through which he anticipates the greater possibility for extension and definition of his system. Simply put, since each situation requires us to choose between the options we construct, Kelly believed we choose the alternative that serves us best (at least within our system of constructs, which may be different than the reality of the best choice). But what about situations in which the best choice is not so obvious? Kelly believed that the choice corollary allowed for shades of gray when a decision is not clearly a choice between black and white alternatives. He did not view this as a contradiction, but rather, he proposed that the choice becomes one between options that are more gray or less gray. Thus, we can maintain the dichotomy of the choice while still also allowing the choice itself.
Range Corollary: A construct is convenient for the anticipation of a finite range of events only. Every personal construct has a range or focus, and few, if any, are relevant to all events. As Kelly points out, the construct tall vs. short may apply well to descriptions of people, trees, and buildings. But what would we mean by tall weather, or short light? Clearly, the construct tall vs. short is limited to certain types of discrete, physical objects.
Experience Corollary: A person’s construction system varies as he successively construes the replications of events. As we apply constructs in our efforts to predict what happens in our lives, we sometimes experience unexpected outcomes. As a result, we reconstruct our constructs, and learn from our experiences. In other words, man-the-scientist is by definition a work in process, and that process is ongoing.
Modulation Corollary: The variation in a person’s construction system is limited by the permeability of the constructs within whose range of convenience the variants lie. This corollary addresses the ease with which the experience corollary can occur. Although all individuals modify the constructs that guide their anticipation of events, some constructs are modified more easily, and some people are more open to changing their perspectives (and, hence, reconstructing their constructs). This is one area where Kelly re-emphasizes the difference between psychological processes and the process of science. Scientists seek hypotheses, theories, and laws that are not likely to change. Indeed, there is a continuum from hypothesis to law based on how likely it is that a scientific observation is true. People, however, are constantly testing and retesting their constructs, and reconstructing them as necessary and appropriate. Therefore, people may act like scientists, but their psychological processes serve to facilitate the individual’s life, not the lives of others (as scientific theories and laws are meant to apply to the whole universe).
Fragmentation Corollary: A person may successively employ a variety of construction subsystems which are inferentially incompatible with each other. This corollary extends from the previous one, but with a twist. As an individual encounters unexpected events, they modify their constructs to the extent that they are able. Thus, their behavior may change slowly, or more quickly, depending on the nature of the constructs that guide their openness to change. The twist comes into play when individuals are either resisting change, or in the process of change, and it involves the dichotomy corollary. If an individual is failing to predict and control events in their life, they may choose an incompatible construct, essentially reversing the course of their behavior. One of the advantages of Kelly’s personal construct theory is that these dramatic changes in behavior can now be seen as reasonable progressions in one’s ongoing desire for predictability and control.
Commonality Corollary: To the extent that one person employs a construction of experience which is similar to that employed by another, his psychological processes are similar to those of the other person. This corollary is important for interpersonal relations. Even though two people cannot experience the same event in exactly the same way, their ability to share their experiences is facilitated by the similarity of their experiences. This raises important implications for therapists working with clients of different cultures, since they might not share similar constructs based on certain events. It also raises an important distinction between cognitive and behavioral approaches to understanding personality. In behavioral perspectives, simple stimulus-response relationships are the same for everyone who experiences them. However, in the cognitive perspective, each person necessarily experiences any event in a unique way.
Sociality Corollary: To the extent that one person construes the construction processes of another, he may play a role in a social process involving the other person. Humans are social creatures. Our ability to predict and control our lives is largely based on our ability to predict and either control or work with other people. Thus, it is important for individuals to construe to thoughts and behaviors of others, and in so doing we can each play a role in the lives of others. Kelly suggests that this provides a natural connection between personal construct theory and social psychology, as well as a connection between personal construct theory and cross-cultural psychology.
Dimensions of Transition
Since life is an ongoing process, there are regular transitions in one’s personal constructs. According to the organizational and modulation corollaries, individuals have certain preferences amongst their constructs and differences in their ability to reconstruct them. Problems in life arise when individuals find it difficult to transition from an ineffective construct, one that does not allow for predicting or controlling events, to an effective construct. According to Kelly (1955a), the major problems are seen as the psychological phenomena of threat, fear, guilt, and anxiety. Kelly defines these terms as follows:
Threat is the awareness of imminent comprehensive change in one’s core structures.
Fear is like threat, except that, in this case, it is a new incidental construct, rather than a comprehensive construct, that seems about to take over.
Perception of one’s apparent dislodgment from his core role structure constitutes the experience of guilt.
Anxiety is the recognition that the events with which one is confronted lie outside the range of convenience of one’s construct system.
In each case, the psychological phenomenon is based on either the failure of one’s constructs to provide courses of action or a direct challenge to the system of constructs available to the individual. Given that the individual’s personal construct systems define the larger construct of self, these psychological phenomena represent a challenge to the very self experiencing them. In defense of the individual, aggressiveness is seen as the active elaboration of one’s perceptual field. In other words, aggressive individuals try to control events in ways that force decisions favorable to the individual. Similarly, hostility is viewed as the continued effort to extort validational evidence in favor of a type of social prediction which has already proved itself a failure. In this case, the individual tries to find confirmation of success following failed constructs, and this can only be done at the expense of others (Kelly, 1955a).
As people live their everyday lives, there are two typical cycles of transition, the C-P-C Cycle and the Creativity Cycle. The C-P-C Cycle involves circumspection, preemption, and control. Being circumspect refers to being wary, not taking risks. Thus, as we construe events we try to be precise in the development of our constructs. We then preempt these constructs for membership in an exclusive realm, one that best fits the event we are trying to predict and control. Finally, the first two steps have control as their natural consequence. Still, the individual must make the choice of that course of action, so Kelly suggests that the final C could just as well stand for choice as it does for control. In contrast, the Creativity Cycle begins with loose constructions, and then leads to tightened and validated constructions. What makes the Creativity Cycle meaningful is the individual’s ability to quickly experiment with various constructs and then seize upon the most promising, which is then tightened up and tested. Since much of this process is preverbal, the thought processes of creative individuals may not be apparent to others. According to Kelly, although individuals who begin with tight constructions might be productive, they cannot be creative. Creativity requires beginning with loose constructions (Kelly, 1955a). The value of creativity is not simply to be found as a distinction between the types of cycles experienced by individuals in their daily lives. Creativity is an important component of well-being, and a common topic in books on positive psychology and human strengths and virtues (Aspinwall & Staudinger, 2003; Cloninger, 2004; Compton, 2005; Peterson & Seligman, 2004; Snyder & Lopez, 2005). Indeed, Carl Rogers identified creativity as a significant aspect of the personality of a fully functioning person (Rogers, 1961).
discussion question \(2\)
Many psychologists, including Kelly and Carl Rogers, consider creativity to be an essential aspect of healthy psychological development. Have you ever entered into an unfamiliar situation and tried to be creative in how you handled it? Was it difficult to set aside preconceived notions about how to act, or do you find it easy to try different things in new situations?
The Role of the Psychotherapist
Kelly was first and foremost a clinical psychologist, and his writings are full of practical examples related to clinical work. Theories are of little value unless they are rooted in the values of the psychologists using them. Kelly considered this to be particularly true of clinical psychologists, since they are routinely dealing with clients (Kelly, 1955b). Kelly believed that the role of the psychotherapist involves not only the training and perspectives of the therapist, but also a need to understand the client, and essential ethical considerations:
The role of the psychotherapist involves keen alertness to what the client expects from psychotherapy and the initial acceptance of a wide variety of client misperceptions of what psychotherapy is…it involves certain ethical obligations that transcend mere legal status. (pg. 618; Kelly, 1955b)
In his typically practical style, Kelly provides lengthy lists of what psychotherapy means to the client, the client’s conceptualization of the therapist, the clinician’s conceptualization of their role, and basic approaches to revising the client’s constructs. At the beginning of therapy, it is unlikely that the client has a good concept of what therapy is and what it can accomplish. Nonetheless, the client has some construction of what will take place in therapy. The complaint presented by the client says something about what he or she thinks therapy can accomplish, and some see therapy as an end in itself. However, the reality is that therapy is a means to an end, and that end should be generating movement forward on the part of the client. In contrast, some clients are so ready for change that the therapist must be cautious in interpreting the client’s state of mind (Kelly, 1955b). Just as the client makes predictions about therapy, they will also have an initial conceptualization of the therapist. They may construe the therapist as a parent, an absolver of guilt, a companion, or even a threat. Hopefully, according to Kelly, the client may construe the therapist as a representative of reality. In this case, the client may feel free to experiment with his or her constructs without fear of failure. Most importantly, how the client construes the therapist will have a dramatic effect on their relationship:
From the client’s conceptualization of psychotherapy comes the role he expects to play and the role he expects the therapist to play…He may be bitterly disappointed in the therapist’s enactment of the expected role. He may stretch his perceptions of the therapist in order to construe him in the manner he expected to construe him rather than in the manner the therapist seeks to be construed….The client may then feel lost and insecure in the psychotherapeutic relationship. (pg. 575; Kelly, 1955b)
As the client is engaging in these processes, the clinician is also conceptualizing their own role. Overall, the goal of any therapist should be to assist in the continuous reconstruction of the client’s construct system, and the changes that take place in therapy should set the stage for continued reconstruction after therapy has been discontinued. Initially, the therapist may rely on a variety of techniques to accomplish superficial reconstructions. The therapist needs to be patient, and initially must accept the client’s construct systems as they are. The latter point is quite similar to the empathy described by Carl Rogers in humanistic, client-centered therapy, and Kelly does indeed use the word “empathize” in his own writings. As therapy progresses, the therapist needs to help the client select new conceptual elements, accelerate the tempo of the client’s experience, and design and implement experiments. Finally, the therapist serves to validate the client’s experiments as they attempt to reconstruct their construct systems (Kelly, 1955b).
Psychological Assessment within Personal Construct Theory
Kelly believed that therapy was a joint effort between the therapist and the client, and since the goal was the ongoing reconstruction of the client’s psychological systems (even after therapy), the client ultimately needs to become his own therapist. Therefore, the psychotherapeutic interview (Note: by “interview,” Kelly means what we would commonly call a therapy session) becomes an essential part of therapy. Throughout the process of the interview, the therapist makes decisions regarding the course of the interchange between the therapist and the client. Overall, the decisions made by the therapist are tailored to the specific client, but still the therapist must remain in control of the interview. This requires that the therapist plan for the interview. Those plans include how often to interview the client, how long the interviews should last, the tempo of the interview, and when to terminate the interview. Since the client continues to live their life outside of the interview room, the therapist must also consider whether special circumstances will require special interview plans (Kelly, 1955b, 1958). One of the most practical aspects of the interview is that the client can simply provide information needed by the therapist, to a point:
…there is a useful adage for clinical psychologists to follow on occasion: if you do not know what is wrong with a person, ask him; he may tell you. (pp. 322; Kelly, 1955a)
The Role Construct Repertory Test (Rep Test) was developed by Kelly in order to understand how a client’s personal constructs influence their personal-social behavior. The client begins with a Role Title List, on which they list the names of important people in their lives (see Table 10-1). The names are then grouped three at a time, and the client is asked to describe in what important way two of the three individuals are alike but different than the third person. A more organized form of the Rep Test, particularly useful for research purposes, involves creating the Repertory Grid. Once again the client is asked to identify significant people in their life. The grid provides three-person pairings that address various relational factors (family, intimate friends, conflicted relationships, authority figures, and values), and as before the client provides a construct that associates two of the people yet distinguishes them from the third. The common factor is listed as the emergent pole, the distinguishing factor is listed as the implicit pole. The Rep Test does not result in specific outcomes, so its interpretation is also subject to different methods. If the Rep Test is interpreted formally, it will provide results on the number and range of constructs present within the client’s construct systems. In the hands of an experienced and skilled examiner, information can be gleaned on the equivalence of constructs, thus providing deeper detail on the effective range of the client’s construct system. As more information is obtained from the Rep Test, the better able the therapist will be to guide the therapeutic process (Kelly, 1955a).
Fixed-role therapy is a technique derived from personal construct theory. First, the client prepares a self-characterization sketch, a technique in which the client is asked to write a character sketch about themselves as if they were the principal character in a play, but written as if by a friend who knows the client well. Using information from the self-characterization sketch, as well as from interviews and perhaps the Rep Test, the therapist then writes a fixed-role sketch. The client is asked to act out the fixed-role sketch over a period of weeks. Initially, Kelly and his colleagues emphasized minor changes in the client’s construct systems. However, they later found that it is often easier for a client to play out roles that are the opposite of their usual constructs, rather than making only minor changes in their behavior. Over time, it is expected that the client will learn that the new construct systems are more predictive than their old construct systems, and the fixed-role therapy will establish an ongoing process of reconstruction within the client (Kelly, 1955a).
Table \(1\): The Role Title List Used for the Personal Construct Repertory Test
1. A teacher you liked. (Or the teacher of a subject you liked.)
2. A teach you disliked. (Or the teacher of a subject you disliked.)
3. Your wife or present girl friend.3a. (for women) Your husband or present boy friend.
4. An employer, supervisor, or officer under whom you worked or served and whom you found hard to get along with. (Or someone under whom you worked in a situation you did not like.)
5. An employer, supervisor, or officer under whom you worked or served and whom you liked. (Or someone under whom you worked in a situation you liked.)
6. Your mother. (Or the person who has played the part of a mother in your life.)
7. Your father. (Or the person who has played the part of a father in your life.)
8. Your brother nearest your age. (Or the person who has been most like a brother.)
9. Your sister nearest your age. (Or the person who has been most like a sister.)
10. A person with whom you have worked who was easy to get along with.
11. A person with whom you have worked who was hard to understand.
12. A neighbor with whom you get along well.
13. A neighbor whom you find hard to understand.
14. A boy you got along well with when you were in high school. (Or when you were 16.)
15. A girl you got along well with when you were in high school. (Or when you were 16.)
16. A boy you did not like when you were in high school. (Or when you were 16.)
17. A girl you did not like when you were in high school. (Or when you were 16.)
18. A person of your own sex whom you would enjoy having as a companion on a trip.
19. A person of your own sex whom you would dislike having as a companion on a trip.
20. A person with whom you have been closely associated recently who appears to dislike you.
21. The person whom you would most like to be of help to. (Or whom you feel most sorry for.)
22. The most intelligent person whom you know personally.
23. The most successful person whom you know personally.
24. The most interesting person whom you know personally.
discussion question \(3\)
Kelly’s fixed-role therapy requires the client to write a script for how they want to live their life. He found that sometimes it was easier for his clients to act out the opposite of their typical behavior. Would you find it easier to make minor changes in your behavior, or easier to make dramatic changes? | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/19%3A_Cognitive_Perspectives_on_Personality_Development/19.01%3A_Chapter_Introduction.txt |
Understanding Culture’s Effects on Cognitive Style as a Prerequisite for Effective Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy
An essential element of all cognitive therapies is the desire to identify and challenge a client’s underlying dysfunctional cognitions, whether they are mistaken beliefs, schemas, automatic thoughts, cognitive distortions, whatever the case may be. To do so, requires that the therapist knows when cognitions are dysfunctional, and to some extent, what would be a reasonable cognition in the client’s personal situation. While it may seem obvious that any psychologically healthy person, particularly a trained therapist, would be able to recognize the difference between functional and dysfunctional thoughts, feelings, and behaviors, this assumes that the therapist and the client come from similar environments. This may very well NOT be the case when the client and the therapist come from dramatically different cultures. Furthermore, as G. Morris Carstairs noted regarding psychiatric interviews (1961), it makes a significant difference whether it is the therapist or the client who is outside of their familiar culture. For example, when a psychologist conducts research in a foreign country, particularly in small towns or villages, local people may simply fear and avoid strangers.
Kelly discussed culture at length in The Psychology of Personal Constructs (Kelly, 1955a,b). Both the commonality corollary and the sociality corollary are directly influenced by our understanding of culture. We, and by “we” I mean to include therapists, tend to expect that people from similar cultures have experienced basically similar upbringings and environments. We also tend to believe that people from a given culture share their expectations regarding the behavior of others from that culture. Thus, in order for a therapist to gain access to the personal constructs of their client, it is important for the therapist to learn as much as possible about the client’s cultural heritage. Failure to do so may interfere with the therapist’s ability to understand some of the client’s disruptive anxieties about either therapy itself or their life in general. Indeed, Kelly shares an example in which a White therapist (whom Kelly was supervising) found it difficult to help a Black client, because the Black client was overly anxious about discussing racially charged feelings regarding interracial sexual relationships. Since the client had discussed sexual issues before, the White therapist did not readily recognize the discomfort with which the Black client addressed his attraction to White women (remember, this was in the 1950s!).
Kelly goes on to discuss cultural differences in mannerisms, language, expectations regarding mental illness, the influence of religion, and how a therapist might go about learning more about a client’s cultural experiences. He does caution, however, that one should not attribute too much value to the influence of culture:
…It is important that the clinician be aware of cultural variations. Yet, from our theoretical view, we look upon the “influence” of culture in the same way as we look upon other events. The client is not merely the product of his culture, but it has undoubtedly provided him with much evidence of what is “true” and much of the data which his personal construct system has had to keep in systematic order. (pg. 688; Kelly, 1955b)
For example, it is often considered the mark of a sophisticated clinician that he considers all of his clients in terms of the culture groups to which they belong. Yet, in the final analysis, a client who is to be genuinely understood should never be confined to the stereotype of his culture. (pg. 833; Kelly, 1955b)
Albert Ellis and Aaron Beck, originators of the best known cognitive-behavioral therapies (see Beck & Weishaar, 1995; Ellis, 1995), also discussed cultural influences, though not as extensively as Kelly had. Ellis emphasized that each individual develops a belief system which helps them make judgments and evaluate situations. Although each person’s belief system is unique, they share many beliefs with other members of their society and/or culture. Perhaps more importantly, different cultures can have very different belief systems. To complicate the situation even further, cultural beliefs can change, either due to gradual evolution of the culture or in a more dramatic fashion when an influential thinker or leader offers a different perspective on life (Ellis, 1977). Beck has discussed how culturally-determined schemas can be so fundamental that they contribute to how and who we both love and hate (Beck, 1988, 1999).
Today, studies on the relationship between culture and cognition continue, both in clinical and non-clinical settings. There are at least two handbooks focusing on cross-cultural and multicultural factors in personality assessment (Dana, 2000; Suzuki, Ponterotto, & Meller, 2001). According to Suzuki, et al. (2001), these handbooks are necessary due to “the growing number of racial and ethnic minorities in the United States and in recognition of the multitude of variables that affect performance on cognitive and personality tests…” As assessment transitions to therapy, it becomes quite a challenge for any therapist to be familiar with the wide variety of cultures in America. Axelson (1999) has identified six basic cultural groups in America: native Americans, Anglo-Americans, European ethnic Americans, African Americans, Hispanic Americans, and Asian Americans. This list obviously does not include the many immigrants living in this country who are not considered to be American. When faced with such cross-cultural challenges, the essential skills for a therapist include careful and active listening, genuine verbal and nonverbal responses that indicate successful communication, being honest about what you do not understand, respecting and caring about the client, and being patient and optimistic (Axelson, 1999).
Additional studies have suggested that cultural knowledge influences the interpretation of stimuli in a dynamic, constructivist fashion (Hong, Morris, Chiu, & Benet-Martinez, 2000), that these processes occur automatically (Bargh & Williams, 2006), and that experiencing a wider variety of cultures in one’s education may actually lead to more complex cognitive processing (Antonio, Chang, Hakuta, Kenny, Levin, & Milem, 2004). When considering fundamental cultural differences, what some consider the core values that distinguish amongst cultures, most psychology students are familiar with the distinction between individualistic and collectivistic cultures (cultures in which one favors one’s own goals as compared to subordinating one’s own goals in favor of group goals). However, Laungani (1999) suggests that there are three other common dimensions: free will vs. determinism, materialism vs. spiritualism, and cognitivism vs. emotionalism. According to Laungani, Western cultures tend to be work- and activity-centered. Thus, they operate in a cognitive mode that emphasizes rational, logical, and controlled thought and behavior. Non-Western cultures, in contrast, tend to be relationship-centered, operating in an emotional mode. Public displays of feelings and emotions, both positive and negative, are not frowned upon (Laungani, 1999). These core values carry over into cognitive styles. For example, the cognitive style prevalent in Africa tends toward synthesis, as opposed to analysis. Africans tend to integrate their experiences into an inclusive whole, and they view such tendencies as more natural than the typical Western alternative (Okeke, Draguns, Sheku, & Allen, 1999). Thus, one can imagine a therapeutic situation in which the client resists analyzing their problems, and the therapist considers that resistance to be a specific problem unique to the client. Any subsequent attempts by the therapist to break down that resistance would be flawed, since the therapist has not understood the underlying cognitive style of the client. The failure of therapists to properly address the significance of cultural factors in therapy, regardless of whether or not their failure was unintentional, has been described as cultural malpractice (Iijima Hall, 1997). | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/19%3A_Cognitive_Perspectives_on_Personality_Development/19.03%3A_Connections_Across_Cultures.txt |
Albert Ellis and Aaron Beck are not known as personality theorists, but both are well-known therapists and prolific authors. Their unique approaches to therapy are, of course, based on their theoretical perspectives, each of which emphasizes cognitive processes. Thus, we will take a brief look at how they have applied cognitive aspects of personality theory to the treatment of psychological disorders.
Pretzer and Beck (2005) have suggested that cognitive therapies are truly integrative approaches that treat the individual within a phenomenological perspective. Beck was trained as psychoanalyst, and began examining his patients’ thought processes carefully in an attempt to prove that Freud was right about depression being the result of anger turned inward. However, Beck instead discovered that his patient’s thoughts focused more on themes such as despair and defeat, and that their appraisals of situations in life and their consistently negative biases in processing information were better predictors of their mood and behavior. Thus, Beck began to develop a cognitive approach to working with his patients. At the same time Ellis was developing rational-emotive therapy, and the two theories have influenced each other in many ways (Pretzer & Beck, 2005). In addition, cognitive therapy has been influenced by many other developments in the field of psychology, including the work of Freud, Adler, Horney, Rogers, Bandura, and, of course, Kelly. The integration of these various approaches, in order to truly understand the individual, requires the therapist to work actively with the client:
…The idea of “collaborative empiricism” is central to the practice of cognitive therapy. In the course of therapy, the cognitive therapist works with his or her client to collect detailed information regarding the specific thoughts, feelings, and actions that occur in problem situations. These observations are used as a basis for developing an individualized understanding of the client which provides a basis for strategic intervention…For the cognitive therapist to intervene effectively, he or she must endeavor both to understand the individual’s subjective experience and to perceive objective reality accurately. (pp. 46-47; Pretzer & Beck, 2005)
More recent developments in cognitive therapy have focused on accepting the circumstances of one’s life, doing so not as an excuse, but in order to facilitate moving forward from that point. Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) acknowledges the presence of suffering in human life, and focuses on using mindfulness to re-orient one’s relational framework to the circumstances of one’s life (Eifert & Forsyth, 2005; Hayes & Smith, 2005; Hayes, Strosahl, & Wilson, 1999). ACT has many elements in common with the traditional practice of Buddhist mindfulness, an approach that is taken directly in Radical Acceptance (Brach, 2003).
Brief Biographies of Albert Ellis and Aaron Beck
Albert Ellis was born in 1913 in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. When he was 4 years old his family moved to New York City, and Ellis has remained there ever since. Although Ellis considered his childhood to have had no significant effect on his subsequent career in psychology, there were some rather dramatic factors that influenced the person he became. His father was a traveling salesman who was seldom home, and when he was home he paid little attention to his children. After his parents were divorced, Ellis seldom saw his father again. His mother wasn’t much more attentive, doing very little for the children, and often leaving them home alone. Ellis later wrote: “As for my nice Jewish mother, a hell of a lot of help she was!” (cited in Yankura & Dryden, 1994). Ellis was also very sick following tonsillitis and a strep infection. He needed emergency surgery, and then developed nephritis. Over the next 2 years, from 5 to 7 years old, he was hospitalized eight times, once for 10 months. Yet his parents remained uncaring, and he would sometimes go weeks without anyone from the family visiting him in the hospital. The illness kept him from playing sports or other games even when he was home from the hospital. Perhaps as a result of all of these circumstances, or perhaps because of his temperament, Ellis was painfully shy. He dreaded public activities, such as when he won an award for his excellent academic work, and he avoided making social overtures toward any girl he had a crush on (Yankura & Dryden, 1994).
Surprisingly, Ellis grew strong from these experiences. He thrived on his independence and autonomy, and turned his attention toward his schoolwork. He obtained praise from adults other than his parents, and at one point became something of a leader amongst the children in the hospital. Although his shyness plagued him for many years, he developed a strong sense of self-esteem based on his success in academics. Most importantly, he developed a sense of choosing to overcome his adverse childhood. He did not become a strong-willed individual because of his bad childhood, for example he describes his sister as never really being happy, but in spite of it, due largely to being born with an innate capacity for rational thinking (Yankura & Dryden, 1994).
Much like B. F. Skinner, Ellis hoped to become a writer. Having finished high school at the age of 16, he decided to attend business school at the City College of New York so he might make enough money to support his writing career. However, the Great Depression was just beginning, so there was little opportunity for a young man to make money in business. Nonetheless, he wrote a great deal. He wrote a 500,000-word autobiographical novel. By the age of 28 he had written twenty full-length novels, plays, and books of poetry. None of them were published. He also wrote numerous non-fiction works on sex, philosophy, and politics. None of them were published. However, his research on the topics of sex, love, and marriage made him a popular source of advice amongst his friends. And so he decided to pursue professional training in psychology (Yankura & Dryden, 1994).
Ellis began his studies in the psychology program at Columbia University, and then transferred to the clinical psychology program at Teachers College of Columbia University, receiving a Ph.D. in clinical psychology in 1947. That year he also began training as a psychoanalyst at the Karen Horney Institute for Psychoanalysis. His training analyst was Dr. Charles Hulbeck, who had been analyzed by Hermann Rorschach. One of the personal issues Ellis addressed during his training analysis was whether or not to marry the women he had begun dating. He eventually decided not to marry her (he was later married twice, one marriage ended in annulment, the other in divorce). Ellis was successful as a psychoanalyst, but many patients couldn’t afford to come as often as was recommended in traditional psychoanalytic theory. Curiously, Ellis noticed that patients who came less often seemed to fare better in therapy, especially when the constraints of limited time caused Ellis to be more proactive in therapy. He pursued this active-directive approach to therapy, and by the mid-1950s he had developed rational emotive behavior therapy to the point where he published his first articles and began describing the technique at professional conferences (Yankura & Dryden, 1994).
Ellis devoted the rest of his career to establishing rational emotive behavior therapy as a significant force in psychotherapy. In 1959 he established the Institute for Rational Living, and by the 1980s there were similar institutes in Australia, Britain, Canada, Germany, Israel, Italy, Mexico, and the Netherlands. He has written over 75 books, beginning with How to Live with a Neurotic (Ellis, 1957), hundreds of articles, and he has received many distinguished awards. After 60 years as a psychotherapist, marriage and family counselor, and sex therapist, Ellis has been honored as a fellow of five major associations. He was recognized with the Humanist of the Year Award by the American Humanist Association, the Distinguished Psychologist Award of the Academy of Psychologists in Marital and Family Therapy, the Distinguished Practitioner Award of the American Association of Sex Educators, Counselors and Therapists, and the American Psychological Association has recognized him for Distinguished Professional Contributions to Knowledge. In a 1991 survey ranking the “Most Influential Psychotherapist,” Canadian psychologists ranked Ellis #1, whereas American psychologists ranked him second to Carl Rogers, but ahead of third-place Sigmund Freud (Ellis, 1994, 2005; Yankura & Dryden, 1994)!
In most ways, Aaron Beck’s childhood couldn’t have been more different than that of Ellis. Born in 1921, he was the youngest child of loving and supportive parents. His parents were particularly supportive of education: his brother Irving became a physician, and his brother Maurice entered social work after earning a Master’s degree in psychology (the other two children had died in childhood, his only sister dying in the worldwide influenza epidemic of 1919). Like Ellis, however, Beck was extremely ill as a child. When he was seven years old, Beck broke his arm at a playground. An infection set in, which then developed into septicemia (a generalized blood infection). At the time, septicemia was 90 percent fatal, and his brother Irving overheard the doctor tell their mother that Beck would die. Although he obviously survived, he missed so much school that he had to be held back a year. As often happens when young children are held back in school, the effect on his self-esteem was devastating, and Beck came to believe that he was stupid and inept (Weishaar, 1993; for more information on the negative effects of grade retention visit the National Association of School Psychologists’ website at www.nasponline.org).
However, with the help of his brothers, Beck was able to catch up to and eventually surpass his classmates, graduating first in his high school class. Along the way he belonged to the Audubon Society, worked as a camp counselor, became the youngest Eagle Scout in his Boy Scout troop, and was editor of the high school newspaper. He followed his brothers to Brown University, but was unsure of a career path. He majored in English and Political Science, but he took a wide variety of courses, eventually taking the courses necessary to go on to medical school. He graduated magna cum laude, Phi Beta Kappa, and won awards for oratory and essay writing. Despite his dramatic successes, Beck suffered a great deal of anxiety, particularly a blood/injury phobia that most likely resulted from his frightening experiences related to the emergency surgery necessary when he broke his arm. Having been accepted to the Yale School of Medicine, his surgery rotation was very difficult in light of his fear of blood. However, he worked through his fears cognitively (an obvious foreshadowing of the work that would make him famous), and successfully completed his medical degree (Weishaar, 1993).
Beck never intended to study psychiatry, and thought little of psychoanalysis. However, having graduated in 1946, there were many veterans returning from World War II. In 1949, he began a residency in neurology at a veteran’s administration hospital in Massachusetts. Due to a pressing need for psychiatrists, the director of the program began requiring everyone to complete a rotation is psychiatry. The psychiatry program at the hospital was primarily influenced by the Boston Psychoanalytic Institute, and Beck protested that psychoanalytic formulations seemed far-fetched, but he eventually decided to stay in psychiatry and to study psychoanalysis in greater detail. He first studied psychoanalysis at the Austin Riggs Center in Massachusetts, where one of his supervisors was Erik Erikson. After completing his training in psychiatry, he joined the faculty of the University of Pennsylvania Medical School (in 1954), where he has remained ever since. As he began his research career, Beck intended to confirm Freud’s hypothesis that depression was the result of hostility turned inward. However, he began to recognize that his patients were greatly influenced by underlying patterns of cognition, the so-called automatic thoughts that are so well-known today. About this same time, Beck learned of Kelly’s work on personal constructs (which Beck later referred to as schemas). As a result of these ideas and experiences coming together, Beck’s own cognitive theory began to take shape. Then, in 1963, Ellis read an article written by Beck. Ellis sent copies of his own work to Beck, and reprinted Beck’s article in the journal Rational Living. Beck then invited Ellis to speak to the psychiatry residents at Penn, and from that point forward the two maintained close contact. Beck has credited Ellis as being an excellent spokesperson for cognitive approaches to psychotherapy (Weishaar, 1993).
During his career, Beck has received many awards, including the Distinguished Scientific Award for the Applications of Psychology from the American Psychological Association. He has also received major awards from the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychopathological Association, and the American Association of Suicidology. He received an honorary doctorate in medical science from his alma mater, Brown University, in 1987 he was elected a Fellow of the Royal College of Psychiatrists (England), and he is a senior member of the Institute of Medicine. Perhaps the most meaningful tribute, however, is that his daughter, Dr. Judith Beck, has followed in his footsteps. She is currently the Director of the Beck Institute for Cognitive Therapy and Research, and a Clinical Associate Professor at the University of Pennsylvania. She has written a number of books on cognitive therapy and, with her father, developed the Beck Youth Inventories (for more information visit the website for the Beck Institute for Cognitive Therapy and Research at www.beckinstitute.org).
Placing Ellis and Beck in Context: Cognitive Therapy
In one sense, Ellis and Beck do not belong in a book about personality theory. They are not known for their theoretical contributions to our understanding of personality development. In another sense, they are among the most important theorists covered, since the practical application of cognitive theories to psychotherapy has had a dramatic influence on the effectiveness of psychotherapy in treating psychological disorders. Remember that Freud, as well as most of the other well-known psychodynamic theorists, began conducting therapy first and later developed theoretical perspectives which helped to explain what they saw in their patients and what worked in therapy. Similarly, Ellis and Beck focused on the development of their therapeutic approaches, and to a large extent their theoretical perspective is inferred from the techniques they use in therapy.
In addition, one could argue that the cognitive therapies of Ellis and Beck stand at the pinnacle of the behavioral and cognitive theories of personality that have been so influential in American psychology. As evidence of their significance, Beck received an Albert Lasker Clinical Medical Research Award in 2006. Often called the American Nobel Prize (some seventy recipients have gone on to win a Nobel Prize), in the 60 years that the Lasker prizes have been awarded, Beck is the first psychotherapist to be honored. This award is a testament both to the respect that cognitive psychotherapy has earned in the medical community and to Beck for the honor he has earned amongst many ground-breaking psychotherapists.
Although cognitive therapies may seem highly specialized, both Ellis and Beck drew upon many different areas of psychology and psychiatry, as well as Eastern philosophies, while developing their techniques. Their psychoanalytic training exposed them to the directive approach of Adler and to Horney’s emphasis on the (which can be viewed as a neurotic belief or a type of automatic thought). In addition, they cited theorists, authors, and spiritual leaders such as Bandura, Frankl, Rogers, Piaget, the Dalai Lama, D. T. Suzuki, Lao Tsu, Jesus of Nazareth, and many others. The range of ideas that Ellis and Beck synthesized into a cohesive and direct approach to psychotherapy is unparalleled in the fields of psychology and psychiatry.
Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy
In order to understand Ellis’ perspective on therapy, one must first understand his perspective on the basis of psychological disturbances, whether they are minor problems with personal adjustment or more serious forms of mental illness. Individuals with problems typically have a long history related to the disorder. Using the same example as Ellis (1957), suppose a woman is chronically depressed because she has been rejected by men she really liked and with whom she wanted to have long-term relationships. She understandably concludes that the activating event of being rejected leads to the consequence of being depressed. However, this conclusion is wrong! According to Ellis, it is not the rejection that causes her depression, it is the belief system that arises within her, particularly irrational beliefs, that cause her depression. For example, if she rationally believed that it was unfortunate that someone she liked rejected her, or that it was frustrating that she was rejected, she might not become depressed. However, if she irrationally believes that it is awful that she has been rejected, or that she should have been more beautiful so that he wouldn’t have rejected her, then she is quite likely to become depressed. This is what Ellis referred to as the A-B-C’s of emotional disturbance or self-defeating behaviors and attitudes. A refers to the activating event (being rejected), B refers to the person’s beliefs(this is awful, I’m not pretty), and C is the consequence of the beliefs: depression. The basis for therapy in such situations can be found by extending the A-B-C’s to the D-E’s: disputing (D) the irrational beliefs, which hopefully leads to the cognitive effect (E - effective new philosophies, emotions, and behaviors) of disrupting the self-defeating patterns of behavior (Ellis, 1957, 1973, 1996). More recently, Ellis has proposed one more letter for his ABC theory of personality, the letter G for goals (*note: there is no “F”). Goals consist of a person’s purposes, values, standards, and hopes. When these goals are thwarted by an activating event, the person can respond by choosing healthy or unhealthy alternatives, and the nature of that choice is based on one’s beliefs (Ellis, 1994). Ellis considered the ABC theory to be so straightforward that it could prove helpful to anyone.
When an individual has become trapped by unhealthy belief systems and the corresponding self-defeating behavior patterns that accompany them, the potential need for psychotherapy arises. The therapy that Ellis developed has come to be known as rational emotive behavior therapy, or REBT (the name went through several permutations over Ellis’ career, and he finally settled on REBT). The primary task of the therapist using REBT is to challenge the client’s irrational beliefs and, in so doing, to help the client change their belief systems. In essence, when the client believes that it would be catastrophic for a certain negative outcome to occur, the therapist tries to help them by disputing the irrational belief with questions such as: “Why would a certain outcome be catastrophic?” While trying to dispute the irrational beliefs, the therapist also searches for underlying philosophies that support the irrational belief system, philosophies that can then also be disputed. In addition to the cognitive aspect of REBT, the therapist often encourages the client to act against their irrational fears. If the client is willing, they have the opportunity to experience anxiety-ridden situations without the catastrophic consequences they have feared (although the help of the therapist may prove necessary along the way). Throughout this process, REBT does not intend to ignore the person’s feelings. However, when a client is suffering from unhealthy and self-defeating feelings, such as anxiety, depression, or anger, REBT can help to minimize those unhealthy feelings. In addition, REBT encourages healthy, positive emotions, and recognizes that sometimes a strong negative response, such as sadness or grief, to a tragic activating event may be healthy or constructive. When utilized effectively, REBT offered what Ellis believed was a better, deeper, and more enduring therapy, which could achieve those results in a fairly brief amount of time (Ellis, 1962, 1973, 1994, 1995, 1996). Ellis also believed that REBT was applicable to a wider range of clients than any other psychotherapy:
RET [later known as REBT], on the contrary, seems to be almost the only major kind of psychotherapy (aside, perhaps, from Zen Buddhism, if this is conceptualized as psychotherapy…) that holds that the individual does not need any trait, characteristic, achievement, purpose, or social approval in order to accept himself. In fact, he does not have to rate himself, esteem himself, or have any self-measurement or self-concept whatever. (pg. 65; Ellis, 1973)
First and foremost, Ellis focused on practical applications of psychotherapy, and he considered his approach to be humanistic in its emphasis on the whole person. He acknowledged that REBT shared important elements with the approaches of other classic theorists who had emphasized the value of individuals, including Alfred Adler, Viktor Frankl, Rollo May, Carl Rogers, Abraham Maslow, and Karen Horney (Ellis, 1973, 1995). Ellis’ discussion of the practice of REBT seems to focus on what Horney addressed in her concepts of neurotic needs and the tyranny of the should. Taken together, the desire to focus on practical applications and helping individuals has led to a wide variety of self-help books based on REBT (Yankura & Dryden, 1994). Naturally, this list includes many books by Ellis himself, including titles such as How to Live With a Neurotic (Ellis, 1957), A New Guide to Rational Living (Ellis & Harper, 1975), How to Live With - and Without - Anger (Ellis, 1977), How to Cope With a Fatal Illness (Ellis & Abrams, 1994), How to Keep People from Pushing Your Buttons (Ellis & Lange, 1994), How to Control Your Anxiety Before It Controls You (Ellis, 1998), and Sex Without Guilt in the 21st Century (Ellis, 2003). REBT has also been applied to a wide variety of other problems that have been covered in Ellis’ books, such as marriage counseling, personality disorders, depression, and even schizophrenia, and REBT has proved successful in both individual and group settings (Ellis, 1962, 1973, 2001; Ellis & Dryden, 1987).
Discussion Question 1
Rational emotive behavior therapy is based on the ABC theory of personality. Can you think of situations in which activating events led you to specific consequences, even though your beliefs, if you thought about them enough, were the real reason for the consequence you experienced?
Ellis, as well as other therapists using REBT, has also addressed addictive disorders, including alcoholism (Ellis, 2001; Ellis, McInerney, DiGuiseppe, & Yeager, 1988; Trimpey, Velten, & Dain, 1993; Yeager, Yeager, & Shillingford, 1993). In the early 1990s, Rational Recovery (RR) was developed by Jack Trimpey as an alternative to the Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) approach to treating alcohol abuse. Both Ellis and Trimpey challenge the basic principles of AA: that the addict has no control over their alcohol cravings, that they must turn over control to a higher power (such as God), that they can never drink alcohol again, and that only AA works for alcoholics. Objective research simply does not support these assertions, and practitioners of REBT and RR have great faith in the ability of individuals to take control of their own lives (though they may need some help from a therapist to get on the right path). RR also does not include the strong religious overtones of AA, which may be an impediment to recovery for anyone required to attend AA meetings but who does not believe in God:
…The core of these methods is learning to recognize and dispute self-defeating thinking that RR frequently labels “the Beast” or “the addictive voice.” In addition to its treatment purposes, RR has a political purpose in advocating for people who are mandated to attend spiritual healing groups but who find that approach useless or offensive. Furthermore, RR attempts to educate professionals about available options and sensitize them to the ethical and possible legal issues involved in overriding client’s objections to spiritual healing approaches. (pg. 271; Trimpey, Velten, & Dain, 1993)
Since REBT focuses on the choices that individuals make for themselves, what role is there for religion within such a perspective? Ellis maintains that there is a significant positive correlation between devout religious beliefs and a variety of emotional disturbances. However, he has argued that the problem is not religion per se, but rather highly restrictive, dogmatic religiosity that causes problems for an individual (Ellis, 2004; also see Yankura & Dryden, 1994). Ellis studied the works of Lao Tsu (author of the Tao Te Ching), Gotama Buddha (known by most people simply as the Buddha), and the existential theologian Paul Tillich, finding helpful perspectives for working with his clients and on his own problems (Ellis, 2004). He overcame his early objections to religion and spirituality by recognizing that when one’s religious beliefs contribute to good psychological health the belief itself, regardless of whether or not God exists, is helpful. Similarly, Zen Buddhism is not actually a religion, but has significant religious overtones. Nonetheless, Ellis was impressed by the effectiveness of Zen meditation for many clients, so he incorporated various Eastern perspectives into the development of REBT.
Discussion question 2
Alcoholics Anonymous has helped many people, but it doesn’t help everyone, especially those who are opposed to religiosity or are simply atheists. Nonetheless, the AA approach has become a standard recommendation in many legal jurisdictions when someone commits a crime such as drunk driving. What do you think about Rational Recovery (based on REBT) as an alternative to AA?
Is Self-Esteem a Sickness?
The heading for this section is the title of the first chapter in a fascinating book by Ellis: The Myth of Self-Esteem (Ellis, 2005). Ellis believed that self-esteem is defined by psychologists in a way that requires individuals to rate, or judge, themselves. This may work fine when everything is going well for the person, but people are not perfect. Thus, they will eventually fail at something, perhaps at many things, and they must then judge themselves as bad, or unworthy. If, however, you accept yourself as imperfect, and rate only your behaviors and thoughts, not your self, then you need not suffer from the effects of low self-esteem. In other words, Ellis advocates unconditional self-acceptance, a very old philosophy known to the Greeks, Romans, Buddhists, Daoists, and others (Ellis, 2005). Ellis considers many different approaches to the concepts of self-esteem and self-acceptance, including the perspectives of Solomon, Jesus of Nazareth, the existential philosophers Kierkegaard, Heidegger, and Sartre, Carl Rogers, the Eastern philosophers Lao Tsu, D. T. Suzuki, and the Dalai Lama, and Steven Hayes (founder of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy, see below). Ellis concludes that one must seek not only to unconditionally accept oneself, but also to unconditionally accept others and the nature of life itself. But this is not a pie-in-the-sky philosophy. Ellis recognizes that there are sad and unfortunate events in life (we are fallible, and we are mortal). He strongly recommends that we do not avoid normal sadness and regret, since these emotions provide the motivation for trying to prevent unfortunate events and for seeking new relationships. The choice is yours:
Both self-esteem and self-acceptance, then, can be had definitionally - for the asking, for the choosing. Take one or the other. Choose! Better yet, take no global rating. Choose your goals and values and rate how you experience them - well or badly. Don’t rate yourself, being, entity, personality at all. Your totality is too complex and too changing to measure. Repeatedly acknowledge that.
Now stop farting around and get on with your life! (pg. 16; Ellis, 2005)
Discussion question 3
Ellis opposes the concept of self-esteem because he believes it requires a person to judge themselves. He advocates instead that we unconditionally accept ourselves, faults included. Does this make sense to you?
Beck’s Cognitive Model of Depression
Having begun his research in an attempt to examine Freud’s theory on the cause of depression, Beck continued studying depression and suicide throughout his career. The reason for this continued focus was the prevalence of depression in society:
Depression is the most common psychiatric disorder treated in office practice and in outpatient clinics. Some authorities have estimated that at least 12 per cent of the adult population will have an episode of depression of sufficient clinical severity to warrant treatment. (pg. vii; Beck, 1967)
Relying on an interplay between clinical work and research, Beck proposed a cognitive model based on automatic thoughts, schemas, and cognitive distortions (Beck, 1967; Beck & Freeman, 1990; Beck, Rush, Shaw, & Emery, 1979; Beck & Weishaar, 1995; Pretzer & Beck, 2005). Automatic thoughts are an individual’s immediate, spontaneous appraisals of a given situation. They shape and elicit a person’s emotional and behavioral responses to that situation. Since they are automatic, they are rarely questioned. Even when they are predominantly negative, the individual accepts them as true and can be overwhelmed by constant questions and images that hurt one’s self-esteem (questions such as “Why am I such a failure,” or seeing oneself as ugly). The reason that even highly negative automatic thoughts are accepted, even when they might be objectively untrue, is that these thoughts do not arise spontaneously. Rather, they are the result of the person’s schemas. Every situation is comprised of many stimuli, and when confronted with an unfamiliar situation a person tends to conceptualize it. Although different people will conceptualize the situation differently, each individual will be consistent. These stable cognitive patterns of interpreting situations are known as schemas. An individual’s schemas then determine how they are likely to respond, automatically, to many situations.
People are also prone to a variety of cognitive distortions, which can amplify the effects of one’s schemas, thus helping to confirm maladaptive schemas even when contradictory evidence is available. Over time, Beck and his colleagues have identified a growing number of such distortions, such as: dichotomous thinking, or seeing things as only black or white, without the possibility of shades of gray; personalization, the tendency to interpret external events as being related directly to oneself; overgeneralization, the application of isolated incidents to either all or at least many other situations; and catastrophizing, treating actual or anticipated negative events as intolerable catastrophes, even though they may be relatively minor problems. Overall, these cognitive distortions lead the individual into extreme, judgmental, global interpretations of the situations they experience, which establish general schemas, which lead to automatic thoughts and feelings that support the idiosyncratic experience of the world (Beck, Rush, Shaw, & Emery, 1979; Beck & Weishaar, 1995; Pretzer & Beck, 2005). The goal of cognitive therapy, therefore, is to help the individual break out of this self-supporting, maladaptive pattern of cognition.
Another important aspect of the depressive syndrome is known as the cognitive triad, three cognitive patterns that cause the person to view themselves in a negative manner. First, the individual has a negative view of themselves. Primarily, the depressed individual sees themselves as defective in some psychological, moral, or physical way, and because of the presumed defects they are undesirable and worthless. Second, the depressed person has a tendency to interpret their ongoing experiences in negative ways. These negative misinterpretations persist even in the face of incompatible evidence. And finally, they tend to hold a negative view of the future. They anticipate continued difficulty, failure, emotional suffering. As a result, they lack motivation, they become paralyzed by pessimism and hopelessness. According to Beck, suicide can be viewed as an extreme attempt to escape problems that depressed individuals believe cannot be solved and the unbearable suffering that the future holds! These negative cognitive patterns are not something that the depressed person plans or has much control over, since they typically occur in the form of automatic thoughts (Beck, 1967; Beck, Rush, Shaw, & Emery, 1979; Beck & Weishaar, 1995; also see Beck, Resnick, & Lettieri, 1974).
Discussion question 4
Beck described a number of common cognitive distortions, including dichotomous thinking, personalization, overgeneralization, and catastrophizing. Think about situations in your own life when you made these distortions. What sort of problems resulted from these cognitive errors, and how often do you make them?
Beck’s Cognitive Therapy
Cognitive therapy, according to Beck, “is an active, directive, time-limited, structured approach used to treat a variety of psychiatric disorders” (Beck, Rush, Shaw, & Emery, 1979). With regard to depression, it is most effective after a major depression has lifted somewhat, though it can also be helpful for some patients during depression, particularly if the depression is of the reactive type (as opposed to endogenous depression; Beck, 1967). As mentioned above, the basic procedure is to help the individual break out of the trap of negative schemas, automatic thoughts, and cognitive distortions that support the client’s problem. The techniques employed are designed to identify, test the reality of, and correct the cognitive distortions and schemas that lead to dysfunctional automatic thoughts. It involves an active collaboration between the therapist and the client, such that the client learns to reduce their symptoms by thinking and acting more realistically.
Beck referred to the constant interaction between the client and the therapist as collaborative empiricism, and contrasted this approach to both psychoanalysis and client-centered therapy. His intention was to provide the client with a series of specific learning experiences that would teach the patient the following skills: (1) monitoring their own negative, automatic thoughts; (2) recognizing the connections between thought, emotion, and behavior; (3) examining evidence for and against their cognitive distortions; (4) substituting reality-based interpretations for their cognitive distortions; and (5) learning to identify and alter the dysfunctional schemas that lead to the cognitive distortions (Beck, Rush, Shaw, & Emery, 1979). The interaction with the client is not superficial, as it involves discussing the very rationale of the therapy to the patient and, ultimately, providing the client with techniques to monitor their dysfunctional thoughts on their own. The therapist teaches the client to recognize the nature of cognition, particularly the client’s dysfunctional cognitions, all with the goal of eventually neutralizing the automatic thoughts. Somewhat related to collaborative empiricism is the concept of guided discovery. Guided discovery is the process by which the therapist serves as a guide for the client, in order to help them recognize their problematic cognitions and behaviors and also help them design new experiences (behavioral experiments) in which they might acquire new skills and perspectives (Beck & Weishaar, 1995). In addition, the therapeutic relationship provides an opportunity for the client to begin to make progress:
If the patient begins to feel better after the expression of feeling, this may then set up a favorable cycle. Since the depressed patient may have lost hope that he would ever be able to feel better again, this positive experience helps to restore his morale and also his motivation to cooperate in the therapy. Any evidence of feeling better is likely to increase the patient’s motivation for therapy and thus contribute to its efficacy. (pp. 43-44; Beck, Rush, Shaw, & Emery, 1979)
Although Beck focused much of his research on depression, cognitive therapy can be used to treat a wide variety of psychiatric and psychological disorders, including anxiety disorders, phobias, substance abuse disorders, anger and violence, and personality disorders (Beck, 1999; Beck & Emery, 1985; Beck & Freeman, 1990; Beck & Weishaar, 1995; Beck, Wright, Newman, & Liese, 1993; Pretzer & Beck, 2005). In Love is Never Enough (Beck, 1988), Beck extended cognitive therapy to working with couples. He had observed that many of his depressed client’s were in troubled relationships, and in other cases his client’s depression and/or anxiety had led to relationship problems. As Beck began working with couples, he found that couples were capable of the same cognitive distortions that individuals make, as each party within the relationship began focusing on the negative aspects of the relationship. As conflict grows, the partners blame each other, rather than seeing the conflict as a problem that can be resolved. Just as with individuals, cognitive therapy offers a means for breaking the cycle of conflict and miscommunication.
Discussion question 5
Collaborative empiricism and guided discovery both suggest that the client must be an active member of the therapeutic team. In your opinion, is it possible for someone who needs therapy to help in their own recovery? Do you think there is a point at which the therapist must take over in order to ensure that therapy is successful?
Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) and Radical Acceptance
A recent development in cognitive therapy shares an ancient tradition with Eastern philosophies: mindfulness. Mindfulness training involves learning to accept one’s emotional realities, and one of the most significant realities is that much of human life involves suffering. Starting with these basic observations, Steven Hayes and his colleagues have developed Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT; Hayes & Smith, 2005; Hayes, Strosahl, & Wilson, 1999; see also Eifert & Forsyth, 2005; Hayes, Follette, & Linehan, 2004). Hayes and his colleagues do not mean acceptance in the sense of resigning oneself to suffering, but rather in the sense of accepting life as it comes. Then, one must commit oneself to moving forward and living a values-based life, regardless of the presence of challenges:
The constant possibility of psychological pain is a challenging burden that we all need to face…This doesn’t mean that you must resign yourself to trudging through your life suffering. Pain and suffering are very different. We believe that there is a way to change your relationship to pain and to then live a good life, perhaps a great life, even though you are a human being whose memory and verbal skills keep the possibility of pain just an instant away. (pg. 12; Hayes & Smith, 2005)
Although Hayes and his colleagues make passing reference to mindfulness as a Buddhist teaching, they do not take a spiritual approach with ACT. They do, however, acknowledge that psychologists often make the mistake of ignoring spiritual practices that might prove helpful to their clients (Hayes, Strosahl, & Wilson, 1999). Many people in psychology today, including Ellis and Beck, recognize that cognitive psychology began with the Buddha some 2,500 years ago (Ellis, 2005; Pretzer & Beck, 2005; see also Olendzki, 2005). Dr. Tara Brach, a clinical psychologist and teacher of mindfulness meditation (also known as vipassana, which means “to see clearly”), makes no qualms about following a Buddhist approach to therapy. In Radical Acceptance: Embracing Your Life with the Heart of a Buddha (Brach, 2003), Brach talks about living in a trance of unworthiness. Plagued by beliefs of their own inadequacies, some individuals limit their ability to live a full life. Consequently, they cannot trust that they are lovable, and they live with an undercurrent of depression or helplessness. They then embark on a series of strategies designed to protect themselves: they attempt self-improvement projects, they hold back and play it safe, they withdraw from the present moment, they keep busy, they criticize themselves, and they focus on other’s faults. Radical Acceptance as a therapeutic approach involves both mindfulness meditation and Buddhist teachings on compassion as a basis for teaching people to accept themselves as they are:
Radical Acceptance reverses our habit of living at war with experiences that are unfamiliar, frightening or intense. It is the necessary antidote to years of neglecting ourselves, years of judging and treating ourselves harshly, years of rejecting this moment’s experience. Radical Acceptance is the willingness to experience ourselves and our life as it is. A moment of Radical Acceptance is a moment of genuine freedom. (pg. 4; Brach, 2003)
Mindfulness as a therapeutic technique has also been used by a variety of other therapists: in couples therapy (Christensen, Sevier, Simpson, & Gattis, 2004; Fruzzetti & Iverson, 2004), following traumatic experiences (Follette, Palm, & Rasmussen Hall, 2004), and for the treatment of eating disorders (Wilson, 2004) and substance abuse (Marlatt, et al., 2004). Janet Surrey, one of the founding members of the Stone Center Group, has favorably compared relational psychotherapy to mindfulness (Surrey, 2005), and Trudy Goodman, who studied child development with Jean Piaget, uses mindfulness in therapy with children (Goodman, 2005). Thus, whether in the more structured approach of ACT or Radical Acceptance, or in more informal ways in the hands of therapists familiar with mindfulness meditation, paying attention to the mind in a calm and careful way is becoming an important trend in psychotherapy. According to Steven Hayes (2004), this approach represents a third wave in behavioral-cognitive therapy, following traditional behavior therapy and then the cognitive therapies of Ellis and Beck. This third wave is also the basis for the popular and influential work of Jon Kabat-Zinn (1990, 1994, 2005; see also Germer et al., 2005) and connects behavioral and cognitive theories to the rapidly growing field of social neuroscience (the study of the interactive influences between the structure/function of the brain and social behavior; see, e.g., Begley, 2007; Cacioppo et al., 2006; Cozolino, 2002; Harmon-Jones & Winkielman, 2007; Siegel, 1999, 2007). | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/19%3A_Cognitive_Perspectives_on_Personality_Development/19.04%3A_Cognitive-Behavioral_Therapy_and_Acceptance_Therapy.txt |
Personality Theory in Real Life: Beck’s Cognitive Therapy and the Treatment of Personality Disorders
Aaron Beck and a number of his colleagues, as well as others, have attempted to apply cognitive therapy to the treatment of personality disorders. It is widely accepted that personality disorders are highly resistant to treatment, but aside from the problems they present by themselves, there is another important reason to continue trying to address these serious psychological disorders. Personality disorders often co-occur with other psychological conditions (Axis I disorders), and they may be the primary reason why psychotherapy does not work well with certain patients (Pretzer & Beck, 2005). Since cognitive therapy in particular requires that the therapist gain an understanding of what the client is thinking, in order to then help the client recognize their own dysfunctional cognitions so that the client may work toward change, it is necessary for the therapist to have a complete understanding of the client’s psychological make-up. As a prelude to treating personality disorders with cognitive therapy, one needs to understand personality disorders in cognitive-behavioral terms.
As with depression, or any other psychological disorder, the cognitive-behavioral perspective suggests that individuals suffering from personality disorders have formed dysfunctional schemas that create an attributional bias, which then causes the person to interpret life’s experiences in dysfunctional ways, but in ways that nonetheless support and maintain the dysfunction of the personality disorder. If this theory is accurate, one should be able to identify typical patterns of dysfunctional schemas that match the characterization of different personality disorder diagnoses. Indeed, Beck and Freeman (1990) have offered those patterns in Cognitive Therapy of Personality Disorders. What distinguishes the negative schemas that characterize personality disorders from schemas that characterize other psychological disorders reflects the basic difference between Axis II and Axis I in the DSM system:
The typical schemas of the personality disorders resemble those that are activated in the symptom syndromes, but they are operative on a more continuous basis in information processing. In dependent personality disorder, the schema “I need help” will be activated whenever a problematic situation arises, whereas in depressed persons it will be prominent only during the depression. In personality disorders, the schemas are part of normal, everyday processing of information. (pg. 32; Beck & Freeman, 1990)
What might the typical schemas associated with other personality disorders be? Beck and his colleagues offer detailed examples for all ten of the personality disorders listed in the DSM, as well as for the passive-aggressive (negativistic) personality disorder (Beck & Freeman, 1990; Pretzer & Beck, 2005). To cite just a few examples, the antisocial individual thinks that “people are there to be taken,” the narcissistic individual thinks “I am special,” and the histrionic individual believes “I need to impress.” As a result of these basic beliefs and attitudes, these individuals adopt corresponding behavioral strategies. The dependent person seeks attachment, the antisocial person attacks, the narcissist engages in self-aggrandizement, and the histrionic person performs dramatically (Beck & Freeman, 1990).
How does a personality disorder arise, according to the cognitive-behavioral perspective? First, there are inherited predispositions that may represent primeval strategies. For example, Beck has suggested that the antisocial personality reflects a predatory strategy, whereas in contrast, the paranoid personality reflects a defensive strategy (see Pretzer & Beck, 2005). Second, the characteristics of personality disorders can result from social learning, especially when the social environment enhances genetic predispositions. A child born with a shy disposition, in a household that seems threatening and/or confusing, may naturally withdraw. That withdrawal, taken to its extreme, is a strategy compatible with the avoidant personality disorder. And finally, there is the possibility of traumatic experiences during development. Personality becomes well established during childhood. If one’s experiences during this important time are dysfunctional and traumatic, the individual is likely to develop a personality that has ingrained dysfunctional schemas, thus affecting the individual’s life from that point forward. In this model, personality disorders are not necessarily any different in form than other psychological conditions, but since they directly involve one’s relationship with others, they become significant, problematic features of one’s daily life:
…The cognitive view of “personality disorder” is that this is simply the term used to refer to individuals with pervasive, self-perpetuating cognitive-interpersonal cycles which are dysfunctional enough to come to the attention of mental health professionals. (pg. 61; Pretzer & Beck, 2005)
The basic approach to treating personality disorders with cognitive therapy is not different than usual, but does require some special attention to detail:
Personality disorders are among the most difficult and least understood problems faced by therapists regardless of the therapist’s orientation. The treatment of clients with these disorders can be just as complex and frustrating for cognitive therapists as it is for other therapists…For cognitive therapy to live up to its promise as an approach to understanding and treating personality disorders, it is necessary to tailor the approach to the characteristics of individuals with personality disorders rather than simply using “standard” cognitive therapy without modification. (pp. 44-45; Pretzer & Beck, 2005)
Based on this concern, Pretzer and Beck (2005) have offered a list of twelve key elements that require attention when using cognitive therapy to treat an individual with a personality disorder:
1. Interventions are most effective when based on an individualized conceptualization of the client’s problems.
2. It is important for therapist and client to work collaboratively toward clearly identified, shared goals.
3. It is important to focus more than the usual amount of attention on the therapist-client relationship.
4. Consider beginning with interventions which do not require extensive self-disclosure.
5. Interventions that increase the client’s sense of self-efficacy often reduce the intensity of the client’s symptomatology and facilitate other interventions.
6. Do not rely primarily on verbal interventions.
7. Try to identify and address the client’s fears before implementing changes.
8. Help the client deal adaptively with aversive emotions.
9. Anticipate problems with compliance.
10. Do not presume that the client exists in a reasonable environment.
11. Attend to your own emotional reactions during the course of therapy.
12. Be realistic regarding the length of therapy, goals for therapy, and standards for therapist self-evaluation.
Despite these straight-forward steps toward effective cognitive therapy, it seems clear from looking at them that there are going to be challenges when dealing with clients who have a personality disorder. Indeed, the very process of collaborative empiricism can be quite difficult with these clients. Beck & Freeman (1990) have identified nineteen problems associated with establishing an effective collaboration with clients who have a personality disorder:
1. The patient may lack the skill to be collaborative.
2. The therapist may lack the skill to develop collaboration.
3. Environmental stressors may preclude changing or reinforce dysfunctional behavior.
4. Patients’ ideas and beliefs regarding their potential failure in therapy may contribute to noncollaboration.
5. Patients’ ideas and beliefs regarding effects of the patients’ changing on others may preclude compliance.
6. Patients’ fears regarding changing and the “new” self may contribute to noncompliance.
7. The patient’s and therapist’s dysfunctional beliefs may be harmoniously blended.
8. Poor socialization to the model may be a factor in noncompliance.
9. A patient may experience secondary gain from maintaining the dysfunctional pattern.
10. Poor timing of interventions may be a factor in noncompliance.
11. Patients may lack motivation.
12. Patients’ rigidity may foil compliance.
13. The patient may have poor impulse control.
14. The goals of therapy may be unrealistic.
15. The goals of therapy may be unstated.
16. The goals of therapy may be vague and amorphous.
17. There may have been no agreement between therapist and patient relative to the treatment goals.
18. The patient or therapist may be frustrated because of a lack of progress in therapy.
19. Issues involving the patient’s perception of lowered status and self-esteem may be factors in noncompliance.
Although Beck and his colleagues offer more details and specific clinical examples in their writings (Beck & Freeman, 1990; Pretzer & Beck, 2005), the preceding lengthy list of problems a therapist is like to encounter clearly suggests that working with these clients is difficult at best. So, is cognitive therapy effective in the treatment of personality disorders? Numerous uncontrolled clinical reports suggest that it is, but the small number of controlled studies have offered equivocal results. More important, however, is the reality of “real-life” clinical practice:
In clinical practice, most therapists do not apply a standardized treatment protocol with a homogenous sample of individuals who share a common diagnosis. Instead, clinicians face a variety of clients and take an individualized approach to treatment. A recent study of the effectiveness of cognitive therapy under such “real world” conditions provides important support for the clinical use of cognitive therapy with clients who are diagnosed as having personality disorders… (pg. 102; Pretzer & Beck, 2005)
So what can we conclude from this discussion? There is consensus that personality disorders are prevalent in our society and they are resistant to treatment. Cognitive therapy, and the theory underlying it, has offered a promising avenue for further research. Given the significant impact of personality disorders on both individuals and society as a whole, any promising line of research deserves to be pursued vigorously. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/19%3A_Cognitive_Perspectives_on_Personality_Development/19.05%3A_Personality_Theory_in_Real_Life.txt |
Review of Key Points
• Personal construct theory emphasizes the cognitions that precede behavior, even more than one’s ability to accurately predict behavior.
• Kelly used the term man-the-scientist to describe how each person creates and tests representations of the world, in an effort to predict and control their environment.
• Our representations, or constructs, are open to revision, and there are always alternatives. The process by which we test and modify our constructs is called constructive alternativism.
• Personal construct theory begins with a fundamental postulate, which is then elaborated with eleven corollaries.
• Personal constructs regularly undergo transition, from ineffective constructs to more effective constructs. Problems with these transitions may result in feelings of threat, fear, guilt, or anxiety.
• There are two typical cycles of transition: the C-P-C Cycle and the Creativity Cycle. The first involves circumspection, preemption, and control. The Creativity Cycle requires beginning with loose constructions and then rapidly testing and pursuing new and effective constructs.
• Creativity appears to be an important component of healthy psychological functioning.
• Both the therapist and the client bring their own conceptualizations about therapy into the therapeutic process. The ultimate goal is to help the client generate movement forward, such that the process can continue after therapy has ended.
• In order to facilitate cognitive-behavioral therapy within his theoretical framework, Kelly developed an assessment tool known as the Role Construct Repertory Test and a therapeutic procedure known as fixed-role therapy.
• In diverse settings, it is essential for therapists to be familiar with cross-cultural issues related to therapy in order to understand the nature of a client’s constructs and schemas.
• Ellis proposed an ABC theory of personality: activating events lead to beliefs about a situation, and those beliefs lead to the consequences of the event.
• Rational emotive behavior therapy was designed to dispute the client’s irrational beliefs, thus leading to effective new philosophies, emotions, and behaviors.
• The straightforward nature of rational emotive behavior therapy, and Ellis’ willingness to write for a popular audience, was a major factor in establishing the self-help genera.
• Rational Recovery, based on rational emotive behavior therapy, was developed as an alternative to Alcoholics Anonymous. In particular, it does not include the religious requirements of AA.
• Rational emotive behavior therapy was challenged as being atheistic. Ellis later wrote that he is not opposed to spirituality, but he is opposed to dysfunctional, dogmatic religious beliefs that hinder one’s personal growth.
• Ellis openly challenged the value placed on self-esteem, suggesting instead that what is important is acceptance of ourselves, including our flaws and mistakes.
• Beck developed his cognitive therapy while conducting research on depression.
• Beck’s cognitive model is based on automatic thoughts, schemas, and cognitive distortions. Depression in particular results from a cognitive triad: a negative view of past, present, and future.
• Cognitive therapy offers an active, directive, time-limited, and structured approach to psychotherapy.
• Cognitive therapy involves collaborative empiricism and guided discovery. Hopefully, the client is able to learn skills that will allow them to continue improving their life even after therapy has ended.
• Acceptance and Commitment Therapy incorporates mindfulness into a modern therapeutic process, emphasizing the acceptance of one’s suffering in life followed by moving forward and living a values-based life. Radical Acceptance incorporates traditional Buddhist mindfulness practice (vipassana) into the therapeutic process. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/19%3A_Cognitive_Perspectives_on_Personality_Development/19.S%3A_Chapter_Summary.txt |
This module contains a brief discussion of the classification of personality disorders, as well as a discussion of Millon's alternative evolutionary model for the development of personality disorders. The references cited in this module can be found in the accompanying module entitled "References for Personality."
20.02: DSM-V Categories of Personality Disorder
A Complex Problem
When I first wrote this appendix I approached the complexity of personality disorders by including two sections: the DSM criteria for diagnosing personality disorders and an alternative way of categorizing these disorders proposed by Theodore Millon. With the advent of the DSM-V (American Psychiatric Association, 2013) things have gotten even more complex. The DSM-V continues with the same categories as were used in the DSM-IV (American Psychiatric Association, 2000), but then it offers a completely different set of criteria for diagnosing personality disorders. No other DSM edition has done this, suggesting that personality disorders are proving to be the most complex group of psychological disorders.
So, I have now kept the same two first sections, since the official diagnostic criteria are essentially the same (only some changes in the wording of the text) and Theodore Millon's alternative theory is particularly interesting. Then, I briefly describe the new alterntive being offered in the DSM-V (leaving it up to you to explore them in more detail).
DSM-V Categories of Personality Disorder
The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th Ed. (DSM-V; American Psychiatric Association, 2013) defines personality disorders as “an enduring pattern of inner experience and behavior that deviates markedly from the expectations of the individual’s culture, is pervasive and inflexible, has an onset in adolescence or early adulthood, is stable over time, and leads to distress or impairment.” The consideration of cultural context is perhaps the most significant change in this definition from the earlier DSM-III. The DSM-V suggests that the personality disorders can be grouped into three clusters, plus a “not otherwise specified” category, for a total of 11 specific diagnoses, the authors caution that the identified clusters have not been consistently validated and that individuals may present combinations of personality disorders from different clusters. Nonetheless, the DSM-V still presents the three clusters of personality disorders (plus the “not otherwise specified” classification). Cluster A, the odd or eccentric types, are paranoid, schizoid, and schizotypal personality disorders. Cluster B, the dramatic, emotional, or erratic types, are antisocial, borderline, histrionic, and narcissistic personality disorders. And finally, Cluster C, the anxious or fearful types, are the avoidant, dependent, and obsessive-compulsive personality disorders.
The odd or eccentric personality disorders represent several of the typical symptoms of schizophrenia (paranoia, emotional detachment, and social withdrawal), leading some to suggest that they represent mild forms of the most widely recognized form of psychosis. However, distinct differences suggest that these personality disorders are not part of a continuum between normal personality and schizophrenia. For example, in individuals with an odd or eccentric personality disorder who also exhibit psychotic symptoms, the personality disorder can be recognized prior to the onset of psychotic symptoms and persists when the psychotic symptoms are in remission. Also, these disorders are not characterized by a pronounced thought disorder, which appears to be the defining characteristic of schizophrenia.
The dramatic, emotional, or erratic personality disorders include the most well-known, due in no small part to their dramatization in movies and television. Most serial killers suffer from antisocial personality disorder (they are often referred to as psychopaths), as do many people in prison. People with antisocial personality disorder demonstrate a complete lack of regard for the rights of others, and will routinely violate those rights. The other personality disorders in this cluster involve various forms of unstable interpersonal relationships, excessive emotions, and a distorted self-image. Interestingly, this cluster appears to involve a significant gender factor, in that antisocial personality disorder is diagnosed more frequently in men, whereas the borderline and histrionic personality disorders are diagnosed more frequently in women.
Probably the least recognized group of personality disorders, among students and the general public are the anxious or fearful personality disorders. The first two, avoidant personality disorder and dependent personality disorder, both involve pervasive patterns of anxiety relating to interpersonal relationships. Finally, obsessive-compulsive personality disorder involves a pervasive preoccupation with neatness, perfectionism, and interpersonal control.
Although the DSM-IV-TR made a point of adding cultural context to the definition of personality disorders, it wasn't until the publication of the DSM-V that much was said in the manual about culture. Not only is there limited research regarding the influence of culture on personality disorders, there is likewise only limited research on cultural influences on normal personality. The notable exception to this may be the well-known research on fundamental differences between individualistic vs. collectivist cultures, which are generally associated with Western vs. Eastern approaches to life. There are also fundamental religious associations that match these basic distinctions, since Western cultures are typically associated with the Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam), whereas Eastern cultures are typically associated with Yoga, Buddhism, Taoism, etc.
Discussion Question: What sort of impression do you have of people with personality disorders (it’s OK to consider things you have seen on television and in movies)? Is this what you think of when you typically think of mental illness or psychological disorders? | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/20%3A_Personality_Disorders/20.01%3A_Summary.txt |
It is generally accepted that personality disorders are highly resistant to treatment. Personality is well-established in childhood, or at least by adolescence. Since many theorists consider it difficult to significantly change personality once it is established, even in a normal individual, by the time an adult is diagnosed with a personality disorder it has become a deeply embedded aspect of their personality. Thus, individuals suffering from personality disorders, individuals who typically lack insight into their problems, are simply unlikely to realize a need for change or to put any effort into making changes. And since change can only come from the individual, it cannot be forced by the therapist, if the individual suffering from a personality disorder does not cooperate with or put any effort into therapy, there can be no possibility for change. The evolutionary perspective on personality disorders offers another possible reason why they would be resistant to change. Personality disorders may be adaptations to abnormal, most likely abusive, conditions present during personality development. Therefore, even though they are viewed as abnormal, they have served an adaptive purpose for the individual suffering from the disorder.
Nonetheless, progress is being made. There is evidence to support the efficacy of some therapeutic approaches in the treatment of personality disorders, including cognitive, behavioral, interpersonal/psychosocial, and psychoanalytic treatments (Benjamin, 2005; Fonagy, 2006; Kernberg & Caligor, 2005; Leichsenring, 2006; Pretzer & Beck, 2005). Perhaps the most thoroughly studied and effective approach to the treatment of personality disorders is dialectical behavior therapy (DBT), developed by Marsha Linehan specifically for the treatment of borderline personality disorder and its commonly associated element of suicidal behavior (Linehan, 1987, 1993; Robins et al., 2004). DBT emphasizes the complete process of change, incorporating both the acceptance of the patient’s real suffering and the desire for change. Since a natural conflict arises between acceptance and the desire/need for change, a conflict that can arouse intense negative emotion, DBT involves teaching patients mindfulness skills necessary to “allow” experiences without the need to either suppress or avoid them. These mindfulness skills were drawn primarily from Zen principles, but are similar to and compatible with Western contemplative practices (Robins et al., 2004).
Discussion Question: Does it surprise you to learn that the most promising treatment for personality disorders is based largely on the practice of Zen? What might this say about the importance of therapists being versed in a variety of techniques and being well-educated in cross-cultural perspectives?
20.04: A New Alternative in the DSM-V
The purpose for adding a second approach to the diagnosis of personality disorders is twofold: first, the APA Board of Trustees wanted to provide continuity in the diagnoses being offered by clinicians, but second, they recognised that few individuals with a personality disorder clearly fit into the criteria for just one personality disorder. Thus, an alternative method has been proposed that considers assessing both "impairments in personality functioning and pathological personality traits" (pg. 761; APA, 2013).
After listing general criteria for personality disorder that are quite similar to the traditional general criteria, the alternative approach addresses personality functioning in terms of two dimensions: self and interpersonal. The healthy vs. unhealthy aspects of the self involve one's sense of identity and one's self-direction, whereas the interpersonal component addresses empathy and intimacy. The individual is then assessed (as appropriate to the presumed, primary personality disorder) on 25 specific trait facets as they apply within five broad trait domains. The trait domains and associated facets are as follows:
Negative Affectivity: emotional lability, anxiousness, separation insecurity, submissiveness,
hostility, perseveration, depressivity, suspiciousness, restricted affectivity (lack of)
Detachment: withdrawal, intimacy avoidance, anhedonia, depressivity, restricted affectivity,
suspiciousness
Antagonism: manipulativeness, deceitfulness, grandiosity, attention seeking, callousness, hostility
Disinhibition: irresponsibility, impulsivity, distractibility, risk taking, rigid perfectionism (lack of)
Psychoticism: unusual beliefs and experiences, eccentricity, cognitive and perceptual
dysregulation
The DSM-V then offers examples of diagnostic criteria according to this methodology for antisocial PD, avoidant PD, borderline PD, narcissistic PD, obsessive-compulsive PD, and schizotypal PD, as well as a new diagnosis of Personality Disorder - Trait Specified. Personality Disorder - Trait Specified is diagnosed based on two criteria. First there must be moderate or greater impairment in the functioning of personality, as manifested in two or more of the areas identified above as identity, self-direction, empathy, and intimacy. Second, there must be one or more pathological traits as defined by the 5 domains/25 facets.
So, with three different, utilitarian approach to the diagnosis of personality disorders, it is clear that disordered personality development is every bit as complex and fascinating as normal personality development. This should not be surprising, since individuals are unique and complex, and we all experience different lives. It will be quite interesting to see how the DSM-VI handles this issue.
Review of Key Points
This page was auto-generated because a user created a sub-page to this page.
20.05: A Final Note
This brief appendix on personality disorders merely scratches the surface of this complex set of psychological disorders. For example, it might appear as if Millon’s classification system for personality disorders is at odds with the DSM-IV/DSM-V classification system, and, therefore, Millon himself may be at odds with the DSM-IV/DSM-V system. Actually, Millon was a member of the DSM-IV Personality Disorders Work Group. In addition, the DSM-IV included among its “criteria sets and axes provided for further study” two of the personality disorders contained within Millon’s classification system: the depressive personality disorder and the passive-aggressive (negativistic) personality disorder. Accordingly, the classification systems continue to be the subject of ongoing research and potential modification, so much so that the DSM-V actually has two systems included. It will be years before we begin the hear about the DSM-VI, but it will be very interesting to see how personality disorders are handled then.
Likewise, although DBT has been very promising in the treatment of borderline personality disorder, there is less research on specific treatments for other personality disorders. Thus, continued research is necessary, perhaps including the development of new therapies specific to certain other personality disorders.
Review of Key Points
• Personality disorders are enduring patterns of deviant behavior that differ markedly from an individual’s culture.
• The DSM classification system identifies three clusters of personality disorder: odd/eccentric, dramatic/emotional/erratic, and anxious/fearful.
• The odd/eccentric personality disorders bear some resemblance to the symptoms of schizophrenia.
• The personality disorders within Cluster B appear to involve a significant gender factor.
• Millon has proposed an alternative classification scheme based on an evolutionary model of personality disorders. He suggests that these disorders represent individual efforts to exist, adapt, replicate, and abstract within an abnormal developmental environment.
• Millon’s model results in personality disorder clusters based on four factors: pleasure-deficiency, interpersonal-imbalance, intrapsychic-conflict, and structure-defectiveness.
• Personality disorders have traditionally been resistant to psychotherapeutic interventions.
• Linehan’s dialectical behavior therapy has been quite promising in the treatment of borderline personality disorder. This treatment incorporates Zen mindfulness as an approach to balancing the acceptance of the individual with the desire/need for change. | textbooks/socialsci/Psychology/Culture_and_Community/Personality_Theory_in_a_Cultural_Context_(Kelland)/20%3A_Personality_Disorders/20.03%3A_Treating_Personality_Disorders.txt |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.