The Book of Gergen Relational Being Beyond Self and Community - Literature review Example

Book Review on Gergen’s Relational Being: Beyond Self and Community Total Number of Words: 2,018 Introduction Before the study of social psychology ever existed, a lot of feminists, psychologists and philosophers had been trying to study ‘self’ as an individual (Gergen, 2009, pp. 235 – 236). Ever since the book of Gergen entitled “Relational Being: Beyond Self and Community” was published, the author managed to persuade a large group of sociologists, social psychologists and other theorists to support his idea on rational being. Gergen gave emphasis over the importance of social relationship in our everyday lives. As part of this book review, the strength and weaknesses in the quality of Gergen’s writing will be critiqued based on the reader’s own judgement on how the author has presented his arguments in his book. Gergen’s contribution in the field of psychology and social sciences will be tackled in details. Based on the limitations of Gergen’s ideas, a list of recommendations for future research will be provided prior to conclusion. Strength and Weaknesses in the Quality of Gergen’s Writing Gergen was able to clearly present his thoughts in a logical manner. In order to give the readers a better understanding on what relational being is all about, Gergen decided to make use of four major sections in his writings. Basically, the first section discussed the differences between bounded beings and relational beings. As explained by Gergen (2009, p. 5), bounded self seggregates “self” from social relationships whereas relational being “recognize a world that is not within persons but within their relationships”. By carefully explaining the differences between these two concepts of “self”, Gergen was able to make his reader fully understand that a relational being is different from the traditional concept of “self” in the sense that the boundaries that used to separate “self” from his social relationship with other people has to be removed. For example, as a result of experiencing life’s pleasure and pain, Gergen (2009, p. 96) explained how the human body (i.e. experiencing emotional ups and downs) could affect our ability to develop relationship with other people. As a common knowledge, social rejections can result to the development of emotional pain. By being a relational being, it is possible that “self” can successfully establish a strong and positive social relationship which is the key towards improving one’s own self-esteem. Given that the process of being able to establish a strong and positive social relationship is one of the best solutions to improve self-esteem, Gergen (2009, p. 17) questioned that “if the fundamental atom of society is the bounded self, how are we to understand relationship?”. Based on this context, it make sense that it is appropriate to accept the idea that “self” should be considered as a relational being. Multi-being means that a person is “socially embedded, fully engaged in the flow of relationship” (Gergen, 2009, p. 137). In line with this, the second section discussed the importance of becoming a relational being in everyday life. In this section, Gergen argued that it is evident that “self” is a relational being since each individual needs to build relationship with their family members since birth (p. 135). In fact, this relationship continuous as each individual enters the school premises, work in their chosen profession, get married and start a family, etc. For this reasons, Gergen mentioned that “self” is considered as a “multi-being” as each individual continuous to develop social relationships. The third section discusses how the concept of relational being can be applied in professional practice. According to Gergen, knowledge can develop through a co-creation process (Gergen, 2009, p. 201). It means that as each individual builds relationship with other people, there is a strong possibility wherein one can learn from the life or work experiences of other people. Eve To sum up his arguments with regards to the significance of relational being in human lives, the last section discussed the moral implications behind relativism to relational responsibility. In this section, Gergen discussed several questions with regards to the significance of morality with religious matters and social relationships. There are strengths and weaknesses in Gergen’s Relational Being. Athough Gergen managed to provide a clear outline with regards to his writing content, there are some parts of his writings that can be difficult on the part of the readers to understand. Aside from the use of excessive quotations to support his ideas, the application of too much anecdotes based on Gergen’s own life experiences (i.e. how he narrates a failed marriage) sounds a little strange. Likewise, the use of multiple or “aesthetic voices” coming from his friends and colleagues can be misleading for some readers (Gergen, 2009, p. xxv). One of the strong points in Gergen’s writing style is that the author has made it a practice to provide several practices in real-life situations that could somehow give his audiences a better understanding about his own thoughts and ideas. Despite the strength of his writings, some flaws can still be noted while reading his book. Even though Gergen’s writing has been successful in giving a fair contribution in the study of social psychology and sociology among others, some parts of his writing does not appear to be based on scientific study. For instance, Gergen mentioned that the study of Biology and the brain has nothing to do with the mind or how a person will interpret positive or negative emotions. Furthermore, Jahoda (2012) mentioned that Gergen’s statement on this matter makes the author appear to be misguided. Contrary to Gergen’s view on the relationship between the brain and emotions, a lot of studies made in the past (i.e. neuro-science and the Human Anatomy) can prove that part of the brain interprets the positive or negative emotions as perceived by each individual. Given that there are strengths and weaknesses in Gergen’s writings, his work can be considered as a useful foundation for a more reliable and realistic future studies on relational beings. Due to the weaknesses of Gergen’s writings, there were several authors in the past who has tried to examine how they could stregnthen Gergen’s ideas on relational being through the use of relational organization of research (Alasoini, 2006; Gustavsen, 2004). Gergen’s Contribution in the Field of Psychology and Social Sciences The ideas that were exploreed by Gergen has made a revolutionary contribution in the field of pscyhology. Specifically Gergen’s theoretical framework with regards to relational being clearly explained why social sciences and social psychologists should focus more on understanding how a person, as a relational being, could effectively establish strong relationship with other human beings within the close vicinity of our environment. According to Gergen, the “self” as an individual is a significant part of social construct. Based on this context, it is logical for social psychologists to study how a person could develop and strengthen his relationship with other people rather than trying to understand or develop theories that could theoretically explain “self” as a natural phenomena. For instance, a lot of previous psychologists and therapists believed in the idea that a person being a rational agent is the basic point or foundation of social life. Gergen explained that it is wrong to believe that rational being should be considered as the main foundation of social life since relational thoughts and practice is the real foundation of social life. In other words, it is actually the human thoughts as the end-product of our minds that enables a person or a rational self to develop a strong social relationship with other people in different environmental settings. Therefore, it is “the mind” that promotes the development of social relationship within the society that should be taken into consideration when trying to study the concept and theories presented in social psychology (Gergen, 2008) The significance of Gergen’s contribution to the overall value andimportance of relational theory is enormous. After being subjected to different degree of criticism, Gergen’s ground-breaking concept of relational theory has been continuously progressing into a more precise paradigms. According to Slife and Richardson (2010), Gergen’s decision to spend many years trying to appraise the significant relationship between a person as ‘self’ and his ability to create interpersonal relationship with other people within a given environmental surroundings has paid off since the social concepts and theories that were intially published on Gergen’s book remained very much applicable in the study of social psychology and social construction theories. In fact, a large group of therapists and feminists suggested the need to incorporate the concept of relational orientation to therapy as an expansion of knowledge and practice of psychoanalysis. This only proves that Gergen’s effort in trying to analyze and understand how a person can be considered as “social” has made a huge contribution in the development and practice of relational theory. In connection to practice, Gergen (2009, p. 277) stated that “let us honour those therapies most likely to guarantee us something for our money”, is “blind to the relational context that grants to therapy its efficacy”. In his statement, the author is suggesting that the public should be aware that therapy that acknowledges the importance of relationships is more effective as compared to therapists that promote the idea of a bounded self. In general, Gergen considers a therapeutic relationship as a process of engaging in the continuous flow of relationships. Since “self” is a relational being, patients who are seeking for an effective psychologist should search for someone who fully accepts the idea that social relationship is a significant part of the human lives. Therefore, the author stated that “it is not mind-repair that is ultimately at stake, from a relational perspective, but relational transformation” (Gergen, 2009, p. 277). When it comes to analyzing the significance of relational being to professional practice, Gergen tried to go beyond the idea that most of the existing psychological problems arises out of misalignment in the “mind”. Instead, the author was trying to move away from the idea that most of the challenges that could arise in our everyday lives are caused by a person’s inability to accept the idea that self is a relational being. Basically, the author’s idea strongly suggests that the process of enabling a person to become more flexible in the continuous motion of relational flow is the secret behind a successful psychiatric therapy. Furthermore, Gergen (2009, p. 291) mentioned that “In each new way of talking lies the potential for a new way of relating”. Since communication can either be verbal or non-verbal, therapists should carefully analyze the body language of his patient as this strategy will enable to therapists to develop therapeutic relationship with the patients. Recommendations for Future Research Upon analyzing the works of Gergen, his decision to make use of multiple or “aesthetic voices” coming from his friends and colleagues strongly suggest that his writings is purely based on his own thoughts. For this reason, his writings is limited in terms of providing his readers with a scientific-based approach towards the promotion of relational being as a concept or theory that can be applied in social sciences. In order to strengthen Gergen’s concept of relational being, this review strongly suggest the need to incorporate scientific-based research methods in determining whether or not the application of relational being as an approach to professional practice is effective in terms of helping individuals who are in need of therapeutic interventions. Conclusion As a relational being, Gergen strongly suggest the idea that each person should be able to develop a strong relationship with other people within the society. Aside from being able to improve knowledge, building a strong relationship with other people could lessen the degree wherein a person will develop and encounter problems in their everyday lives. Having acknowledged that “self” is a relational being, professional therapists should develop new strategies on how they could effectively build a good working relationship with other people. By doing so, therapists can be more successful in their chosen career. Although Gergen’s presentation of fact with regards to the importance of relational being is logical, his writings failed to provide his readers with a scientific-based study. Therefore, future research is necessary to strengthen his ideas on how each person can improve “self” as a relational being. References Alasoini, T. (2006) In search of generative results. A new generation of programmes to develop work organization. Economic and Industrial Democracy 27(1): 9-37. Gergen, K. (2008) On the Very Idea of Social Psychology. Social Psychology Quarterly 71(4): 331-337. Gergen, K. (2009) Relational Being: Beyond Self and Community. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Gustavsen. (2004) Making knowledge actionable: From theoretical centralism to distributive constructivism. Concepts and Transformation 9(2): 147-180. Jahoda, G. (2012, February 7). Review-Relational Being: Beyond Self and Community by Kenneth J. Gergen. Psychology. 16(6) [online] Available at: http://metapsychology.mentalhelp.net/poc/view_doc.php?type=book&id=6401&cn=396 [Accessed 23 February 2012]. Slife, B. and Richardson, F. (2010) Book Review. Review of Relational Being: Beyond Self and Community. Journal of Social Psychology 150(2): 226-230. Read More