Analysis of Personality Theories: Erik Erikson - Coursework Example

Analysis of Personality Theories Number Personality Theories Erik Erikson was one of the most notable personality theorists of the twentieth century America. The German-born American theorist was specialized in developmental psychology and psychoanalysis, fields which he perfected by creating the theory on psychosocial development of individuals. Perhaps, one of the most notable discoveries by Erickson during his long career was his coining of the term ‘identity crisis.’ Erikson ingenuity in psychology propelled him to greater heights, earning him a career in education in one of the world’s top universities. Life events Eriksons personality theory can be traced to his humble beginnings and poor educational background, which he sought to prove as immaterial to an individual with strong personality. Erickson was born to Karla Abrahamsen, a Jewish woman living in Copenhagen. No more information about the theorist’s biological father is available apart from the fact that he was Danish. After Eriks birth in 1902, his mother joined a training school for nurses and relocated to Karlsruhe. Three years later, Karla married Eriks Jewish therapist, Theodor Homburger. The marriage would pave way for the young Erik’s adoption by the Jewish step-father in 1911 (Mendelberg, 2005). It is notable that Erick’s development of interest in personality began in his childhood throughout his stages of life. Back in 1910s, Erickson was popularly referred to as Erik Homberger, and any information about his past remained under his parents’ wraps. Erickson was tall, light-colored, blue-eyed boy who spent his early life practicing Jewish religious practices and values. At school, his peers mocked him for having Nordic or Jewish traits in a way that prompted him to investigate the differences among people’s personality (Yeager, Miu, Powers, & Dweck, 2013). At Das Humanistisch Gymnasium Erickson’s was particularly interested in studying art, history and languages, however he eventually lost interest in school and completed his education without achieving excellence. Following his graduation, the young Erick opted to attend a school of art against the desires of his step-father who wanted him to study medicine. He immediately dropped out of school altogether. The reality of Erickson’s personality dawned on his for the first time when he began to express doubts about his calling and his place in society; issues that he opted to ‘resolve’ by taking a lengthy journey around Germany and Italy in company of Peter Blos, his long-time friend. During this time, Erickson persisted with his investigations of his father’s whereabouts and competing forces of ethnicity, religion and patriotism all of which invoked strong personality for one to succeed (Mendelberg, 2005). Early adulthood When Erickson was in his 20s, his ally Peter Blos asked him to pay him a visit in Vienna to lecture art at a fledging Burlingham-Rosenfeld education facility for minors, whose wealthy parents were learning psychoanalysis theory taught by Anna Freud, Sigmund Freud’s daughter. Anna soon became aware of Eriksons deep interest in children at the facility and motivated him to enroll for psychoanalysis class at the Vienna Psychoanalytic Institute, where he had the privilege to be supervised by legendary psychologists including August Aichhorn, and Paul Federn. Now surrounded by psychoanalysts in a favorable environment, Erickson majored in child analysis and went through a meticulous training and evaluation process by the younger Freud. During his training, Helene Deutsch and Edward Bibring were assigned to supervise him, especially during his first handling of an adult client. At the same time, Erickson learned the Montessori Method of early childhood education, which was based on intensive exposure of children to teaching aids in order to facilitate their learning and development. In the early 1930s, Erickson was a warded a diploma by the Vienna Psychoanalytic Institute. His psychoanalytic experience and learning in Vienna made him more productive than before. The enabling environment, as evident in the constant encouragement and training he received from the facility contributed in his greater level of interest and knowledge of personality theory. Cultural influences Apart from the life events, cultural influences also contributed in Erickson’s theory of personality development. His encounter with different cultures during his stints in Denmark, Germany, Canada and finally in the United States molded him to really study psychoanalysis theory of personality in order to work in cross-cultural environment in a seamless manner by understanding the needs of the people around him (Mendelberg, 2005). In 1930, Erickson sought to strengthen his understanding of the North American culture by marrying Joan Mowat Serson. Serson was an artist with Canadian origins. The woman of his life influenced him to convert to Christianity which he did, most probably to understand the Christian way of life. While in the United States, Erikson earned placement as the first psychotherapist specialized in child care in Boston. He was deployed in Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, the Judge Baker Guidance Center, and Psychological Clinic where he served in different capacities (Mendelberg, 2005). In mid 1930s, Erikson left Harvard for Yale University where he was in charge of human relations and acted as a professor at the university’s Medical School. Erikson persisted with his interest in other faculties other than psychoanalysis with a view to finding a link between the subjects and psychology (Yeager et al, 2013). In light of this, the theorist made important engagements with American anthropologists including Margaret Mead, and Ruth Benedict. These interactions yielded fruits in 1938, when he received an invitation to assess the learning processes of students in South Dakota. A year later, Erickson left Yale for California, following his invitation to be part of a team taking part in a longitudinal research of child development, an event that was organized by the University of California. Mendelberg (2005) notes these education journeys equipped the theorist with the rich cultural information which he needed to understand personality. He eventually put the rich information into practice in San Francisco where he started a private care facility for children. Between 1950 when launched his popular book titled “Childhood and Society”, and 1970 when he opted to retire, Erikson served in different capacities in various educational and health institutions including the University of California, Austen Riggs Center and Harvard. Eriksons theory of personality The stages of life, which Erikson went through, from Germany to Denmark, and finally to North America where he spent the rest of his life, played a vital role in the development of his theory of personality (Rychman, 2012). Erikson’s psychoanalytic theory of personality holds that appropriate outcomes of each stage of life or “virtues” must prevail in medicine. Eriksons theory indicates that an individual with good personality must be able to withstand both ends of each stage of life in conflict. Erikson argues that an individual who can hold both ends will have a personality that meets the virtue test (Capps, 2011). In light of this, an individual with good personality must give in to trust and mis-trust so as to create sustainable hope, which would be the first step to arriving at the right solution to a problem in life. In addition, Erikson argues that integrity and despair should be accepted simultaneously because by doing so, wisdom would come out as an appropriate solution to the problem in question (Capps, 2011). Other Personality Theories Sigmund Freud’s Theory of Personality is based on the interactions of the id, the ego, and the superego (Capps, 2011). According to Freud, the id is a part of personality, which is inherent in individuals, and it is responsible for spawning the ego, responsible for controlling human behavior in such a way that is acceptable in the real life. The superego is the component of personality which retains all of an individual’s internal moral values that one learns from his or her immediate social interactions - the human sense of righteousness or evil. The superego facilitates moral judgments and is acquired at five years of age. As Rychman (2012) suggests, Freud’s theory of personality is similar to Erikson’s in the sense that in both cases, there are opposing forces and the need upon the individual to balance the extremes when making judgments or choosing to behave in an acceptable way. Freud’s conflict of the id, the ego and the superego is similar to Erikson’s conflict of ‘worst’ and ‘best’, which an individual must accept at once in order to create hope, which then stimulates the realization of a solution. Freud’s ego strength, which refers to the ability of the component of personality to operate irrespective of these conflicting forces will create what Erikson calls ‘hope’ and ‘wisdom’ (Capps, 2011). An individual with suitable ego strength has the capacity to balance these extremes, while those who have extreme ego strength will tend to be too inflexible or too unsettled. Apart from psychoanalytic theories, Humanism emphasizes the value of freedom in the development and the use of personality to navigate challenging issues in life (Engler, 2013). Humanist theorists support the theory of self-actualization, which refers to a natural need for individual development as a motivation of behavior (Capps, 2011). When compared with Erikson’s or Freud’s psychoanalytic theories, Humanists such as Carl Rogers and Abrahams Maslow assume that strong personality can be developed by allowing people to enjoy the sense of freedom in order to achieve solutions anchored on wisdom. Behavioral Theories hold that personality is an outcome of interface between the person and their surroundings (Engler, 2013). Unlike Freud and Erikson who base their theories of personality on internal factors, behaviorists study tangible and quantifiable behaviors, which the latter two theories fall short of explaining. Behaviorists such as B.F. Skinner and Watson argue that external factors have a tremendous bearing on personality development because, according to them, behavior can be modified by operant conditioning or similar conditions. Conclusion Theories of Personality attempt to explain human behavior in society. Erikson’s theory of psychoanalysis holds that personality is developed by one’s exposure to the extremes of events in the stages of life. In each case, therefore, an individual with strong personality must balance the extremes of the situation in order to arrive at the best solution. Erikson’s theory draws several parallels from Freud’s psychoanalytic theory, positing that an individual with a strong personality must exercise ego strength. Ego strength means balancing the extremes of the id, the ego and the superego. On their part, Humanists support free will in the development of personality, and Behaviorists argue that the environment plays a pivotal role in personality development. Of the three theories, psychoanalytic theory seems to be internal and very remote to the environment, while the rest depend on the environment as an important factor in personality development, and as such can be used as the lens through which personality can be viewed. All the same, it is rational to argue that it takes all of the theories to understand personality in its entirety. References Capps, D. (2011). The Verbal Portrait: Erik H. Eriksons Contribution to Psychoanalytic Discourse. Journal of Religion & Health, 50(4), 880-898. Engler, B. (2013). Personality Theories. New York: Cengage Learning. Mendelberg, T. (2005). Bringing the Group Back Into Political Psychology: Erik H. Erikson Early Career Award Address. Political Psychology, 26(4), 637-650. Rychman, R. (2012). Theories of Personality. Cengage Learning. Yeager, D.S., Miu, A.S., Powers, J., & Dweck, C.S. (2013). Implicit Theories of Personality and Attributions of Hostile Intent: A Meta-Analysis, an Experiment, and a Longitudinal Intervention. Child Development, 84(5), 1651-1667. Read More