Title: Alfred Adler and the fulfillment model of personality theorizing.
Abstract: The textbook writers and theory interpreters usually consider Adler to have had much in common with Freud. Adler is discussed by some, such as Ruth Monroe (12.), as a neo-Freudian, and by others, such as Hall and Lindzey (7), as a psychological As far as I can imagine, a neo-Freudian expresses essentially Freudian ideas in a modern idiom. Although the ideas are changed, and in that sense new, they are still supposed to be recognizable as Freud's in parentage. The designation, social psychological theorist, though less explicit in itself is used in a context intimately relating it to Freud. Usually, the chapter on social psychological theorists follows that on the pure Freudians, and the difference between the two emerges as a tendency to replace the biological, narrowly sexual emphasis of the latter with an emphasis on society and culture as the determiners of personality. But the implication is that the basic insights of Freud carried in such concepts as the unconscious, anxiety, defense, instinct, fixation, and reality principle, still remain. I cannot see how one could properly understand Adler as either a neo-Freudian or a social psychological theorist. There is little concern with sexuality, or the pleasure principle, or the reality principle in Adler, and he emphasizes society no more than does Freud. It should be remembered that Freud gave to society a major role in shaping character structure, the superego, and even the ego, through the action of parents during the various stages of psychosexual development. It is my contention that Freud and Adler differed so radically in their view of man that no attempt to highlight their similarities will be fruitfu!.
Publication Year: 1970
Publication Date: 1970-11-01
Language: en
Type: article
Indexed In: ['pubmed']
Access and Citation
AI Researcher Chatbot
Get quick answers to your questions about the article from our AI researcher chatbot