The debate about the primacy of the influences of environment and heredity on personality development
Among the main driving forces of personality development highlight the impact of the social environment and heredity (in other words – the degree of “animality” and “humanity”) on the behavior of individuality. Moreover, there are adherents of the theory on the primacy of the social behavior of the individual, and the primacy of the individual.
First consider the person the result of external influence, which forms the main personality traits, the axioms on which man relies on throughout his life. Because you can not erase the facts of influence on the formation of the personality of the environment in which the individual resides the majority of the time of day (kindergarten, school, home). Copying the behavior of other children, the child learns concepts about life in General and about the laws of existence in a particular environment. Already in kindergarten, the individual is faced with the need to fulfill social roles. Support of its theory, its supporters and see that the people inhabiting different parts of the planet, but having essentially the same physiology, are distinguished by their “color” of their culture – the diversity of traditions, stereotypes of behavior and thinking. The analysis of personality is impossible without the study of these subjective factors.
Relatively recently (in the 1970s) introduced the concept of situationalism V. Michelle . which insists that such personality traits like honesty and temperament, are formed under the action of the situation. Studies have been conducted that prove this version.
But at the same time, the psychologist William stern found no less credible evidence supporting the concept of heredity . which considers determinants of personality development based on the nature of genetic and physiological characteristics. Varieties of the theory of heredity can be considered a variety of dispositional concept, seeing the causes of behavior innate or acquired her qualities, objective differences between specific personality. Proponents of these theories believe that whatever negative impact nor rendered Wednesday, a truly strong individuality will find opportunities for self-actualization.
H. Heckhausen highlights three indicators of individual behavior that cannot be explained by the influence of the environment.
The first indicator is the level of influence the actions of others to the actions of a particular person. Deviations from generally accepted behavior, usually due to a predisposition to a certain kind of action. For example, the shocking behaviour in a public place beyond decent, can mean the tendency of a person to nonconformity . and the manifestation of natural pointaverage behaviors .
The second indicator was the level of conformity of individual behavior to the behavior of this person, as demonstrated in other circumstances.
The third indicator is the level of similarity of behavior in similar situations, but at different times.
The same evidence can often be interpreted in different ways – as a proof of concept of heredity, and as a proof of concept environment. For example, in the succession of generations within the family are the first to see evidence of the inheritance of talent, and the second – confirmation of the value of education directed.
A. M. Etkind revealed the impossibility of separate existence of the concept of heredity and the concept of environment, as a result of experimental studies found that really changes in the situation affect a change in behavior in 1 case out of 10. Experiments have shown that the actions of each individual are determined simultaneously and environmental influences, and internal predisposition.
Replaced outdated theories came the concept of two-factor determination of personality development . studying the degree of influence of external and internal environments. Among the variety of such approaches are the two most developed: the theory of the convergence of two factors (V. stern) and the theory of the confrontation of two factors (Z. Freud) .
V. stern suggested that personality is shaped by environmental factors and hereditary dispositions. The interaction of these two factors provides the impetus for a new state of the individual. This scheme, called the principle of convergence, served as an axiom in the debate about the value of internal and external environments.
Freud suggested that the development has two driving forces: the desire for pleasure and the reality principle .
Cornerstone between these two aspirations becomes indoctrination, it enables a person to cope with primitive desires, spreading let less strong, but still desire to meet the expectations of other people. While the individual is subordinated to the pursuit of pleasure (or avoid displeasure), the environment in which it is located, restrains or suppresses these aspirations, using such forms of social control as law, taboos, customs, traditions, morals, manners, etc. Z. Freud conditionally defines two opposing forces – the super-ego and ID . Super-ego in the personality structure is responsible for the social constraints and principles that are deeply internalized by the individual under the influence of reality. It means the animal nature inherent in each individual.
Theory Z. Freud about the confrontation between the two forces has been repeatedly criticized by psychologists and philosophers. More than just challenging the theory of Freud about the polar relationship of the individual and of society as a whole. According to A. G. Asmolov . the persistence of Z. Freud to see in metamorphoses Lee-videosnap primary impulses explanation of any manifestations of the activity of both personality and society as a whole led to the emergence of the “dissenters” among supporters of psychoanalysis. Such representatives of neofreudian, K. Jung, A. Adler, K. Horney and E. Fromm . tried to disprove the theory Z. Freud, arguing the version about a much smaller effect of sexual attraction on the personality than what he’s talking about Sigmund Freud.
In his work “beyond the pleasure principle” Z. Freud explores the struggle between the tendency to assimilation (self-preservation) and the pursuit of dissimilation (the propensity to self-destruct). The dissimilation Z. Freud explains as is characteristic of any living creature desire the original state. It is the desire of the scientist calls the libido – the momentum and determines the whole point of the confrontation between it and superego. This scheme Z. Freud confronts her critics, explaining the failure of their versions initially wrong approach. He argues that the scheme of the biological and social struggle only explains adaptation and evolution of species but does not explain a more global and significant tendencies in human behavior and society.
Neatradisi headed by E. Fromm explain the emergence of socio-psychological phenomena of personality active and passive adaptation of human physiology to the socio-economic situation. From early childhood through parents or close family people the child receives a first indication of the economic situation, which can not make adjustments to his individual psyche. Here, according to psychologists, the unconscious installation is not only and not so much the influence of libido, much wave action economic and social environment surrounding the person.
These disputes are forced to rethink the two-factor scheme determination of development, to give them new characteristics and definitions, but the Foundation dual effect on the personality remains undeniable.