When we are talking trait theories my first thought is about Jung and the first question that comes to mind, when I think of Carl Jung is, where do you start?
Even though his influence permeates many aspects of psychology, I am going to start in the same place Adler did and build on the major characteristic of Jung?s view of people. Jung?s view was that human behavior is conditioned not only by the past but also by the future. Thus, the causal emphasis was an interaction of innate and experiential factors (individual and racial history) which foundationalized a search for wholeness, completion, and a desire for rebirth.
Jung?s view was holistic, social, goal-oriented, systemic, and humanistic which are also the characteristic of Adler?s therapeutic perspective (Corey, 2005). One can sum up both men?s approaches in one word: ?teleology? (goal-oriented). A goal-oriented focus is driven by the needs of a subjective perception of reality that is acted upon by inner and outer forces. There is a striving for balance between significance and wholeness.
When one think about Jung?s work the striving for balance always comes to mind: balance between light and dark, good and evil, inner and outer. Although it sounds esoteric this is a very pragmatic view. If there was nothing but bright light.. a beam of light would be hard to see, but if there was no light, a steam of light becomes the focus. In nature everything has balance and if that balance is disturbed then the system functions erratically (neurotically) till it finds balance again.
Balance was the foundation of Jung?s perspective. He defined the psyche (total personality as a series of interacting systems: the ego, the personal unconscious (complete with its complexes), the collective unconscious, archetypes, anima vs. animus, and the shadow. He used these schemas when discussing the structure of personality and the psychic energy that allowed it to function. Jung?s psychic energy or libido was governed by the principal laws of energy, seeking balance by using the principles of equivalence and entropy. The first concept states that energy can not be destroyed nor created, thus any energy that is in a system must still be there in the system, somewhere. Thus, if energy is repressed in one area of the system it will reappear in some other value as in a dream or fantasy; thereby, maintaining a balance (entropy) among the various components.
The question is do you believe Jung? Personally, I must admit I have a few problems with his views. Nonetheless, I find the concept of temperament types to be very useful in evaluating behavior. I believe that people have certain tendencies or patterns. For instance Jung?s thoughts on language use, and whether your language demonstrates a tendency toward the concrete or is it systematic and categorical can be used as tool in assessment (Keirsey, 1998).
Jung himself was a systematic and categorical thinker. His writing was high on elucidation and high on appreciation, and filled with metaphors and analogies. It makes it hard for many people to conceptualize. The fact that it is hard to conceptualize for the concrete, structured thinker, has led some people to ignore its possible validity, so I believe. But never fear, Jung?s theory of synchronicity would ensure that the psychic energy utilized in conceptualizing his constructs and views will allow the materialization of his constructs although I am not sure how the concepts of equivalence and entropy will find a balance then.
The last thought I have on temperament tpes is to say that the data indicates that there is valitity to trait theory concepts.
Oct 04, 2008 @ 15:27:02
