Self Analysis

Published under category: Writing Ideas | 2017-12-05 22:58:06 UTC

Context: Psychology

Personal behavior can be viewed from several perspectives. There is the inevitable view of the self that is defined by individuals. This view may be biased especially if it is constructed without self reflection. However, an objective self evaluation is possible with some effort. On the other hand, personal behavior can be viewed from the perspective of other psychologists. For an objective evaluation, a person can evaluate own behavior from the perspective of psychologists who have established methods that have been reviewed in the discipline for a long time. In using the established methods, there is a chance to make comparisons of self evaluation versus evaluation using other known methods. In addition, there is a possibility of harmonizing the different views of personality as reflected by different theories. This paper evaluates personal behavior through self evaluation and by applying established theories by Carl Jung, Sigmund Freud, Alfred Adler, and Karen Horney.

Sigmund Freud divided the totality of individual behavior, or personality, into the id, ego, and the super ego. The id is the inner unconscious self, while the ego is the conscious perception of the self (Siegfried, 2014). According to Freud, the super ego is the aspiration of an individual, the aspired perfect self.  In self evaluation, I consider my routine a part of the id. Even though I plan on what to do at a particular time, a pattern eventually emerges. Daily events often seem to repeat every day. On days where a special event disrupts the routine, I am bound to notice the anomaly later, often as a reflection on why the day is odd. Therefore, I realize that there are behavioral patterns that are not molded by the conscious thought, but remain part of the unconscious id. This is to say that habit is largely unconscious. The ego is clearly visible in the things I take decisions on for example, I choose on the precise time I will arrive in class. I may plan to arrive five minutes earlier or five minutes late. I realize that the ego part of my personality is small, and actually affects the fine details of everyday routine. Finally, the super ego affects my decisions on important issues in my life. For example, I consider the decision on what course to take at school a part of my super ego since schooling is a pathway to the ideal self. Freudian theory covers all aspects of life.

Carl Jung’s model of behavior is much simpler as applies to me and even compared to Freud model. The ego, the part which I consider much smaller than other faculties in Freud’s model, takes the center stage (Lu, 2012). All decisions I make and the conscious part of my thought, or the ego, is the origin of other parts including the unconscious. Carl Jung separated collective behavior into different categories. Of the categories, I would place myself in the sentimental extrovert category. While it is not easy to confine behavior into simple profiles, this is the category that most elements of my character match with. I judge myself as a person that likes to interact with people all the time. Notably, Jung’s model does not have much friction with Freud’s model in application. The two appear to be different approaches in modeling behavior, but are essentially structured in the same way. Jung’s model considers the unconscious, the conscious, and the persona, which is the desired image, to be interconnected so that they all issue from the centrality of the conscious, or what Jung would call the ego. While Jung’s model eventually develops a personality type to which it assigns me, Freud’s model describes the three different realms of personality. While ignoring the developmental theories, my personality can be analyzed using Jung’s and Freud’s method without conflict.

In contrast to Jung and Freud, Alfred Adler takes a holistic approach to behavior. Adler’s work lacks the imaginative aspect of Jung and Freud. For example, it is impossible to ascertain the conscious and the unconscious in any other mind other than own. This reality leaves Freud and Jung open to accusation of using guesswork as scientists. Adler takes a pragmatic approach where a personality is summarized into observable behavior (Marano, 2017). Adler’s approach may seem shallow, but it is testable and can easily be subjected to empirical observation. I categorize myself as a socially useful type of a person, one of Adler’s classifications of collective individual behavior. I see myself as a person who is able to understand other people’s position without feeling inferior.  Adler did not go to the extent of imagining what a human mind dislike, or used own perception as a template for all people. He therefore applied the scientific method to his evaluation by suggesting that personality should be modeled from observed behavior. This evaluation of self as appears to other may be biased because there is always a conflict between self evaluation and independent evaluation.

Karen Horney is another psychologist who has a unique approach to personality analysis. Her approach is considered neo Freudian due to her view of developmental psychology. Horney’s personality theory considered behavior a result of experience during growth (Coolidge 2001). For example she theorized that if a female child experienced oppression, she would develop a masculine complex as an adult. According to Horney, behavior can model childhood experiences. This is similar to Freud’s psychosexual stages of child development.  This theory is to an extent a method of psychoanalysis. Evaluating my situation, I do not find myself to be suffering from any masculine complex. However, I have near perfectionist standards that according to Horney’s approach probably arise from having been held to high standards as a child.

My own view of my personality is that of a mild person neither easily provoked and nor too calm. I tend to personally ascribe to Freudian approach or Horney’s theory of development. In my life, I haven’t experienced any developmental difficulties I know off. An independent opinion would probably a better approach, but each individual has the ability of self reflection. I believe that I fall in the central part of a normal distribution of personalities. In addition, I believe that majority of people fall in this band of moderate behavior, attempting to avoid extremes.

In conclusion, personality can be viewed from different perspective, which is not necessarily opposed to each other. The Freudian approach to personality is influential among other psychologists. Most notably, Carl Jung and Horney have an agreement as to how personality develops. Adler is more pragmatic and does not seem to ascribe to imagination or intuition as a method of developing psychoanalytic theories. I ascribe to this view despite the weaknesses in its argument. I would apply this particular approach in self analysis. Alfred Adler has a more pragmatic approach to psycho analysis, and compelling method. After evaluating myself using all psychologists’ methods, I have arrived at my own approach to self evaluation, finding myself to be a mild individual.