Sigmund Freud and Alfred Adler Personality Theorists

Human nature is a multifaceted subject that piques the interest of most scholars, who attempt to provide viable explanations for how humans behave. Since the time of Plato and Socrates, scholars in the twenty-first century have made strides that have transformed and continue to modify the understanding of the human mind as it pertains to their nature. Scholars from the twenty-first century, such as Sigmund Freud and Alfred Adler, are noted for their contributions to the development and foundation of some of the concepts of psychology that are still used in their respective fields today.  Alfred Alder’s definition of the human nature is centered around self-actualization based on the idea of holism. Adler’s understanding of the human nature is focused on individual psychology, where gaining perspective of an individual’s personality is studied as a whole and not divided into parts. His notion was forward moving, in which he believed that an individual requires motivation to move forward and not their past to determine their future.

Although Freud had a similar understanding of the human nature, his ideas were sexual-oriented to conceptualize the human nature. Freud insisted that someone’s personality is determined by their conscious and unconscious mind, which has both reflex and voluntary responses to situations. Like Adler he affirms that he mind of an individual is a crucial tool in establishing their personality. However, the theorists differ in the manner they approach their understanding of personality theories. Adler’s view is based on the study of human psychology as a unit, while Freud’s idea is based on sectioning the human mind to understand their nature. The comparison and contrast of the two most influential scholars of psychology seeks to show how their views have contributed to the development of theories that are used in the field of psychology to address health issues affecting the mind.

Contrast between Sigmund Freud’s and Alfred Adler’s Theories of Personality

There are differences between the two scholars that are brought about by the manner, in which they chose to explore their understanding of the different personalities of humans. According to Freud, the basic drive of human nature is sexual tension, as it determines their mannerisms and essentially their personality as they develop. Freud used psychosexual stages of his patients to establish a conclusion that the fundamentals of a human being are beside on their sexual history (Freud and Strachey 10). Their sexual history was not focused on experience, but on their desires, fears, hate, shame, and experiences in love.

In his theories, Freud expresses that the child is born with a sexual urge that motivates a child to seek pleasure as they develop. As such, he divided the understanding of human development based on their sexual nature into three stages. In these stages, Freud states that the child seeks pleasure in other objects revealing their personality. The personality of an adult is determined by their childhood and how they interacted with their desires at an early stage of their lives. For instance, oral interactions with the child in terms feeding determine their personality. A child that is forced to eat will end up engaging in undesirable oral activities such as being a smoker. A child that is deprived of food would develop dependency characters when it comes to oral activities (McLeod). Children that undergo early weaning will most likely develop aggressive behaviors.

Another factor to be considered in determining the personality of an adult is their anal activities during childhood. The process of toilet training is a crucial aspect in developing the character of the child, and it is eventually reflected in the adult personality of an individual. According to Freud, children that undergo harsh training develop obsessive, mean, and tidy behaviors; on the other hand, those that are trained with a laidback attitude develop generous attitudes as grownups. Freud also focuses on phallic activities of a child to establish their character and personality as grownups. Phallic activities are mainly family set-up and how they influence the child as they develop (McLeod). Freud asserts that a child that has been brought up in a challenged family in terms of relations grows up to be self-obsessed, sexually anxious, inferior, and vain.

On the other hand, Adler posited that the fundamentals of human nature and personality are based on social relationships an individual has with their environment. He explains this theory through psychological types that he develops from his interactions with patients. He came up with this conclusion because of the energy the patients release as they went through the therapy sessions. One of the psychological types that define personality, according to Adler, is ruling type of person, who is naturally domineering, and they possess high energy that might be overwhelming for other (Journal Psyche). He explains that such persons are not bullies or sadists; they have personalities that cannot be tamed, and those that fail to express their personality self-distract in such a way that they may develop drug addiction problems, and others become suicidal. The other psychological type expressed as a result of social relationships is the leaning type that feeds off of other people’s energy, and they require other people to go through life challenges. As a result of failure of other people giving this type of people the energy they require, they develop phobias, anxieties, obsessions, and dissociation in their life.

Adler’s other explanation of his personality theory is the avoiding type, in which he elaborates that this type of people have low energies and they stay away from life and social events, where they have to interact with others. He further asserts that these types of persons are prone to cases of psychosis as they retreat into themselves. The final psychological type considered by Adler is socially useful type, which he describes as the healthy type that possesses adequate social interest and energy. This type of people is able to connect with people and give them support, and they are not consumed by a sense of inferiority, as they are open to ideas other than their own of going through life’s challenges (Journal Psyche). The difference in between Freud and Adler based on the basics of their theories is displayed in the manner, in which they understand what influences human personalities. According to Freud, they influence on personality is developed from an early stage of life as they develop their sexual senses. Adler, on his end, believes that the personality of an individual is developed from their social interactions.

Another contrast that is evident in the works of Freud and Adler is the approach they had in explaining the reasoning behind their personality theories. Adler used the individual psychology idea of looking at what defines people’s personalities. Under the individual psychology approach, Adler focuses on several factors to affirm his theory. Some of the factors include holism, teleology, field theory, the creative self, private intelligence, and life style. According to Adler, for an individual to portray their personality, they should be able to function as a unit. The ideal is based on the concept of holism developed by Adler, where the individual functions as a self-conscious open system that is independent of an individual’s personal encounters in their early life (Mitchell). He insists that people are a unit and not a collection of diverse drives and instincts, as Freud posits in his theories. Another aspect that supports Adler’s notion of individual psychology is field theory that emphasizes on the movements, relationships, and actions of an individual as a means to determine their mind development. This theory examines the working of a person and their sense of belonging when it comes to social groups.

Understanding the field theory allows the therapist to discern the capacity of the person to fit in groups through psychological types grouping, and hence, treatment for their respective psychological illness can be designed. Adler did not believe in generalizing the treatment of an individual, as he focused on the individual and the case on their hand. Another factor considered by Adler to determine the personality of an individual is teleology, which is the ability to self-realize. He explains that individuals have different capacities to achieve their goals depending on their self-realization goals (Mitchell). The will power to overcome a huddle or attain a goal is motivated by the individual’s upward strive for completion. As such the behavior of persons is governed by the desire to reach high achievements; hence, the personality of a person is defined by their zeal to achieve their goals, as persons differ in desire and drive.

The creative self is also another factor that Adler highlights as an essential aspect in individual psychology. The precepts asserts that an individual is responsible for their own personality such that they cannot shift blame for their condition to others or unexplainable forces. A person’s pattern from their early stages of life reflects their personality, and thereby, Adler discusses this concept in what he terms as life style. The life style of a person covers all the perceptions and actions that engage in on a daily basis giving an indication of their nature as humans. Lastly, private intelligence is presented as the reasoning that an individual has for justifying their self-indulgence into a given lifestyle (Carlson et al. 22). Contrary to common sense, which acknowledges wisdom as a mutual benefit when it comes to a society, private intelligence is self-affirming, and it helps people validate their choices, whether they are socially acquiescent or not.

Contrary to Adler’s precepts of personality as a unit that is understood through individual psychology, Freud views personality as an aspect of life that is determined by sections of the human mind. He divides the mind into three major sections that work independently, and at times, are in conflict with each other to determine the personality of a person. The three sections of the mind include the id, ego, and the superego, which are hypothetical ideas that define important mental activities. According to Freud, the id section of the mind is an unconscious level that operates on the basic instincts. The instincts are derived from two biological drives that make up the id, and they are known as the Eros and the Thanatos. The Eros part of the instinct as a basic component of the id enables a person to survive, as it is responsible for life sustaining actions such as respiration, eating, and sexual activities. Freud explains the Eros releases energy responsible for sexual desires known as libido. The other component of the instinct is the Thanatos, which presents contrary actions that Freud believed to be destructive, and they are present in all human beings. The destructive forces are manifested as anger, aggression, and violence when projected towards other people. However, Freud expresses that the Eros is stronger than the Thanatos, and that is the reason people are able to survive as opposed to self-destructing from the forces that are present in Thanatos.

The other section of the mind that determines the personality of a person, according to Freud, is the ego, which develops during the early stages of life. He explains that the ego of an individual is influenced by their infant years and activities they engage in such as toilet training and oral activities that include eating. The manner, in which the child is trained, determines their personality as adults. Freud examines that ego develops from the id, and its mandate is to satisfy the needs of the id in a socially acceptable way. It follows the practical principle, as it operates in the conscious mind unlike the id, which is active in the unconscious mind. The ego allows an individual to think rationally before acting, and it controls the activities of an individual, when they are awake.

The last section of the mind explored by Freud is the superego, which develops from early childhood stages of life. The superego is responsible for the moral nature of an individual. It is the section that invokes guilt, when a person does immoral activities. The superego is based on a moral principle that informs the actions of the ego, as it ensures a person behaves in a moral manner as it pertains to their social setting. Freud asserts that conflict between the three components of the mind develops the personality of a person. The contrast between Adler and Freud is apparent, and it displays in the paths they take to reinforce their personality theories. Freud divides the human mind into the three parts to explain why people behave the way they do, while Adler approaches the human nature as a unit that is explained through the individual psychology.

Similarity between Sigmund Freud’s and Alfred Adler’s Theories of Personality

There are several similarities that are exposed through the works of Freud and Adler. The two scholars shared the core principles of psychodynamic analysis of the human mind. Although Adler did not support the idea of sexual tension as the underlying essence of human nature, he used the foundation laid by Freud to establish his theories of personality. Adler and Freud were in a similar research association that focused on mental health, and their works on developing clinically applicable solutions to mental health issues were based on social dynamics, in which their various patients were exposed to during their childhood. Their preference to use experience as a validation for personality is a confirmation that they had similar perceptions of the human nature, and how it feeds from experience to develop the characters that people portray (Carlson et al. 87).

Both Adler and Freud believed that the personality of an individual is developed through the experience. They agree that the personality of an individual is influenced by the events of their early life as they develop from the childhood to the adulthood. Their assertion is that the social relationship and the sexual tension of an individual affect the manner they relate to their environment. For instance, Freud explains that the intimate issues such as the toilet training define the type of the person grows up to be depending on how the process was undertaken. Children that are harshly trained to use the toilet develop the self-obsessive characters that eventually turn in to the mean attitudes towards the others.

Adler also posits that the manner, in which an individual relates to their environment socially, reflects their personality (Carlson et al. 102). There are different types of people depending on how they relate to others. There are those, who lean on others, and those that dominate; others withdraw from social affairs, and others are socially useful. These types of personality are discern from an early stage in life, where they are expresses through feelings and desires that individuals harbor in their thoughts and share with their therapists in order design a treatment model.

Freud and Adler had a common view of psychology, as Adler is believed to have been a partner of Freud’s during his researches, and he contributed to some of them in terms of development (Freud and Strachey 25). They viewed human nature as a complex subject that needed to be studied via various means; Adler opted to explore the subject as a holistic unit, while Freud preferred to break down the ideas he had and came up with a conclusion that is more or less similar to Adler’s. Both of them show that childhood experiences shape the personality of a person, and how they fit into the society as their social skills are the main factors considered to explain the personality traits.

Freud’s theories, similar to Adler’s, do not provide factual evidence to confirm their precepts. Both scholars based their theories on subjective factors that cannot be quantified or measured. Their ideas were intangible in terms of verification, because they used feelings and the actions of the mind to explain their theories. Freud explains that the mind is divided into id, ego, and superego, all of which cannot be measured to ascertain the theory.

He also suggested that the sexual tension of an individual determined their personality, as it is part of their development process from infancy to adult. Sexual tension cannot be quantified, making the claim impossible to justify through scientific measures. Similarly, Adler’s theories also focus on the social dynamics of an individual, where he expresses that a person that shows tendencies to lean on others or be socially useful express obsession and generosity respectively. These two quantities cannot be qualified or measured through scientific resources available, because they are intangible factors.

Their concepts are also similar, as they depict the early stage of humans to be weak and feeble such that they are impressionable (Freud and Strachey 49). Freud, on his end, explains that the manner that a child is exposed to intimate issues affects their nature as they grow, and eventually, the child will manifest their childhood habits in their personality as grownups. He posits that children, who are exposed to forceful feeding, develop dependency characters that could be projected in terms of smoking. This is because the oral activities are aggressive, so they will require a continuation of the same to fulfill the aggression they experienced, thereby becoming smokers in their adult life.

Similarly, Adler’s theory of individuals needing to achieve certain goals compared to their environment is motivated by the feeling of inferiority as they develop. As children grow up, they tend to seek to fit in a certain groups to attain a sense of belonging, which, according to Adler, is crucial for personality development. Since his theories are underlined by social relationships, the idea of inferiority propels the individuals to self-motivate themselves to achieve their desires, and in so doing, they manifest their personalities. Both of them acknowledge that the feeling of being left out forces a person to strive to fit into the group they seek as a way of gratification (Carlson et al. 90).

Both Adler and Freud understood the position of a therapists as that of the receiver and the patient as the source of information during therapy sessions. They express that the information given by the patient about their thoughts and desires were instrumental. The latter have been essential in being applied in generating an effective plan to approach the patient’s need as far their mental health was concerned. The therapists cannot prescribe a treatment method without information from the patients, thus understanding that the patient’s childhood experiences were vital in examining and treating the patient.

Conclusion

Comprehending the dynamics of human nature and how they develop personalities is a vital aspect of exploring human beings as they interact with their environment. Adler and Freud are both regarded as founders of knowledge in the field of psychology, as their material is the basis, on which further research in the fields such as the neurology with the respect to the mental health is continued. The differences between the two scholars give the perspectives that are beneficial to the current society, as people tend to question and compare the two as they seek answers to make the sense of the human nature.

The main difference between Adler and Freud is the manner, in which they choose to deduce the reason behind the different personalities. Adler based his research on social dynamics and explained that the exposure that an individual is accustomed to influences their personality. He continued to express that the individuals could turn out to be needy, socially strong, social introverts, or domineering in the society depending on the environment they are exposed to. Freud, on the other hand, demonstrated that personality is based on the sexual tension experienced by the persons in their early stages of life. He further explains that the mind is divided into three major parts that are in constant conflict, hence projecting the personality of a person.

Despite they differences the two scientists conquered on various issues that include the idea that early stages of life of an individual contribute to the development of the person’s personality in their adulthood. They agreed that therapists are information gatherers, and patients are sources of information to help them develop appropriate treatment plans for their patients. They also have a common foundation, since they worked together at some point in time to develop effective measures to tackle mental health issues. Today, neurologists that have come after the scientists have developed equipment that allows them to ascertain that a person’s environment in their early life influences their personality. This is done through brain screening, as the person in question is asked intimate questions and their brain activity is monitored and later analyzed to conclude their findings.

Works Cited

Carlson, Jon, Richard E. Watts, and Michael Maniacci. Adlerian Therapy: Theory and Practice. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 2006. Print.

Freud, Sigmund, and James Strachey. The Ego and the Id. London: Hogarth Press, 1974. Print.

Journal Psyche. “Alfred Adler’s Personality Theory and Personality Types.” Journal Psyche, 2015. http://journalpsyche.org/alfred-adler-personality-theory/. Accessed 21 June, 2017.

McLeod, Saul. “Sigmund Freud.” Simply Psychology, 2013. https://www.simplypsychology.org/Sigmund-Freud.html. Accessed 20 June, 2017.

Mitchell, Gregory. “Alfred Adler and Adlerian Individual Psychology.” Mind Development, 2005. http://mind-development.eu/adler.html. Accessed 21 June, 2017.