Erikson Those Who Are Unclear

Erikson

Those who are unclear about Erik Erikson's contribution to psychoanalytic theory believe he was the antithesis to Freud. This is incorrect. Erikson was accepting of the basic elements of Freudian theory. This makes his work different from Jung and Adler, who rejected Freud's work and used their own theories. Unlike Jung, Adler or the neo-Freudians, Erikson's work was broad in the application of his theories not only to identity and personality, but also to social science issues. Erickson's focus on the problems of children, adolescents and adults show that emotional pathology can occur within the life span and are not simply associated with childhood development.

Erikson's concepts of psychopathology along the life line are frequently used in of psychiatric education. Erikson's theory on the stages of life frequently form the basis for treatment modalities, even though research on the validity of Erikson's theories have been difficult to test. It is noteworthy that Erikson's theories are felt to be marginalized, even though he is one of the most esteemed psychoanalysts. Two elements are thought to explain this paradox (Wallerstein, 1998). Erikson contribution to the understanding of the ego and life-phase specific development was not easily integrated into the status quo of American psychoanalytic theory. Second, when American psychological services began to change in the early 1970s toward more intersubjective and interpersonal association, Erikson's ideas were considered somewhat staid, especially when evaluated in the language of the 1950s.

Like Freud before him, Erikson's theories surrounded the entirety of the human personality, and as such are difficult to evaluate given current methods of research or hypothetical validation. The life stages that Erikson describes "sound right" to researchers, but anecdotal appropriateness is not enough to validate a theory of personality put into such wide use. Douvan (1997) opined that the identity theory could not be used for girls in the same manner it was applied for boys. In their book the Adolescent Experience, it was postulated that the use of groups for the female adolescent allowed an alternative environment of identity, within which the female adolescent could find mutuality, intimacy and try out personality traits. Females, however, are not as likely to support the authority or the solidarity of the group as male adolescents will, preferring to seek a more dyadic relationship. While Erikson does identify the significance of the male vs. female relationship issue, Erikson's theory included the idea that developmental issues with women from childhood could be solved by marriage, both in issues of identity and intimacy.

Erikson reported the clinical observations on the human ego in his book Childhood and Society.

In this book, he states that the stages of psychosexual development which had been described by Freud were actually psychosocial stages of ego development, via which the individual would establish orientation of self and interaction with the social sphere (Marzi, Hautmann, Maestro, 2006). Erikson also states that the development of personality continued through the entire life cycle, rather than just during childhood as Freud has postulated. Finally, Erikson believed that each stage of development had both positive and negative elements.

Erikson's departure from the Freudian school was not readily accepted, even by those who were close to him and admired his work. In each of Erikson's developmental stages there is conflict with bipolar outcomes, as previously described. In Erikson's belief, each individual must experience both sides of the conflict in order to incorporate them into life and to synthesize these into a higher level of functioning. This differs from Freud's theory in that each stage has a name, rather than relation to pleasure from a body zone (oral, anal, etc.). According to Erikson, when the conflict is worked through in a constructive manner, this positive experience then becomes the more dominant part of the ego which then allows the individual to move toward further healthy and positive development in later stages. If the individual cannot move past the conflict or the conflict is not resolved in a positive manner, than the negative element of the stage will prevent or retard the individual's development. This negative element may be manifested as problems with self-esteem, adjustment, and in the most severe cases, may result in significant psychopathology.

Erikson has taken the basics of Freudian theory and expanded beyond the basics of psychosocial development placing emphasis on the social development and the development of the individual over the life cycle. His teachings moved away from man as a creature whose personal development was based upon his existence as a sexual being to that of the individual as a whole. Erikson was able to identify that personality differs from culture to culture, although it was his hypothesis that developmental tasks are similar to all cultures. Erikson took the initial psychological basis of Freud's work and was able to expand upon it, establishing a connection between childhood and adulthood (Leffert, 2007).