Wednesday, February 19, 2020

Comparison of Sigmund Freud, Carl Jung, Alfred Adler, and William Essay

Comparison of Sigmund Freud, Carl Jung, Alfred Adler, and William James theoretical positions - Essay Example The paper tells that Sigmund Freud, Carl Jung, Alfred Adler, and William James are historical psychologists whose work formed the foundation of psychology. Their theorems and practice in the field has had a great effect to this day. Most of the practicing psychologists in the present times borrow a lot from their work. However, this does not mean that their success in the field did not face challenges. The greatest of all the challenges for each one of them came from fellow psychologist. In efforts to outdo each other in their approach on psychological issues, similarities as well as differences developed that one cannot ignore. The four being the pioneers of psychology were passionate on getting better perceptive in the field. Their approaches aimed at getting facts that could better explain the psychological sphere of the human beings. This search for a better explanation led to common agreements on concepts like mental processes. They all believed that there was a conscious and a subconscious part of the human mind. These two spheres formed the basis for mental processes and Freud and Jung had similar views on dreams as a function of the unconscious mind. Jung in his theorem on individuation argued that human beings needed to incorporate both the conscious and unconscious mind to get the meanings to the dreams. Jung, Alder, and Freud agreed on the power of motive in human behavior. Childhood experience took the centre stage in the reason behind the motive. Cultural orientation, inferiority, and sexuality are all concepts that one gets from childhood. Since community and religious values influence a bigger part in them, the assimilation process into the child’s life is crucial because it affects relationships and psychological functioning of the individual (Meissner, 1987). Though the four could have differed in their theoretical positions of religion and the influence it has on human behavior, they all agreed that it plays a role in human psychology ( Dumont, 2010). Their theorems emphasized on religious interpretation of situations, and understanding of the world at large (Stone, 2011). Right from childhood, a child’s religion affects the way the child perceives different situations all the way to adulthood (Meissner, 1987). Contrast on Sigmund Freud, Carl Jung, Alfred Adler, and William James theoretical positions Just as the four psychologists are distinct, their theoretical positions equally had distinctions. They all had distinct approaches on the applicability of the concepts they all agreed were true. An example is in believing on mental processes that lead to human behavior. Human behavior as per Freud’s view required insight into thoughts and feelings for action to take place (Stone, 2011). Though Jung and Freud agreed on the unconscious part of dreams, their approaches on interpretation differed. Jung believed that religious nature formed the basis for interpretation hence dividing the unconscious into ind ividual and collective (Stone, 2011). For him, personal experience and concerns as well as collective religious believe influenced the interpretation (Dumont, 2010). However, this was different with Freud since to him mental processes and behavior took the centre of the dreams. James on the other hand came up with a completely different approach. To him, mental processes were a matter of evolutionary process meaning it is a function of constant changes (Stone, 2011). In his theoretical position on mental processes was more natural selection rather than emotions. Jung, Alder, and Freud agreed on the power of motive. While Freud believed that sexuality influenced motive, Jung and Adler had a different position. Jung considered culture,

Tuesday, February 4, 2020

The Iranian Revolution Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 words

The Iranian Revolution - Research Paper Example By then Khomeini had had resisted Shah for extended periods, and as a result, exiled. Khomeini depicted himself as pursuing the footsteps of Ali, A Shia Imam, who had resisted the rule of a tyrant. As a result of his growing popularity, majority of the clergy, at home, sought to galvanize the crowds by presenting Islamic causes. At the heart of this opposition, was his pro-CIA stance, his earlier alliance in Operation Ajax, his pro-Israel stance, and the perceived move towards westernization, which was demonized. There are objective and subjective factors that contributed to the manifestation of the Iranian revolution and establishment of an ideology representing an amalgam of religious imagery, nationalism, and socialism, which can be widely described as a mode of third-world populism. The controversy detailed that the struggle against imperialism dictated by political discourse within the two decades preceding the revolution. It was apparent that two strategic mistakes were underta ken: namely, abandonment of the question of democracy, and underestimation of the influence wielded by the Islamic clergy. The paper explores some of the Shah's policies that may have played a part in driving the revolutionaries’ agenda forward during the Islamic revolution. ... In antagonizing a core constituent, that is the Shia religious leadership, Shah was unknowingly creating a rich ground for rebellion. A revolution is mainly explained through failure of state dwelling on either objective or subjective factors. With regard to structural factors, the government denigrates or alienates its social bases of support (either via reform or repression) while perception relates to a sense that state repression has loosened, hence an opportunity for action arises. While some historians (with 20-20 hindsight) asserted that the Islamic Revolution presented a reasonable product of Iran’s political evolution, an analysis of the past happenings is not satisfactory that the origin of the revolution has been explored fully. The Iranian revolution was distinct based on the surprise that it generated around the world. The revolution lacked numerous customary causes of revolution such as disgruntled military, peasant rebellion, defeat at war, and financial crisis; it generated immense changes at a fast speed, was immensely popular among the masses; and, substituted a modernizing autocratic monarchy with a theocracy grounded in the Guardianship of the Islamic Jurists (Amuzegar 9). Even at the height of street protests and demonstrations, neither Iranians nor its key allies such as the U.S officials perceived the possibility that Iran’s armed troops, which was highly modernized and the largest, would be incapable of dealing with the revolutionaries (Coughlin 4). A number of structural weaknesses are frequently cited as comprising a structure of political opportunities favourable to revolution. 1) The monarch’s social support was weakened by the reforms, whereby the