Every event in human history has been influenced by different personalities. Every event in the future will also be influenced by personality. Personality – alone – shapes our lives and makes us who we are. But what exactly is this abstract concept of personality and where does it come from? This is the question that scientists have been trying to answer for years. While there are no definitive answers yet, most people have their own personal explanations. Scientists have also presented many of their own theories, some of which have gained major popularity, and developed methods to measure personality. Personality means different things to everyone, and everyone has their own ideas of where it comes from. It’s hard to put such an abstract
…show more content…
One theory we discussed in class that especially resonated with me is the humanistic models. This theory is centralized around the idea of self-actualization. We are free and able to improve ourselves and personality and live to our fullest potential. They also believe that humans are innately good with pure motives. This theory is the closest one to my personal theory, because it states that people are born good and can change their personalities. In my experience, this proves to be accurate. A major strength of this theory is that it is hard to falsify. It would also explain major personality changes that people go through in their lives. Carl Rogers did a study and found that the discrepancy between people’s descriptions of their actual versus ideal selves is greater for emotionally unstable people than for emotionally healthy people. This difference decreased when individuals were given psychotherapy. This could be interpreted as – and was interpreted by Roger – as reflecting a lessening of conditions of worth. So this study showed that personality is something that can be changed and used to help people reach their full potential. On the other hand, there are weaknesses present in humanistic models of personality. Many studies have shown that humans may not be inherently good. In fact, there is strong evidence to suggest that aggression is part of humans’ genetic
One theory we discussed in class that especially resonated with me is the humanistic models. This theory is centralized around the idea of self-actualization. We are free and able to improve ourselves and personality and live to our fullest potential. They also believe that humans are innately good with pure motives. This theory is the closest one to my personal theory, because it states that people are born good and can change their personalities. In my experience, this proves to be accurate. A major strength of this theory is that it is hard to falsify. It would also explain major personality changes that people go through in their lives. Carl Rogers did a study and found that the discrepancy between people’s descriptions of their actual versus ideal selves is greater for emotionally unstable people than for emotionally healthy people. This difference decreased when individuals were given psychotherapy. This could be interpreted as – and was interpreted by Roger – as reflecting a lessening of conditions of worth. So this study showed that personality is something that can be changed and used to help people reach their full potential. On the other hand, there are weaknesses present in humanistic models of personality. Many studies have shown that humans may not be inherently good. In fact, there is strong evidence to suggest that aggression is part of humans’ genetic