As indicated earlier. cardinal personality developmental theories that were developed after Freud’s psychoanalytic theory were either straight derived of it or aimed at knocking some of its major constituents. a ) Erik Erickson I ) Phases of development Barbara ( 2008 ) and Lieberman ( 2007 ) agree that the work of Eric Erickson was a direct derived function of Freudian considerations in human development. Eric Erickson theory of psychosocial development concurred with Freudian position that life. development and challenges develop in phases.
Psychosocial theory further builds the impression of the ‘ego’ which was mostly brought out by Freud as external world ingraining to one’s head. Particularly. the phases of Erickson psychosocial development strongly cohere with Sigmund’s work. Clara et Al ( 2008 ) explain that phase one of Erickson’s theory of psychosocial development is reflected through ‘trust versus mistrust’ mostly because the kid is wholly dependent on the health professionals.
Like Freud mentioned the pleasance a kid derives from unwritten stimulation. Erickson emphasized on the ensuing familiarity as a platform in impeling the kid to the following phases. Therefore. Erickson’s first phase borrows the construct of external environment in making adequate force for the following phase. In the 2nd phase of psychosocial development. Erickson every bit borrows from Freud’s ‘anal stage’ which is a critical preparation factor. Nelson-Jones ( 2005 ) explains that from a higher consideration. Erickson argued that larning to travel to the lavatory gave a strong sense of control and hence great independency.
As Freud clearly brought out the impression of the self-importance. Erickson’s 3rd phase of inaugural versus guilt emphasizes the averment of power and control which plays an of import function in the ulterior phases development. Erickson indicated that many kids seek to asseverate their high quality among others but with careful considerations of the bing reverberations ( Marrie and Janneke-van. 2007 ) . Notably. Erickson agrees with Freud that parents and caretakers must step in to ease the needful reassurance and hence avoid guilt to their immature 1s.
It is nevertheless deserving observing that Erickson strongly differed with Freud on how long development persists in an individual’s life. While Freud postulated that personality development merely lasted to the venereal phase when an person starts acquiring interested in sexual relationship with those of the opposite sex. Erickson postulated that developed progressed to the old age ( Busch. 2009 ) . However. bookmans appear to be strongly divided with one group sing the latter Erickson’s work to be based on unfavorable judgment of the Freud’s work and therefore its promotion ( Barbara. 2008 ) .
two ) The impression of arrested development One resilient impression of Freud’s work is the impression of sequence between different phases. Though they do non necessary cohere on clip and expected reverberations. both theoreticians agree that people at different phases must travel through them successfully or acquire fixated ( Hayes. 2004 ) . Fixation as Henry ( 2009 ) point out denotes the inability to come on since latter phases are wholly dependent on the old phases success. Erickson argued that all phases present an single with two contradicting results ; positive and negative.
For illustration between twelvemonth five to eleven. Erickson indicated that a successful person will go hardworking while the unsuccessful 1s will endure lower status ( Laura and Pam. 2007 ) . B ) Lacanian theory In his work. mostly referred to as the return of Freud. Emile Lacan’s constructs appear to be to the full defined by the former ( Adam. 2008 ) . Though Lacan strongly criticized the Freud’s separation of the witting ( self-importance ) and unconscious ( Idaho ) . he mostly employed the same constructs in his work.
Lacan argued that the witting and unconscious considerations of the head were non different. but operated from a extremely sophisticated and complex lineation compared to Freud’s consideration. Locan mirror as Brickman ( 2009 ) and Gottdiener ( 2008 ) decisions suggest is formative and a derived function of the experience an single gets during development. Therefore. the paradigm of the imagination to be effectual during the younger old ages as opposed to the old age which is more subjective fits the Freudian intension of development prevailing merely to the venereal phase.
