Kriza identiteta

7/30/2019 Kriza identiteta

1/19

Kriza identiteta

Ideja identiteta ne moze se misliti na stari nacin.

Derrida

Da bi se oblikovao identitet, bilo personalni ili kolektivni, potrebno je, prvo, da postojeuslovi za normalan opstanak i elementarnu socijalnu sigurnost; drugo, da postoje stabilni

socijalni, ekonomski i kulturni uslovi koji obezbedjuju pojedincima i grupama resavanje

protivrecnosti i redukovanje konflikata u drustvenoj sredini, sto omogucuje i resavanjeunutrasnjih konflikata i, trece, miran i postupan evolutivni razvoj koji obezbedjuje

uskladjivanje naraslih potreba sa promenjenim okolnostima i otklanja traume koje nastaju

usled brzih i nenadanih promena i drustvene uzburkanosti, koje destabilizuju situaciju i

izazivaju nesigurnost i otpor prema promenama.Na identitet se misli kada neko nije siguran gde pripada, kako da sebe smesti medju

varijetete stilova i uzora ponasanja; odnosno, identitet je naziv koji se daje bekstvu od

nesigurnosti (12: 19). Kriza identiteta je, dakle, povezana u najvecoj meri sanesigurnoscu, koja izaziva pometnju i zabrinutost. Iako se najcesce povezuje sa

disfunkcionalnoscu celine drustvenih institucija, kriza identiteta ima dublje korene u

previranjima u kulturi, usled cega dolazi do promene paradigmi i obrazaca drustvenekomunikacije i drustvenog ponasanja. Daniel Bell je povezivao krizu vrednosti (i

nastajanje anomije) sa brzim promenama modela u kulturi, kada dolazi do pojacanja

dezintegracionih faktora. Dramaticnost promena u savremenoj civilizaciji izrazio je

Theodor Roszak recima: Zivimo u vremenu gde je vec privatno iskustvo o otkrivanju iispunjenju personalnog identiteta postalo subverzivna politicka snaga velikih razmera.

Kriza identiteta se moze definisati bilo kao poremecaj sklada konstitutivnih elemenata

strukture licnosti ili drustvene grupe/zajednice, sto remeti kontinuitet smisla i jedinstvo,

kao osnovu zajednickog osecanja pripadanja jednoj celini, kada je grupni/kolektivniidentitet u pitanju, bilo kao neuskladjenost personalnih identiteta clanova grupe/zajednice

sa modelom identiteta koji postulira grupa, usled cega se javlja odsustvo osecanjapripadnosti i ukorenjenosti u sopstvenu kulturu. Drugim recima, svaki poremecaj

integracije, bilo personalne ili socijalne, dovodi u pitanje ranije ostvareni identitet, sto

moze biti samo manifestacija krize rasta, a ne i diskontinuitet iz kojeg se radjaju anomijai osecanje gubitka i krize identiteta. Analiza konkretnih promena u socio-kulturnoj sredini

i njihov uticaj na unutrasnju integraciju licnosti pokazace da li je u pitanju jedno ili

drugo, i da li uopste nastaje kriza identiteta.

Posmatrajuci savremenu civilizaciju, Mark Shapiro pise: Demokratija nosi sa sobomsaroliki prtljag. U svakoj zemlji ona podstice ekstreme, pokusaje da se traga za

jednostavnim resenjima. Ekstremizam je pojava koja nastaje iz nejednake raspodelebogatstva, pogresno usmerenog patriotizma, straha. Takva osecanja su pogodna zaiskoriscavanje od bilo koje strane u politickom spektru (127: 33). Pluralitet opcija koje

nudi moderno drustvo ima dvostruko dejstvo. S jedne strane, podstice proces razvoja i

personalnih i kolektivnih potencijala, jer omogucuje izbor i transformaciju onog stopostaje zastarelo i sto pocinje da se javlja kao kocnica. A s druge, izaziva pometnju,

neizvesnost, nesigurnost u pogledu izbora pravog cilja i vrednosti. Stoga se mora

kriticki preispitivati i sama savremena civilizacija kao jedan od izvora nastajuce krize


2/19

identiteta. Ali se time ne iscrpljuje odgovor na pitanje o izvorima i karakteristikama krize

identiteta. Neophodna je i analiza unutrasnjih razloga u samom bicu i strukturi licnosti, u

kojoj egzistencijalne protivrecnosti cesto nije moguce uskladiti.

Dva aspekta krize identiteta

Mozemo govoriti o dva osnovna izvora krize identiteta: jedan je civilizacijski i socio-kulturni, a drugi kriza kao ontoloska nesigurnost. U prvom slucaju kriza nastaje kao

rezultat promena i poremecaja u sirim okvirima odredjene civilizacije i kulture, a u

drugom proizlazi iz egzistencijalnih protivrecnosti koje su sastavni deo ljudske prirodesvake individue, ali i kao rezultat reflektovanja civilizacijskih/kulturnih promena na

personalnu situaciju. Stoga se ova dva izvora moraju posmatrati u njihovoj uzajamnoj

vezi i u konkretnim situacijama analizirati i odredjivati tezinu jednog ili drugog.Civilizacijski/kulturni uslovi cine preduslov formiranja identiteta, buduci da je, prema

Samuelu Hanntingtonu, globalni okvir identifikacije civilizacijski (hindu, kineska,

zapadnoevropska, latinoamericka i druge civilizacije), a zatim kulturni (kultura

odredjenih naroda). U nauci je do sada uglavnom proucavan civilizacijski okvir koji cinezapadnoevropska drustva, ciji etos podrazumeva evrocentrizam, koji pretpostavlja da je

evro-americki obrazac zivota pozeljan model za sve kulture i da je njegov zivotni stil

najprikladniji potrebama coveka. Sa sve uocljivijim protivrecnostima savremene tehnickecivilizacije kako se naziva evro-americki obrazac postaje jasno da se pozeljnost ne

moze vise tako jednostrano odredjivati i da se nanovo mora razmotriti pitanje kada su

razlicite kulture i civilizacije podjednako vredne. Prema misljenju nekih teoreticarakulture, svaka kultura koja traje dosta dug vremenski period zadovoljava neke osnovne

teznje odredjenih naroda i vredna je po sebi. Ako uzmemo u obzir hiljadugodisnje

trajanje kineske i indijske civilizacije i odolevanje pritisku tehnicke civilizacije od straneafrickih kultura, nauka bi morala da se ozbiljnije pozabavi problemom kako stvaranja

tako i pojavom krize identiteta u tim civilizacijskim modelima. Usled nedostatka takvihanaliza, ovde o tome nije moguce govoriti, te se moramo zadrzati prvenstveno na

savremenoj zapadnoevropskoj (americkoj) civilizaciji.Ukoliko je rec o civilizacijskom okviru koji oblikuje identitet, mora se, pre svega, imati u

vidu etos koji odredjena civilizacija izgradjuje kao duh vremena, ili kao kolektivnu

filozofiju zivota. U tom smislu, savremena tehnicka civilizacija na kraju XX veka,novim sistemom telekomunikacija i kompjuterskih informacija, nudi nove alternative za

prevazilazenje razlika u kulturi i jeziku (130: 174). Ili, kao sto kaze Margaret Archer,

informativno drustvo rekonceptualizuje sta znaci biti covek, buduci da je cela kulturapotcinjena informativnoj tehnologiji, te instrumentalna racionalnost postaje osnovna i

vlada imperijalizam instrumentalnog razuma (4: 109). Archerova govori o razlicitim

koncepcijama coveka: industrijski covek, modernisticki covek, postmodernistickicovek (4: 179). U informativnom drustvu vrednosti informacija, a ne materijalnevrednosti, pokrecu drustvo; razvoj se shvata visim nego materijalni rast, jer zahteva

promenu stavova, kulturnu adaptaciju, novo obrazovanje radne snage i promenjenu

politicku strukturu. Drugim recima, briga za kvalitet zivota zamenjuje jednostranu teznjuza ekonomskim ciljevima (31: 23). Globalna kultura, koju Smith naziva kulturni

imperijalizam, javlja se kao pozitivna alternativa nacionalnoj kulturi (130: 178) i stoga

se moderna koncepcija o kulturnom identitetu izrazava kroz multikulturalizam u smislu


3/19

medjuzavisnosti kultura Evrope (107: 385).

Kada nastaje kriza kulturnog identiteta? Najpre, onda kada postojeci kulturni obrasci

dodju u otvoren sukob i izazovu nedoumice u pogledu pozeljnih paradigmi (na primer,kada se sukob aktualizuje na religioznom planu sukob hriscanskog i muslimanskog

obrasca, ili katolickog i pravoslavnog). Zatim, kada nastane vakuum kulturnih vrednosti i

poremecaj u obrascima kulture, koji stvara konfuziju u pogledu poruka i propisanihstandarda i normi ponasanja. Najzad, onda kada drzavno-politicka zajednica nametne

odredjene obrasce kulture i odgovarajuce propise kao jedini opstevazeci referentni okvir i

iskljuci svaku mogucnost izbora (sto je karakteristicno za totalitarne rezime). Bilo da jerec o jednom nametnutom obrascu kulture, sa iskljucenjem alternativa, ili o sukobu

kulturnih obrazaca u kojem jedan tezi da dominira, dovodeci u pitanje pluralitet kulturnih

formi, kolektivni identitet se spolja namece i iskljucuje izbor kao samoopredeljenje koje

je conditio sine qua non demokratske integracije kako pojedinaca tako i drustvenih grupau sire zajednice.

Krizi kolektivnog identiteta najvise doprinosi poremecaj u sistemima vrednosti i

vrednosnim orijentacijama, odnosno takva partikularizacija i relativizacija vrednosti (po

nacionalnom/etnickom, religioznom ili nekom drugom osnovu) koja onemogucuje razvojosecanja zajednistva i pripadanja sirem kolektivitetu; zatim, odbacivanje starih simbola

ili njihova fragmentacija, koja onemogucuje sporazumevanje u zajednici kao celini, ilistvara konfuziju buduci da se fragmentarno nudi kao celina (kada se umesto zajednickih

simbola odredjene politicke zajednice, kao sto su, na primer, simboli republike ili

monarhije, nametnu simboli odredjene etnicke ili religiozne zajednice; ili kada senametnu jezicki dijalekti, odnosno kada se vestacki stvaraju novi jezici s ciljem

nacionalne diferencijacije).

Sam proces modernizacije je postavio neke probleme koje tek treba resavati, iako se vec

nalazimo u postmodernistickom dobu. Ako se za modernizaciju vezuju tri trenda, premarecima Arnasona, to su: globalizacija, pluralizacija i relativizacija (5: 219), postavlja se

pitanje: kako usaglasiti kristalizaciju celokupnog sveta kao jednog mesta (proces

globalizacije) sa diskrepancijom i napetoscu izmedju medjusobno zavisnih a razlicitihentiteta (pluralnost), s razlikovanjem tradicije i modernosti, narocito sa porastom vaznosti

nacije koja u sebi obuhvata moderno i premoderno? Krajem naseg veka postala je

uocljiva napetost izmedju globalizacije i relativizacije u vidu dva, reklo bi se, nespojivatrenda ka integraciji i ka separaciji nacija-drzava. Ovo preti zaostravanjem sukoba i

izazivanjem novih ratova. Uprkos mnogim procesima unifikacije u modernom

informativnom drustvu, pojam zajednickog se ponovo suzava na manje celine.

Umesto globalnog, u prvi plan se istice svojevrsnost partikularnih grupa, tezeci da u njihzatvori svet zivota kroz suprotstavljanje drugom razlicitom. U tome je paradoks

procesa modernizacije, koji je afirmisao, pre svega, diferencijaciju i pluralizaciju,

zanemarivsi da u modernom svetu postoje sredstva za uspesno prevazilazenjepartikularizma. Pitanje je samo da li to nuzno vodi i gusenju osobenog identiteta manjih

zajednica.

Podsetimo se, jos jednom, dilema modernog coveka, o kojima je pisao Giddens:unifikacija naspram fragmentacije, bespomocnost prema dostignucima, autoritet nasuprot

neizvesnosti, personalizacija nasuprot postvarenju (46: 189200). Dodajmo tome da se

sve vise gubi poverenje u vazece drustvene vrednosti, a dominantni socijalni model

forsira dezangazovanje i pasivnost. Stoga Mucchielli konstatuje da nasa kultura fabrikuje


4/19

neuravnotezene licnosti, koje se plase slobode (103: 102, 104) jer su devalorizovani

progres i univerzalizam, kao i racionalizam. Za razliku od tradicionalnog drustva, u

kojem ljudi nisu znali za krizu identiteta, jer je postojalo osecanje sigurnosti koje jeproizlazilo iz nedvosmislenog mesta u svetu i socijalnoj strukturi u modernom drustvu

javlja se stalno sve vise potreba i zahteva, sve vise individualizma, ali i frustracije (103:

98). Iz tih razloga, nije cudno vracanje tradiciji jer dominantni civilizacijski identitet visene ispunjava sopstvene zahteve i ljudi se, u potrazi za alternativnim identitetom, okrecu

tradiciji koja je bila potisnuta modernoscu, trazeci u njoj, kao sto kaze Friedman,

primordijalnu lojalnost. Tako se restaurira raniji kulturni identitet kao pokazateljopadanja modernosti (37: 86, 100). Jedan autor upozorava na to da postoji koegzistencija

moderne tehnologije i starih drustvenih formi (134: 45). Ovaj momenat se cesto

zanemaruje, mada ukazuje na to da se moderni covek brani od pritisaka savremene

civilizacije ocuvanjem ranijih kulturnih identiteta u malim, intimnim zajednicama, kaosto su porodica i druge male grupe.

Buduci da moderna civilizacija podstice diferencijaciju sveta zivota, Habermas je

upozoravao da u uslovima diferencijacije afilijacija moze biti antagonisticka i

ambivalentna, solidarnost samo situaciona i strateska, a zajednica se cesto postize krozkontingenciju socijalnih interesa i politickih zahteva. Tada socijalna dezintegracija

uslovljava i personalnu dezintegraciju. Kriza civilizacije moze da vodi u fetisizam kadaja postaje primarno zavisno od spoljasnjih zivotnih sila. Zygmunt Bauman konstatuje

da su i licnosti i stvari izgubile svoju solidnost, definitivnost i kontinuitet (12: 23).

Postmodernizam jos vise potencira diferencijaciju i fragmentaciju lansirajuci ideju oneprestano promenljivom ja. Derrida kaze da se ideja identiteta ne moze vise misliti na

stari nacin.

Hall zastupa diskurzivni pristup koji odredjuje identifikaciju kao proces koji se nikada

ne upotpunjuje, jer se ne moze dostici totalitet, te smatra da pojam identiteta ne sugerirastabilno jezgro ja. Taj pristup polazi od pretpostavke da su identiteti u modernim

vremenima fragmentizovani i razbijeni i da nisu nikad singularni, vec multiplicirani,

buduci da se konstruisu preko razlicitih i mesajucih ili antagonistickih diskursa i praksi.Identitet je stalno destabilizovan, buduci da se dogadja fragmentacija vremena u epizode

koje su odsecene i od proslosti i od buducnosti (58: 28).

Prema Baumanu, postmoderni problem identiteta je primarno u tome kako izbecifiksaciju i odrzati opciju otvorenom u teznji da se odbije vezivanje za jedan poziv, jedan

stil, itd. Strategija postmodernog zivota nije izgradjivanje identiteta, vec izbegavanje

fiksacije (12: 18, 24). Dok je krilatica modernosti bila kreacija, kaze Bauman, krilatica

post-modernizma je reciklaza, a kriterijum moralnosti se zamenjuje kriterijumomukusa (12: 33). To upucuje na krajnju relativizaciju kriterijuma, kojima se porice svako

cvrsto uporiste. A covek bez oslonca na izvesne opste vrednosti i kriterijume ne moze da

zivi, pogotovo da se snadje u modernom diversifikovanom i vrlo slozenom svetu. Dakle,post-moderna civilizacija suocava coveka sa novim problemima i dilemama. S jedne

strane, ona coveka oslobadja krute determinisanosti jednim mestom, ciljem, vrednoscu,

koje ga vezuju i ogranicavaju permanentni razvojni proces, podsticuci otkrivanje irazvijanje novih potencijala i stalno prevazilazenje dostignutog nivoa identifikacije i

formiranog identiteta, sto je svakako pozitivno u odnosu na ogranicenost pojma identiteta

u tradicionalnoj vizuri. Ali, s druge strane, stalna promenljivost i neprestani izazovi

novog i jos nedovoljno pojmljenog, permanentno destabilizovanje vec postojeceg


5/19

identiteta i poricanje prihvacenih vrednosti i ciljeva, da bi se izbegla fiksacija, proizvodi

pometnju i nesigurnost. A ljudima je potrebna izvesna stabilnost i postupnost promene da

bi je mogli razumeti i prihvatiti. U sukobu izmedju potrebe za sigurnoscu i izvesnomstabilnoscu i bekstva od fiksacije, postmoderni covek upada u ambis vrednosne i moralne

relativizacije, koja mu potkopava tacku oslonca i izaziva beznadje i nesposobnost

snalazenja u pluralitetu vrednosno oslobodjenih opcija.Postmodernisticki radikali savetuju, pise Mehennan (93: 21), da se odbace totalizujuce

zamisli (buduci da uvek postoje alternativne socijalne zamisli) kao vodic za

progresivnu politiku. Medjutim, pita se isti autor, kako bilo koja opsta analiza moze danastane iz tako jako pragmaticne osnove? Problem je, nastavlja on, gde povuci crtu, jer

treba izbeci kako nihilizam i ultrarelativizam, tako i fundamentalizam (93: 9394).

Upravo to je osnovni problem. Da se ne dobije sizofrena licnost kao rezultat, ukoliko se

ne pronadje ravnoteza izmedju relativizacije i univerzalizacije (u smislu zadovoljavanjaizvesnih sustinskih potreba ljudske prirode). Covek ne moze da zivi kao rascepljena

licnost, stalno u naponu nastajanja, bez dostignutog rezultata postojanja, koji cini osnovu

njegove egzistencije i identiteta kao odredjenog subjekta.

Sta, dakle, znaci Derridina poruka da se identitet ne misli na stari nacin? To znaci, uprvom redu, da se proces identifikacije i nastajanje identiteta shvate kao kontinuum, u

kojem se, usled stalnog procesa prilagodjavanja, modifikacije i rasta, neprestano dostizunovi krugovi identiteta, koji su nabijeni razlikama i otvorenim mogucnostima za dalji

proces. Drugim recima, treba odustati od kategorickih i apsolutnih pojmova, sto je i ranije

naglaseno (narocito povezujuci pojam identiteta i akcije-prakse, koja ukljucuje iprakticnu i diskurzivnu aktivnost). To, medjutim, ne znaci da treba odustati od upotrebe

pojma identiteta, vec samo da treba stalno imati u vidu njegovu relacionu i relativnu

prirodu, koja se moze objasniti samo u datom istorijskom, civilizacijskom i kulturnom

kontekstu (diskursu).U tom smislu, kaze Giddens, moderne institucije stimulisu ideju ljudske emancipacije od

dogmatskih imperativa tradicije i religije (46: 210). Ako se emancipacija tako shvati, ona

ne protivreci postmodernom pluralizmu, jer je emancipatorska politika politika ljudskihsansi. A to podrazumeva oslobadjanje od fiksacija koje postavljaju granice svetu zivota

i ljudskom razvoju, mada se iz recnika post-modernizma ti pojmovi izbacuju.

Ali, za razliku od postmoderne koncepcije (koja ceo proces oslobadjanja svodi narazbijanje dogmi, ne uzimajuci u kriticku analizu i sam civilizacijski kontekst), potrebno

je antidogmatski pristup u sferi diskursa povezati sa razbijanjem dogmatizovane

predstave o praksama savremene civilizacije da bi se shvatili koreni i priroda krize

identiteta danasnjeg coveka.U prethodnoj analizi nastojala sam da utvrdim karakteristicne elemente danasnje

zapadnoevropske/americke civilizacije koji generisu krizu identiteta, ne zaboravljajuci da

je to samo jedna strana ovog slozenog procesa. Drugu stranu predstavlja takozvanaontoloska nesigurnost, iz koje proizlazi unutarnja dinamika licnosti, koja u svom

rezultatu moze dovesti do krize identiteta.

Ontoloska nesigurnost proizlazi iz unutrasnjih poremecaja ili promena u samoj licnostikao rezultat neusaglasenih elemenata u strukturi licnosti. Mucchielli je povezuje sa

poremecajem kognitivne sinteze celine materijalnih, subjektivnih i socijalnih referenci i

procesa integracije, sto izaziva afektivni sok i frustraciju kao izvor krize identiteta. To

je stanje kada se u samom sebi sve vidi kao protivrecno i kada se ne moze pronaci


6/19

sigurnost, te se gubi osecanje identiteta, koherencije i autonomije (103: 89, 102).

Prema Giddensu, ontolosku nesigurnost karakterise: 1. nedostatak konzistentnog osecanja

bioloskog kontinuiteta; 2. opsesivna preokupacija mogucim rizicima za egzistenciju iparaliza akcije, kao nemogucnost da se blokiraju opasnosti i 3. nesposobnost da se razvije

poverenje u samoidentitet (46: 5354). Osecanje personalne nemoci time izazvano moze

da dovede do mentaliteta prezivljavanja, tj. do osecanja da je osoba lisena sposobnostii mogucnosti da upravlja zastrasujucim serijama personalne i drustvene sredine (46: 193).

Licnost je tada suocena sa personalnim besmislom.

Ponovo se vracaju potisnuta egzistencijalna pitanja. Ali u modernoj logici, pise Diamond,pojmovi zivot-smrt, individua-zajednica, mi-oni su kategorije koje se iskljucuju, za

razliku od primitivnih naroda gde su te opozicije bile inkluzivne kategorije (30: 313

314). Individua je opsednuta suprotnostima i ne vidi kontinuitet, zato rastu napetosti koje

se pretvaraju u represiju, kada autoritativni drugi stalno zabranjuje ostvarenje impulsa(43: 90) i pojedinac gubi spontanost i inicijativu, sve rigidnije reagujuci na date opozicije.

Iz toga se radjaju ekstremne pozicije (na primer, individualizam nasuprot kolektivizmu i

obrnuto), koje dalje remete ravnotezu personalnih dimenzija. Usled toga se javlja

nesigurnost i beznadje.Buduci da je licnost vrlo slozena celina, koja se sastoji kako iz formiranih potreba tako i

iz nade da se ostvari nesto vise, kako iz dispozicija koje se ostvaruju kao karakterne crtetako i iz mogucnosti da se stvore nove potencije integritet licnosti je relativna

kategorija, jer je to proces izmedju strukturiranih potreba i karakteristika i njihove

dekonstrukcije u suocavanju sa novim izazovima. Te egzistencijalne protivrecnosti delujukao dinamicki faktor, koji moze da posreduje u razvoju identiteta individue, ali i da

ugrozi oblikovanje identiteta kada izazove konfuziju i paralise sposobnost individue da

upravlja tim procesima. Ovo je narocito podstaknuto destabilizujucim spoljnim

ciniocima. Zato periodi socijalne i civilizacijske krize idu ruku pod ruku sa ontoloskomnesigurnoscu, usled koje dolazi do gubitka osecanja identiteta. Individua se tada

prvenstveno orijentise na sigurnost, na fiksaciju (za autoritarnog vodju, za naciju i sl.),

redukujuci slozenost personalne strukture na borbu za prezivljavanje i zadovoljavanjeelementarnih potreba, ukidajuci sve protivrecnosti, koje su motor razvitka, jer ih shvata

kao opasnost.

Kriza identiteta nastala iz ontoloske nesigurnosti manifestuje se u gubitku oslonca usamom sebi i u trazenju potpore u nekom autoritetu, u prihvatanju heteronomnog obrasca

ponasanja, u zaostravanju suprotnosti i konflikata, u pojednostavljenoj (i nerealnoj) slici

o sebi i svetu. Ontoloski nesigurna osoba nije u stanju da adekvatno percipira ni sebe ni

svet oko sebe. Ona je psiholoski, socijalno i moralno nezrela. Za pojedinca se moze recida je ontoloski nesigurna osoba, koja je izgubila osecanje identiteta, nesposobna da

upravlja kako vlastitim tako i spoljnim konfliktima; tada kod nje svaka konfliktna

situacija izaziva sok i osecanje izgubljenosti. Takva osoba nije svesna svoga sopstvenogpotencijala i nije u stanju da samostalno rukovodi svojim zivotnim procesima.

Analiza krize identiteta mora, dakle, da poveze oba izvora krize identiteta

civilizacijski/kulturni i personalni da bi se razumeli slozeni uticaji koji mogu izazvatikrizu. Ukoliko cinioci iz oba izvora nisu povezani, ako imamo posla sa zrelim i stabilnim

licnostima (sto ne znaci nepodloznim promenama i razvoju), civilizacijska kriza ih ne

mora ugroziti i poremetiti, jer ce biti u stanju da izadju na kraj sa njenim

protivrecnostima. Ali, ako se kriza civilizacije i kulture susretne sa postojanjem ontoloske


7/19

nesigurnosti, ona ce proizvesti i personalnu krizu identiteta. Znaci, treba razlikovati krizu

rasta i krizu raspada; u prvom slucaju rec je o modifikaciji identiteta, a u drugom o

gubljenju osecanja identiteta i o osecanju besmisla.Da li ce u savremenoj zapadnoevropskoj/americkoj civilizaciji prevladavati jedno ili

drugo zavisice od toga u kojoj meri ce ljudi u postmodernom drustvu biti u stanju da se

produktivno suoce sa postojecim protivrecnostima i da prevladaju ultrarelativizam kojije u trendu a koji paralise pozitivnu energiju i socijalnu akciju za ostvarivanje potrebnih

civilizacijskih i socio-strukturalnih promena. Sadasnja struktura novog svetskog

poretka ne obecava da ce se lako pronaci ravnoteza izmedju procesa globalizacije iregionalizacije/separacije, narocito u odnosu izmedju jedne supersile i drugih velikih

naroda, s jedne strane, i malih i nerazvijenih naroda, s druge.

Erik Erikson, the psychologist who coined the term identity crisis, believes that the

identity crisis is the most important conflict human beings encounter when they go

through eight developmental stagesin life.

Description

The identityis "a subjective sense as well as an observable quality of personal sameness

and continuity, paired with some belief in the sameness and continuity of some sharedworld image. As a quality of unself-conscious living, this can be gloriously obvious in a

young person who has found himself as he has found his communality. In him we see

emerge a unique unification of what is irreversibly given--that is, body type andtemperament, giftedness and vulnerability, infantile models and acquired ideals--with the

open choices provided in available roles, occupational possibilities, values offered,

mentors met, friendships made, and first sexual encounters." (Erikson, 1970.)

According to Erikson's stages, the onset of the identity crisis is in the teenage years, andonly individuals who succeed in resolving the crisis will be ready to face future

challenges in life. But the identity crisis may well be recurring, as the changing world

demands us to constantly redefine ourselves. Erikson suggested that people experience anidentity crisis when they lose "a sense of personal sameness and historical continuity".

Given today's rapid development in technology, global economy, dynamics in local and

world politics, identity crises are expected to be more common now than 30 years ago,when Erikson formed his theory.

Seven areas

If you find yourself (again) in an identity crisis, you can look at seven areas of difficulty

in which to work towards a resolution.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erik_Eriksonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erikson's_stages_of_psychosocial_developmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erikson's_stages_of_psychosocial_developmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Identityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Identityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teenagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erik_Eriksonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erikson's_stages_of_psychosocial_developmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Identityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teenage


8/19

Time Perspective

Can you distinguish immediate gratification from long-term goals? Have you

learnt to balance between jumping at opportunities as soon as they are presentedto you and working steadily and patiently towards your long-term goal?

Self-Certainty

Do you feel consistent in your self-image and the image you present to others?Role Experimentation

Have you tried different roles in search of the one that feels right to you?

Anticipation of AchievementDo you believe that you will be successful in what you choose to do -- whether

your role is at the work front or home front?

Sexual Identity

Do you feel comfortable being a male or a female, and dealing with others assuch?

Leadership polarization

Are you able to become both a leader and a follower, whichever is called for in a

given situation?Ideological

Have you found a set of basic social, philosophical, or religious values that youroutlook on life can be based upon?

An existential crisis is a state of panic or feeling of intense psychological discomfort

about questions of existence. It is more common in cultures where basic survival needshave been overcome.

Description

An existential crisis can result from:

A sense of being alone and isolated,

The realization of one's own mortality, or the realization that there is no afterlife;

or

A realization that one's life has no destined, supernatural, or in some cases

external purpose or meaning.

It is quite similar to the sociological concept ofanomie. It has also been likened to amid-

life crisis. The implication of an existentialcrisis is that the crisis itself stems from somesort of existential realization or understanding.

In non-existentialbelief systems the essence of what it means to be human is largely held

to have been predefined before birth, usually by some sort ofsupernatural beingor group

of beings. A certain lack of faith in such belief systems is typically a prerequisite for an
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afterlifehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anomiehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anomiehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mid-life_crisishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mid-life_crisishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mid-life_crisishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mid-life_crisishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existentialhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existentialhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belief_systemshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supernatural_beinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supernatural_beinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:AtivanAd.jpghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afterlifehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anomiehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mid-life_crisishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mid-life_crisishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existentialhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belief_systemshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supernatural_being


9/19

existential crisis. Basically, an existential crisis is the sudden awareness of not knowing

what one's life is all about and or the sudden awareness of one's inevitable impending

personal doom.

Cognitive dissonance results when a person is faced with the paradox of believing that

their life is important on the one hand while at the same time perceiving that humanexistence itself is without meaning or purpose. It is the resolution of this paradox which

dissolves the crisis. A typical solution to resolving the paradox is a belief in some sort ofa supernatural explanation through religion; others hold that one can define for ones self

what ones own meaning and purpose is on this planet such as the single realization that

life as it is known is one way it should be.

Existential crises are sometimes triggered by a significant event or change in a person's

life. Usually the event in some way makes the person reflect on his or her own mortality,

revealing the repression. Typical examples of such events are the death of a loved one, a

life-threatening experience, one's children moving away from home, reaching a certain

age, or a length of time in solitary confinement.

Crisis handling

There are more ways and variations on how to handle an existential crisis, however. One

may decide, for instance, that thought is pointless and existential truth or security cannot

be obtained through it. Others may decide that it is not important to know what happensor how things work, all that is important is thepresent. Others may decide that being

happy is the pursuit of life and strive to increase their knowledge base to accomplish this.

What is an Identity Crisis?

Are you unsure of your role in life? Do you feel like you don't know the 'real you'?If you answer yes to the previous questions, you may be experiencing an identitycrisis. Theorist Erik Erikson coined the term identity crisis and believed that it wasone of the most important conflicts people face in development.

According to Erikson, an identity crisis is a time of intensive analysis andexploration of different ways of looking at oneself. Erikson's interest in identity

began in childhood. Raised Jewish, Erikson appeared very Scandinavian, andfelt that he was an outsider of both groups. His later studies of cultural life amongthe Yurok of northern California and the Sioux of South Dakota helped formalizeErikson's ideas about identity development and identity crisis.

Erikson described identity as "a subjective sense as well as an observable qualityof personal sameness and continuity, paired with some belief in the samenessand continuity of some shared world image. As a quality of unself-conscious
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solitary_confinementhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specious_presenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solitary_confinementhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specious_present


10/19

living, this can be gloriously obvious in a young person who has found himself ashe has found his communality. In him we see emerge a unique unification ofwhat is irreversibly given--that is, body type and temperament, giftedness andvulnerability, infantile models and acquired ideals--with the open choicesprovided in available roles, occupational possibilities, values offered, mentors

met, friendships made, and first sexual encounters." (Erikson, 1970.)

Research on Identity

In Erik Erikson's stages of psychosocial development, the emergence of anidentity crisis occurs during the teenage years in which people struggle betweenfeelings of identity versus role confusion. Researcher James Maria (1966, 1976,1980) has expanded upon Erikson's initial theory. According to Marcia and hiscolleagues, the balance between identity and confusion lies in making acommitmentto an identity. Marcia also developed an interview method tomeasure identity as well as four different identity statuses. This methods looks at

three different areas of functioning: occupational role, beliefs and values, andsexuality.

Identity Statuses

Identity achievement occurs when an individual has gone through an

exploration of different identities and made a commitment to one. Moratorium is the status of a person who is actively involved in exploring

different identities, but has not made a commitment. Foreclosure status is when a person has made a commitment without

attempting identity exploration.

Identity diffusion occurs when there is neither an identity crisis orcommitment.

Researchers have found that those who have made a strong commitment to anidentity tend to be happier and healthier than those who have not. Those with astatus of identity diffusion tend to feel out of place in the world and don't pursue asense of identity.

In today's rapidly changing world, identity crises are more common today than inErikson's day. Exploring different aspects of yourself in the different areas of life,including your role at work, within the family, and in romantic relationships, can

help strengthen your personal identity.

Psychosocial development as articulated by Erik Erikson describes eight developmental

stagesthrough which a healthily developing human should pass from infancyto lateadulthood. In each stage the person confronts, and hopefully masters, new challenges.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erik_Eriksonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Developmental_stagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Developmental_stagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Developmental_stagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adulthoodhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erik_Eriksonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Developmental_stagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Developmental_stagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adulthood


11/19

Each stage builds on the successful completion of earlier stages. The challenges of stages

not successfully completed may be expected to reappear as problems in the future.

Description

Erik Erikson developed the theory in the1950sas an improvement onSigmund Freud'spsychosexual stages. Erikson accepted many of Freud's theories (including the id, ego,

and superego, and Freud's infantile sexuality represented inpsychosexual development),

but rejected Freud's attempt to describe personality solely on the basis of sexuality. Also,Erikson criticized Freud for his concept of originology[1]. This states that all mental

illness can be traced to early experiences in childhood. According to Erikson, experience

in early childhood is important, but the individual also develops within a social context.[2]

Erikson believed that childhood is very important in personality development and, unlike

Freud, felt that personality continued to develop beyond five years of age. In his most

influential work, Childhood and Society (1950), he divided the human life cycle intoeight psychosocial stages of development.

Human personality, in principle, develops according to steps predetermined in

the growing person's readiness to be driven toward, to be aware of, and to

interact with a widening social radius.

Erik Erikson

NoteErikson first identified seven stages of development during his lifetime. His wife,

Joan, later added the last stage after his death.

The Stages

Infancy (Birth -18 months)

Psychosocial Crisis: Trust vs. Mistrust

Developing trust is the first task of the ego, and it is never complete. The child will let itsmother out of sight without anxiety and rage because she has become an inner certainty

as well as an outer predictability. The balance of trust with mistrust depends largely on

the quality of the maternal relationship.

Main question asked: Is my environment trustworthy or not?

Central Task: Receiving care

Positive Outcome: Trust in people and the environment

Ego Quality: Hope

Definition: Enduring belief that one can attain ones deep and essential wishes

Developmental Task: Social attachment; Maturation of sensory, perceptual, and

motor functions; Primitive causality.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erik_Eriksonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1950shttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1950shttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1950shttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sigmund_Freudhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sigmund_Freudhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychosexual_stageshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superegohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychosexual_developmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erikson's_stages_of_psychosocial_development#_note-0%23_note-0http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erikson's_stages_of_psychosocial_development#_note-1%23_note-1http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Childhood_and_Society&action=edithttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1950http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erik_Eriksonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1950shttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sigmund_Freudhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychosexual_stageshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superegohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychosexual_developmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erikson's_stages_of_psychosocial_development#_note-0%23_note-0http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erikson's_stages_of_psychosocial_development#_note-1%23_note-1http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Childhood_and_Society&action=edithttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1950


12/19

Significant Relations: Maternalparent

Erikson proposed that the concept of trust versus mistrust is present throughout an

individuals entire life. Therefore if the concept is not addressed, taught and handledproperly during infancy (when it is first introduced), an individual may be negatively

affected and never fully immerse themselves in the world. For example, a person mayhide themselves from the outside world and be unable to form healthy and long-lastingrelationships with others, or even themselves. If an individual does not learn to trust

themselves, others and the world they may lose the virtue of hope, which is directly

linked to this concept. If a person loses their belief in hope they will struggle with

overcoming hard times and failures in their lives, and may never fully recover from them.This would prevent them from learning and maturing into a fully-developed person if the

concept of trust versus mistrust was improperly learned, understood and used in all

aspects of their lives.

Main question asked: Where am I?

[edit] Toddler (1 1/2 - 3 Years)

Psychosocial Crisis: Autonomy vs. Shame & doubt

If denied independence, the child will turn against his/her urges to manipulate anddiscriminate. Shame develops with the child's self-consciousness. Doubt has to do with

having a front and back -- a "behind" subject to its own rules. Left over doubt may

become paranoia. The sense of autonomy fostered in the child and modified as life

progresses serves the preservation in economic and political life of a sense of justice.

Main question asked: Do I need help from others or not?

[edit] Play Age (3-6 Years)

Psychosocial Crisis: Initiative vs. Guilt

Initiative adds to autonomy the quality of undertaking, planning, and attacking a task for

the sake of being active and on the move. The child is learning to master the world

around him or her, learning basic skills and principles of physics; things fall to the

ground, not up; round things roll, how to zip and tie, count and speak with ease. At thisstage the child wants to begin and complete his or her own actions for a purpose. Guilt is

a new emotion and is confusing to the child; he or she may feel guilty over things whichare not logically guilt producing, and he or she will feel guilt when his or her initiativedoes not produce the desired results.

Main question asked: How moral am I?

The development of courage and independence are what set preschoolers, ages three to

six years of age, apart from other age groups when Erik Erikson discussed his third
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Psychosocial_development&action=edit&section=4http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Psychosocial_development&action=edit&section=5http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Psychosocial_development&action=edit&section=4http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Psychosocial_development&action=edit&section=5


13/19

psychosocial stage. Young children in this category, ranging between three to six years of

age, face the challenge of initiative versus guilt (Boer, 1997). As described in Bee and

Boyd (2004), the child during this stage faces the complexities of planning anddeveloping a sense of judgment. During this stage, the child learns to take initiative and

prepare him or herself towards roles of leadership and goal achievement. Activities

sought out by a child in this stage may include risk-taking behaviors, such as crossing astreet on his or her own or riding a bike without a helmet; both examples involving self-

limits. The child defines his or her own boundaries when taking initiative in crossing a

street or riding a bike with no helmet, such as deciding to cross a street without lookingboth ways or choosing to ride a bike at his or her own pace with no helmet. Within

instances requiring initiative, such as those previously mentioned, the child may also

develop negative behaviors. These behaviors are a result of the child developing a sense

of frustration for not being able to achieve his or her goal as planned and may engage inbehaviors that seem aggressive, ruthless, and overly assertive to parents; aggressive

behaviors, such as throwing objects, hitting, or yelling, are examples of observable

behaviors during this stage. With aggressive behaviors as a result of frustration, the child

may progress towards developing a sense of guilt for not establishing initiative in thedecisions he or she makes and/or not being able to follow through with a set goal. When

guilt develops, the child becomes more assertive, aggressive, inhibited, and overlydependent. These characteristics can be seen as far from the norm since the child engages

in behaviors that do not show a challenge and/or are comfortable for the child; thus, the

child does not take on new situations unless assisted by an adult. In concordance withguilt, parents often misjudge the situation and punish or restrict the child too much.

However, Bee and Boyd further state that children in this stage require some sense of

guilt in order to guide their self-control and a healthy conscience.

The relationship between parent and child must include a positive balance between

helping the child develop guilt, of which will encourage self-control, and establishingindependence for the goals the child chooses. Independence is significant to goal

development and child development in that the child will learn to form a foundation for

decision-making and in taking the steps required to set goals. As suggested by McDevittand Ormrod (2002), children establish a positive ability to have self-initiative to set goals

through the encouragement and support of their parents and/or teachers. Both parents

and/or teachers are crucial aspects in helping a child develop self-initiative to set goalsfor two reasons: adults can model the self-control that is relevant to setting goals and

assist the child with reasoning through making decisions. These components are

necessary in that adults help the child establish the foundation of forming a self-initiativeto set goals so that the child can progress forward on his or her own in future goal

building. If a child decides to construct a large puzzle, the responsibility of reinforcing

the childs capabilities lays upon the supervising adult since the child must take anothersperspective regarding his or her own capabilities; self-perspective may be different in the

eyes of others and can produce more honesty than the self can see, especially with

children. The adult should not impede instruction, but rather reassure the child through

reinforcement that creates intrinsic motivation, such as through positive discussion aboutthe childs capabilities and sense of worth. McDevitt and Ormrod claim that by observing

his or her own accomplishments and/or through the development of self-efficacy, the


14/19

child internalizes a sense of satisfaction that is necessary for maintaining initiative.

However, the child will develop guilt regarding personal needs and desires when he or

she, or a supervising adult discourages him or her from completing a goal independently.As a result, the child questions what he or she is actually capable of and may reshape

future actions taking initiative and challenging goals, which in turn may not reflect the

childs natural abilities but a more limited repetition.

In order to promote a safe balance between initiative and guilt, parents must provide thechild with achievable responsibility. Cramer, Flynn, and LaFave (1997) describe two

different outcomes, both positive and negative, that may occur if a child is not given

responsibilities, such as cleaning a room or walking a dog; all of which can createindependence and dependability. For a healthy balance of initiative and guilt, the child

should be able to accept feelings of guilt while understanding that certain activities and

situations he or she chooses may or may not be permitted by others. Children should alsobe encouraged to use their imaginations when taking initiatives that are related to adult

roles, ultimately not feeling guilty for thinking outside of the box and being different

from the norm as a result. The child should not feel guilty in using imagination duringplay since it provides him or her with learning how to be creative and to reflecting upon

personal capabilities. For example, the child may be imagining he is a police officer and

will form his play around this role; this concept could later develop into a future

profession, of which the child is willing to take initiative in facing the challenging stepsin becoming an actual police officer. Therefore, parents need to provide students with

chores and small jobs because it will strengthen skills that reflect responsibility and

future adult roles, such as tending to a younger sibling or helping wash dishes. Incontrast, children who are not allowed to complete tasks independently may learn that the

activities and situations are beyond their ability and they are incapable of setting their

own goals. The Child Development Institute LLC (1998) suggests that a child with no

responsibility, whether given by an adult or produced by the child, grows fearful in mostsituations involving change, excessively depends on adults, and is restricted from

imagination and active play; these characteristics are a result of the child being

immobilized by guilt (i.e. low feelings of self-efficacy, confidence, and frustration inabilities when a personal goal has not been accomplished).

In view of the fact that preschool children require skills necessary to become independent

and responsible, parents and/or teachers should learn how to assist in the childs socialdevelopment; this may include teaching the child how to be courageous, empathetic, self-

disciplined, and loyal. Fittro (2003) suggests several ideas on how to create these types of

values during a childs moral development. First, parents should respect the child in all

aspects of his or her personality if they seek respect in return. For example, parents needto consider the childs opinions and perspectives before setting discipline and behavioral

standards. Parents should stay firm on their expectations, yet remind themselves that the

child is a human being and deserves to be treated with fairness in order to develop apositive self-concept. Parents also have the advantage of teaching good morality through

discussion and example. By illustrating and discussing how to tolerate guilt, such as

feelings of low self-efficacy, self-esteem, or self-confidence after taking initiative inaccomplishing a goal, the child will learn that this type of behavior is acceptable. If the


15/19

child is not given the opportunity to discuss how to accept these feelings that accompany

guilt or if the child is simply dealing with guilt reactions, then several questions may

arise, such as Can I do this?, How moral am I?, and posing the why question tounderstand how the world works. In asking numerous Why questions, the child learns

about life by making up his or her own explanations for why things are the way they are,

experimenting with adult roles through fantasy play, and seeking explanations for his orher surroundings from adults. Consistent with these ideas, the Mohonasen Central School

District Board of Education (2005) suggests letting children take on small tasks that

gradually increase in difficulty as they grow older. This may include helping preparesmall meals, setting a table, or letting them choose their own clothing for the day; all of

which builds confidence and assists in developing simple math skills (e.g. counting and

sorting). Finally, allow children with downtime as their responsibilities expand. Parents

and/or teachers should remember that children in this stage of Eriksons psychosocialdevelopment need and deserve a time to be free.

[edit] School Age (7-12 Years)

Psychosocial Crisis: Industry vs. Inferiority

To bring a productive situation to completion is an aim which gradually supersedes the

whims and wishes of play. The fundamentals of technology are developed. To lose the

hope of such "industrious" association may pull the child back to the more isolated, lessconscious familial rivalry of the oedipal time.

Main question asked: Am I good at what I do?

According to Allen and Marotz (2003), "children at this age are becoming more aware of

themselves as individuals." They work hard at "being responsible, being good and doingit right." They are now more reasonable to share and cooperate. Allen and Marotz (2003)

also list some perceptual cognitive developmental traits specific for this age group:

Children understand the concepts of space and time, in more logical, practicalways,beginning to grasp Piaget's concepts of conservation, gain better understanding of

cause and effect and understand calendar time. Children in this stage have to learn the

feeling of success. If the child is allowed too little success, he or she will develop a sense

of inferiority or incompetence. Too much industry leads to narrow virtuosity (childrenwho are not allowed to be children). A balance between industry and inferiority leads to

competency. According to Robert Brooks (2001) parents can nurture self esteem andresilience in different ways: a. Understand and accept children's learning problems(highlight strengths) b. Teach children how to solve problems and make decisions c.

Reinforce responsibility by having children contribute d. Learn from, rather than feeling

defeated by mistakes e. Make the child feel special (create special times alone with themeach week)

[edit] Adolescence (12-18 Years)
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Psychosocial_development&action=edit&section=6http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Psychosocial_development&action=edit&section=7http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Psychosocial_development&action=edit&section=6http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Psychosocial_development&action=edit&section=7


16/19

Psychosocial Crisis: Identity vs. Role Confusion

The adolescent is newly concerned with how they appear to others. Ego identity is the

accrued confidence that the inner sameness and continuity prepared in the past arematched by the sameness and continuity of one's meaning for others, as evidenced in the

promise of a career. The inability to settle on a school or occupational identity isdisturbing.

Main question asked: "Who am I, and what is my goal in life?"

[edit] Young Adulthood (19-34 years)

Psychosocial Crisis: Intimacy vs. Isolation

Body and ego must be masters of organ modes and of the other nuclear conflicts in order

to face the fear of ego loss in situations which call for self-abandon. The avoidance of

these experiences leads to openness and self-absorption.

[edit] Adulthood (35-60 Years)

Psychosocial Crisis: Generativity vs. Stagnation

Generativity is the concern of establishing and guiding the next generation. Simply

having or wanting children doesn't achieve generativity. Socially-valued work and

disciplines are also expressions of generativity.

Main question asked: Will I ever accomplish anything useful?...

[edit] Value of the theory

One value of this theory is that it illuminated why individuals who had been thwarted in

the healthy resolution of early phases (such as in learning healthy levels of trust andautonomy in toddlerhood) had such difficulty with the crises that came in adulthood.

More importantly, it did so in a way that provided answers for practical application. It

raised new potential for therapists and their patients to identify key issues and skills that

required addressing. But at the same time, it yielded a guide or yardstick that could beused to assess teaching and child rearing practices in terms of their ability to nurture and

facilitate healthy emotional and cognitive development.

"Every adult, whether he is a follower or a leader, a member of a mass or of an elite, was

once a child. He was once small. A sense of smallness forms a substratum in his mind,

ineradicably. His triumphs will be measured against this smallness, his defeats will
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Psychosocial_development&action=edit&section=8http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Psychosocial_development&action=edit&section=9http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Generativity&action=edithttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stagnationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Childrenhttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Psychosocial_development&action=edit&section=10http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Psychosocial_development&action=edit&section=8http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Psychosocial_development&action=edit&section=9http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Generativity&action=edithttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stagnationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Childrenhttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Psychosocial_development&action=edit&section=10


17/19

substantiate it. The questions as to who is bigger and who can do or not do this or that,

and to whomthese questions fill the adults inner life far beyond the necessities and the

desirabilities which he understands and for which he plans." - Erik H. Erikson (19041994), U.S. psychoanalyst. Childhood and Society, ch. 11 (1950).

[edit] Critique

Most empirical research into Erikson has stemmed around his views on adolescence and

attempts to establish identity. His theoretical approach was studied and supported,particularly regarding adolescence, by James E. Marcia.[3] Marcia's work has

distinguished different forms of identity, and there is some empirical evidence that those

people who form the most coherent self-concept in adolescence are those who are mostable to make intimate attachments in early adulthood. This supports Eriksonian theory, in

that it suggests that those best equipped to resolve the crisis of early adulthood are those

who have most successfully resolved the crisis of adolescence.

On the other hand, Erikson's theory may be questioned as to whether his stages must beregarded as sequential, and only occurring within the age ranges he suggests. For

example, does one only search for identity during the adolescent years, or are there times

later in life (or earlier) when one is searching for identity. Moreover, does one stagereally need to happen before other stages can be completed? Does one need to first

achieve industry before achieving identity or intimacy?

The following is quoted from

Erikson, E.H. (1970). "Identity crisis" in perspective. In E.H. Erikson, Life history and

the historical moment. New York: Norton, 1975.

To say then that the identity crisis is psycho andsocial means that:

1. It is a subjective sense as well as an observable quality of personal sameness and

continuity, paired with some belief in the sameness and continuity of some shared world

image. As a quality of unself-conscious living, this can be gloriously obvious in a youngperson who has found himself [sic] as he has found his communality. In him we see

emerge a unique unification of what is irreversibly given--that is, body type and

temperament, giftedness and vulnerability, infantile models and acquired ideals--with theopen choices provided in available roles, occupational possibilities, values offered,

mentors met, friendships made, and first sexual encounters.

2. It is a state of being and becoming that can have a highly conscious (and, indeed, self-

conscious) quality and yet remain, in its motivational aspects, quite unconscious andbeset with the dynamics of conflict. This, in turn, can lead to contradictory mental states,

such as a sense of aggravated vulnerability and yet also an expectation of grand

individual promise.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Psychosocial_development&action=edit&section=11http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Marciahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erikson's_stages_of_psychosocial_development#_note-2%23_note-2http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Psychosocial_development&action=edit&section=11http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Marciahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erikson's_stages_of_psychosocial_development#_note-2%23_note-2


18/19

3. It is characteristic of a developmental period, before which it cannot come to a head,

because the somatic, cognitive, and social preconditions are only then given; and beyond

which it must not be unduly delayed, because the next and all future developmentsdepend on it. This stage of life is, of course, adolescence and youth. The advent and

solution of the identity crisis thus partially depends onpsychobiologicalfactors, which

secure the somatic basis for a coherent sense of vital selfhood. On the other hand,psychosocialfactors can prolong the crisis (painfully, but not necessarily unduly) where a

person's idiosyncratic gifts demand a prolonged search for a corresponding ideological

and occupational setting, or where historical change forces a postponement of adultcommitment.

4. It is dependent on thepastfor the resource of strong identifications made in childhood,

while it relies on new models encountered in youth, and depends for its conclusion on

workable roles offered in young adulthood. In fact, each subsequent stage of adulthoodmust contribute to its preservation and renewal.

The "socio" part of identity, then, must be accounted for in that communality withinwhich an individual finds himself. No ego is an island to itself. Throughout life the

establishment and maintenance of that strength which can reconcile discontinuities andambiguities depends on the support of parental as well as communal models. For youth

depends on the ideological coherence of the world it is meant to take over, and therefore

is sensitively aware of whether the system is strong enough in its traditional form to"confirm" and to be confirmed by the identity process, or so rigid or brittle as to suggest

renovation, reformation, or revolution. Psychosocial identity, then, also has apsycho-

historicalside, and suggests the study of how life histories are inextricably interwoven

with history. The study of psychosocial identity, therefore, depends on threecomplementarities--or are they three aspects of one complementarity?--namely, the

personal coherence of the individual and role integration in his group; his guiding imagesand the ideologies of his time; his life history--and the historical moment.

All this sounds probable enough and, especially when shorn of its unconscious

dimension, appears to be widely, and sometimes faddishly, acceptable in our day. The

unconscious complexities often ignored can be grouped thus:

1. Identity formation normatively has its dark and negative side, which throughout lifecan remain an unruly part of the total identity. Every person and every group harbors a

negativeidentity as the sum of all those identifications and identity fragments which the

individual had to submerge in himself as undesirable or irreconcilable or which his group

has taught him to perceive as the mark of fatal "difference" in sex role or race, in class orreligion. In the event of aggravated crises, an individual (or, indeed, a group) may despair

of the ability to contain these negative elements in a positive identity. A specific rage can

be aroused wherever identity development thus loses the promise of an assuredwholeness: an as yet uncommitted delinquent, if denied any chance of communal

integration, may become a "confirmed" criminal. In periods of collective crisis, such

potential rage is shared by many and is easily exploited by psychopathic leaders, whobecome the models of a sudden surrender to total doctrines and dogmas in which the


19/19

negative identity appears to be the desirable and the dominant one: thus the Nazis

fanatically cultivated what the victorious West as well as the more refined Germans had

come to decry as "typically German." The rage aroused by threatened identity loss canexplode in the arbitrary violence of mobs, or it can--less consciously--serve the efficient

destructiveness of the machinery of oppression and war.

2. In some young people, in some classes, at some periods in history, the personal

identity crisis will be noiseless and contained within the rituals of passage marking asecond birth; while in other people, classes, and periods, the crisis will be clearly marked

off as a critical period intensified by collective strife or epidemic tension. Thus, the

nature of the identity conflict often depends on the latent panic or, indeed, the intrinsicpromise pervading a historical period. Some periods in history become identity vacua

caused by the three basic forms of human apprehension:fears aroused by new facts, such

as discoveries and inventions (including weapons), which radically expand and changethe whole world image; anxieties aroused by symbolic dangers vaguely perceived as a

consequence of the decay of existing ideologies; and, in the wake of disintegrating faith,

the dreadof an existential abyss devoid of spiritual meaning. But then, again, a historicalperiod may (as, for example, the American Revolution did) present a singular chance for

a collective renewal which opens up unlimited identities for those who, by a combination

of unruliness, giftedness, and competence, represent a new leadership, a new elite, and

new types rising to dominance in a new people.

If there is something to all this, why would insights concerning such universal matters

first come from psychoanalysis, a clinical science? The fact is that in all periods of

history, mental disturbances of epidemiological significance or special fascination

highlight a specific aspect of man's nature in conflict with "the times" and are met withby innovative insights: as happened to hysteria in Freud's early days. In our time, a state

ofidentity confusion, not abnormal in itself, often seems to be accompanied by all theneurotic or near psychotic symptoms to which a young person is prone on the basis ofconstitution, early fate, and malignant circumstance. In fact, young individuals are

subject to a more malignant disturbance than might have manifested itself during other

stages of life, precisely because the adolescent process can induce the individual semi-deliberately to give in to some of his most regressed or repressed tendencies in order, as it

were, to test rock bottom and to recover some of his as yet undeveloped childhood

strengths. This, however, is safe only where a relatively stable society provides collectiveexperiences of a ceremonial character, or where revolutionary leaders (such as Luther)

provide new identity guidelines which permit the adolescent individual to take chances

with himself. Historical crises, in turn, aggravate personal crises; and, indeed many

young people have in the recent past been judged to suffer from a chronic malignantdisturbance, where we now know that an aggravated developmental crisis was dominant.

This, then, is the clinical anchorage for the conception of an identity crisis. (Erikson,

1970/1975, pp. 18-22)

Documents

Kriza identiteta