Aristotelian Concept of Virtue (Aristotle 384 B.C. - 322 B.C.)

He was also a great Greek philosopher. He was the first to write a book on ethics in the Western world. Knowledge, courage, bravery, and perseverance by themselves do not make a morally good character or man. Their ethical significance depends on the motives and the values to which they are related. Aristotle, therefore, rightly distinguishes the moral virtues from the intellectual virtues. The doctrine of the golden mean is central in Aristotle’s concept of virtues.

Aristotle is also right in extending the meaning of the important virtue of justice. He considers justice as the supreme virtue. It has two forms. Distributive justice consists in the equitable distribution of wealth and honours among the citizens of the state. Remedial justice consists of the fair transactions among the members of the community. The virtues are acquired through the development of the habit of doing virtuous actions consistently. Ability to think and ability to control one’s desires and passions is the special virtue of man.

According to Aristotle, virtuous conduct consists in avoiding the extremes of excess or of deficiency. For instance, excessive indulgence is as much a vice as the excessive repression of desires. Self control, therefore, is a virtue. Likewise, courage is the mean between rashness and cowardice. For instance generosity lies between meanness and prodigality. Thus, virtue is a matter of striking a mean between two vices. Moral virtue thus is a mean-state lying between two vices, viz. a vice of excess on the one side and a vice of deficiency on the other. It is not easy to find the mean. As Sahakian has pointed out, it consists in doing the right thing, to the right person, to the right extent, with the right motive, and at the right time. For instance, the practice of generosity: give generously to the right person, at the right time, to the right extent, with the right purpose.

Summary

Thus, man has to make use of reason to determine the mean. Virtues can be cultivated only through the practice of choosing and doing good deeds, and through the good habits. Aristotle points out the difficulty in selecting the proper mean. This mean is not a mathematical average. It is what is appropriate for man. Practical wisdom helps man to hit this mean. An individual knows ‘what ought to be’ by using his insight which can be developed by practice. Passions can be tamed by continuous practice of self control. According to Aristotle, virtue consists in the choice of mean that is the practical moderation of impulses by reason in actual human experiences. Morality consists in the right determination and identification of the ‘mean’ related to the individual in society i.e. his profession and position in society. E.g. “Courage” of a soldier. It must be distinguished from the rashness. Moreover the life of virtues leads to eudaemania (well-being).

There can be no two opinions about the significance and the need of virtues for the promotion of the morally good life. Actual morality consists in doing good deeds, and virtues are good traits or habits of character which are productive of good works and right conduct. These good traits or virtues in turn can be cultivated through the doing of good deeds and acting on moral principles. Therefore Aristotle said that virtue is a matter of habit. Reason and experience play a major role in choosing right actions or in hitting the mean and avoiding extremes. Hence the importance of both intellectual and moral virtues.

Plato's Concept of Virtues

Plato was a great Greek philosopher. He is known as a true disciple of Socrates. Plato’s doctrine of cardinal virtues is based on his concept of virtue. According to Plato, goodness consists of the natural and proper functioning of human nature. Besides, man is social by nature; therefore, society is a normal background of moral life of human beings. Socrates had said that virtue is knowledge. It means that insight into the nature of moral virtues is essential for becoming virtuous. Of course mere knowledge of virtue is not enough. Man has to cultivate virtues through the habit of doing obligatory and morally good actions. For Plato, good life is the life of virtues. Plato has described four important virtues in his theory of morality. According to him the cultivation of these four virtues - wisdom, courage, temperance, and justice - constitutes a morally good life. Later on, these four virtues came to be called ‘Cardinal virtues’. The term ‘cardinal’ is derived from the word ‘Cardo’ ‘Cardo’ means a hinge or a hook which supports the door, and on which the door turns. The four virtues are cardinal because they support moral life of man in society. They are fundamental virtues. Other virtues depend upon them and are therefore subordinate to them. Thus, cardinal virtues, according to Frankena, are a set of virtues which cannot be derived from one another; and all other moral virtues can be derived from them or shown to be forms of them.

These four virtues are said to be the basic and important constituents of moral life or goodness of man. Morality consists in knowing and maintaining the harmony between the rational and non-rational elements of the self. It is called ‘Justice’ by Plato. Malfunctioning of any part of the self will have adverse effects upon the other parts. Thus, the key to moral life is the proper integration of the three parts of the self. According to Plato, the human self or soul is tripartite. The three elements or parts of human beings are:

1. Passionate or Appetitive Element (Passions)
2. Spirited or Dynamic & Executive Element (Will)
3. Philosophical or Rational Element (Reason or Intellect)

This integration can be achieved when the spirited element helps the reason to keep the passions in check.

Wisdom is the virtue of reason. It consists in knowing and mastering the non-rational elements viz. spirited element and passions. It includes knowledge, insight and foresight based on that knowledge. It is not bookish knowledge/data/information only. It implies the active choice of values as against disvalues, or virtues as against vices. A man is wise in whom reason rules over the other impulses.

Courage is the virtue of the spirited element. It must perform its heroic function within the limits set by reason. It is of two types viz. physical courage of a soldier and moral courage of a thinker or a reformer. Thus, one can be courageous in war as well as in intellectual convictions. Courage, therefore, is the excellence in the activity of the will. A man is brave when the spirited element holds fast to the instructions of intellect.

Temperance or self-control consists in keeping bodily satisfactions within limits. Passions are not to be condemned. Even they are to be satisfied. The passionate element is both non-moral and non-rational. It needs to be regulated and subjected to the rules of reason. Temperance is not complete abstinence. It is the principle of self-restraint and moderation. It is the controlling and ordering of natural instincts, desires and sensuous pleasures. A man is temperate when the spirited element or passionate element yields to intellect and obey its commands.

Justice is the virtue of the whole self or the complete person. It is the proper integration of different parts of the self. Thus, justice also consists of the harmonious functioning of the three parts of personality. Each part must do its function for which it is fit. When these three parts of the personality or the self with their three virtues of wisdom, courage and temperance function harmoniously together and are ordered and ruled by reason, then justice emerges as the resultant virtue. Each man is fit for a particular job in accordance with his nature. Justice consists in doing one’s own job. Being morally perfect, therefore, is tantamount to being wise, valiant, temperate and just. Justice, then, is the supreme virtue. Just man will not indulge in the pursuit of material pleasures only.

According to Plato, the four cardinal virtues have both individual and social significance. They are found both in the individual and in the society. Human beings are rational and social animals. They have the natural tendency to live in communities. Morality of the society is the same as it is for the individual. According to Plato, society is the individual ‘writ large’. For society is made up of individuals.

Each individual self consists of three parts. All the three elements are not equally dominant in all individuals. In some persons, the rational element is predominant, while in others the spirited element is powerful. Majority of the people give more importance to the passionate element. Thus, as we have three elements of the self so we have three classes in a society. They are: Guardians, Auxiliaries and Civilians.

Guardians constitute the class of rulers. They are drawn from that type of men in whom the rational or the philosophical elements is dominant. Such persons live only for truth. They are truth-seekers. They can be philosopher-kings. They are men of knowledge and wisdom. Wisdom is their chief virtue.

The auxiliary class consists of those in whom the spirited element is dominant. They live for honour and success. They are good for the execution of laws and to protect the society from internal disorder and external attack. Courage is their principal virtue. They support the guardians and execute the laws made by the enlightened rulers or philosopher kings.

The class of civilians consists of producers, such as farmers, blacksmiths, fishermen, traders, carpenters, etc. In them the element of passion is dominant. They live for material gains. Temperance is their main virtue.

The guardians are enlightened or wise rulers. They direct and control the majority of the people with the help of the members of the auxiliary class. When each class does its appropriate function, justice emerges. In a just society, the latter two classes willingly accept the rule of the wise (guardians). Wisdom is an important virtue. It helps a person to control his passions and perform his duties efficiently. The virtue of justice takes note of different aspects of a human person and integrates them. It thus stands for the harmony in the individual as well as harmony between the individual and community.

Ethical Objectivism

Ethical objectivism is the view that there are universal and objectively valid moral principles that are relative neither to the individual nor to society.

Relativism vs. Objectivism

The relativism/objectivism debate in philosophy is no different. Objectivists accuse all relativists of being subjectivists who seek ethical nihilism by claiming that morals are up to the individual; relativists accuse all objectivists of being absolutists who believe that all questions have only one right answer, regardless of context or culture.

We have seen that Relativism is the view that states that moral principles are valid, but they vary from to culture (conventionalism) or by individuals (subjectivism). Conventionalists like Ruth Benedict argue that since different cultures hold different principles, how can one judge another? Each of these different moralities is equally valid. She uses the argument from 'normality': each culture defines what behaviour is normal, to fit the behaviour of the majority. The majority of that population then defines normality and also lives by it, and only a small minority is aberrant or abnormal.

Benedict calls morality "a convenient term for socially approved habits" and the normal "a variant of the concept of the good." In other words, whatever behaviour is socially acceptable and normal is also good. Subjectivism is the extreme end of relativism. This view holds that morality is determined at the individual level, not a social or universal level. Thus, the only moral principles that are valid are the ones you believe in--in short, all principles are equally valid.

According to the ethical objectivist, the truth or falsity of typical moral judgments does not depend upon the beliefs or feelings of any person or group of persons. Objectivism is the view that holds that certain moral principles are valid for all individuals and cultures. There are different levels of objectivism:

• The fixed view, which says that principles are fixed and do not change;

• The universal view, which includes the fixed view and adds that principles apply to all people everywhere; and

• The absolutist view, which includes the universal view and adds that certain principles are non-overrideable and true for all situations. People who hold this theory answer the question "where do these principles come from?" in several different ways: from the essence or commonality of human nature, from natural reality (moral realism), from God or the divine, or from the intrinsic good that comes from their application consequentialism).

The view of objectivism is based on the assumption that "human nature is relatively similar in essential respects, having a common set of needs and interests."

In Who’s to Judge, Louis Pojman addresses the ethical relativist’s argument. He explains the “Diversity Thesis” of relativism asserts morality varies depending on the society, resulting in there being no moral guidelines, independent of culturally established beliefs, shared by all societies.

The problem with the “Diversity Thesis,” according to Pojman, is there does appear to be moral guidelines common to many variant societies. For example, he quotes an article by Clyde Kluckhohn, which notes how “every culture has a concept of murder…other regulations upon sexual behaviour…mutual obligations between parents and children”. Additionally, argues Pojman, since there is a majority of different societies which do observe shared moral guidelines, then it could be argued the cultures which do not are simply wrong.

Pojman moves on to explaining the subsequent “Dependency Thesis” which asserts actions are deemed moral or immoral depending upon the cultural circumstances of the society. Regarding the “Dependency Thesis,” Pojman offers a distinction between morality being upheld based on the culture’s circumstances and morality being determined based on the culture’s circumstances. If morality is upheld based on the culture’s circumstances, according to Pojman, then an action may be considered immoral unless the greater good of the society requires the action be done. He uses the example of Eskimos with limited food who practice euthanasia. Whereas, he continues, if morality is determined based on the culture’s circumstances, then the beliefs of the culture determine right and wrong. He offers another example, where a Sudanese tribe will throw deformed babies into the river believing the babies “belong to the hippopotamus”. In either case, Pojman asserts there exists shared moral guidelines with our culture, which are independent of cultural biases, like respect for life and giving back what belongs to another.

Pojman also presents “Conventional Ethical Relativism, ”which asserts that actions are determined to be moral or immoral based on the acceptance of the actions by the society, which leads to tolerance of all actions deemed morally accepted by any society. “Conventional Ethical Relativism” fails as well because, as Pojman states, “Conventional Ethical Relativism” allows for tolerance of genocide and nuclear war, just as long as the culture committing the acts deems the actions morally acceptable. Additionally, Pojman notes, a person may belong to many cultures and subcultures which have different views on what actions are considered moral, resulting in the person’s actions being both moral and immoral at the same time.

Criticism of Relativism

1. Most ethicists reject the theory of ethical relativism. Some claim that while the moral practices of societies may differ, the fundamental moral principles underlying these practices do not.

For example, in some societies, killing one's parents after they reached a certain age was common practice, stemming from the belief that people were better off in the afterlife if they entered it while still physically active and vigorous. While such a practice would be condemned in our society, we would agree with these societies on the underlying moral principle -- the duty to care for parents. Societies, then, may differ in their application of fundamental moral principles but agree on the principles.

2. Also, it is argued, it may be the case that some moral beliefs are culturally relative whereas others are not. Certain practices, such as customs regarding dress and decency, may depend on local custom whereas other practices, such as slavery, torture, or political repression, may be governed by universal moral standards and judged wrong despite the many other differences that exist among cultures. Simply because some practices are relative does not mean that all practices are relative.

3. Other philosophers criticize ethical relativism because of its implications for individual moral beliefs. These philosophers assert that if the rightness or wrongness of an action depends on a society's norms, then it follows that one must obey the norms of one's society and to diverge from those norms is to act immorally. This means that if I am a member of a society that believes that racial or sexist practices are morally permissible, then I must accept those practices as morally right. But such a view promotes social conformity and leaves no room for moral reform or improvement in a society. Furthermore, members of the same society may hold different views on practices. In the United States, for example, a variety of moral opinions exists on matters ranging from animal experimentation to abortion. What constitutes right action when social consensus is lacking?.

4. Perhaps the strongest argument against ethical relativism comes from those who assert that universal moral standards can exist even if some moral practices and beliefs vary among cultures. In other words, we can acknowledge cultural differences in moral practices and beliefs and still hold that some of these practices and beliefs are morally wrong. The practice of slavery in pre-Civil war U.S. society or the practice of apartheid in South Africa is wrong despite the beliefs of those societies. The treatment of the Jews in Nazi society is morally reprehensible regardless of the moral beliefs of Nazi society.

For these philosophers, ethics is an inquiry into right and wrong through a critical examination of the reasons underlying practices and beliefs. As a theory for justifying moral practices and beliefs, ethical relativism fails to recognize that some societies have better reasons for holding their views than others.

Conclusion

Moral relativism is the strong claim that all morals are relative to the believer; and if this claim were true, then we would inevitably need to accept that genital mutilation, sex selection abortions, murder, abuse, mercy killing, rape, and even genocide are, well, morally acceptable since we lack a ground to condemn such actions.

If a culture or person practices an act that we believe is inhumane, then we need a basis to ground our moral criticism and judgment upon. Lacking that ground—or objective notion of moral right or wrong—pushes us into the corner of silence or apathy. Most philosophers argue that moral universalism—an objective moral good—is the preferred position. On the contrary, and strictly speaking, if relativism is true and all morals are up to the culture or individual, then literally all things are morally permissible. Clearly this is an untenable position, but why?.

But even if the theory of ethical relativism is rejected, it must be acknowledged that the concept raises important issues. Ethical relativism reminds us that different societies have different moral beliefs and that our beliefs are deeply influenced by culture. It also encourages us to explore the reasons underlying beliefs that differ from our own, while challenging us to examine our reasons for the beliefs and values we hold.

Existential Theory

Existentialism originated in Europe in 1940's. It began to be studied and discussed in America in 1950's. Today it is popular all over the world. The term Existence comes from the latin world 'existo and existere'. Existo means I exist and existere means to become, to change something which is not stable but continuously changing and developing. The existential psychology is an out growth of phenomenology. It deals with the phenomenological analysis of the actual human existence. It aims at the reconstruction of the inner world of experience. The existentialists believe that existence precedesessence. The essence refers to the mental image or concept of a particular part of thing. They are concerned with two problems: the other man and God. The other man means man's relation with other human beings, his perception, his interaction about his knowledge about God.

Principles of Existential Theory

1. It aims at developing a comprehensive concept of man and understanding of man in his total existential reality.
2. Its focus is on consciousness, feelings, moods and experiences. What can be seen or experienced is real.
3. Its chief method is phenomenological method.
4. It does not believe in cause and effect relationships in human existence. Two events may have the same existential meaning but this does not signify that event A caused event B or vice-versa.
5. Man is free and he alone is responsible for its existence.
6. Maturation and understanding are operative principles in the analysis of behaviour.
7. Its frequent themes are being in the world, modes of existence, freedom, responsibility, individual's scale of values and meaning of life, suffering, anxiety, death, etc.

Basic Concepts of the Theory

These are discussed as follows:

Structure of Existence (Being in the world)

The structure of human existence is based on the concept of being in the world in which the individual's whole existence is and has to be can appear and become present and be present. Man and the world are not related nor do they interact with each other. The world in which the human beings have their existence comprise of physical environment, psychological environment and the person himself.

Being beyond the world (Human Possibilities)

Human beings are in the world have a world and long to get beyond the world. By being beyond the world means actualizing and relating our possibilities to what we encounter. The human beings are free to realize the possibilities of their existence.

Ground of Existence

The human beings find themselves in the world that is their ground constitutes their destiny. This ground places definite limits on what a person may become.

World design

This indicates the overall pattern of mode of being in the world. A person's world design determines how he will react in specific situations and the types of traits and symptoms they will develop. The world design may be open or closed, disclosed or concealed, expanded or constricted.

Modes of being in the world

There are many different modes of being in the world. Each mode is a way in which person understands, interprets and expresses itself. A person may have many modes of existence. Existentialists try to understand the totality of man's existence of himself in all his modes of existence. There are some inherent characteristics in every human existence. The inherent characteristics are called Existentials such as spatiality of human existence. The inherent characteristics are called Existentials such as spatiality of existence, temporarily of existence, babyhood, human existence in a shared world, mood.

Dynamics of Existence

Since the existential theory rejects the concept of causality, dualism of mind and body and the separation of the person from his environment, the concept of dynamics is the usual one. An individual is neither influenced by the environment nor by the needs, instincts or drives. He has the freedom to choose and he alone is responsible for his own existence. What ever he does it is his choice. He himself determines what he will be and what he will do. If he is to choose wisely, he has to be aware of the possibilities of his existence. Some openness is necessary for the possibilities to disclose themselves. There is always the possibility of changing one's existence of disclosing and unfolding a whole new world. But can never transcend guilt, a fundamental characteristic of existence. Death is the absolute nothing-ness by which non-being can invade being. Moods determine the openness of an individual at a given moment. They are responsible for the disclosed meanings and motivations of the encountered things.

Development of Existence

The individual's whole existence is a historical event with different modes of existence instead of stages. The dwelling in the world always means dwelling in the past, present and the future simultaneously.

The most important existential developmental concept is that of becoming something new, of transcending itself. To become completely human is to fulfill all the possibilities of existence. Becoming implies direction and continuity but direction can change and continuity be broken. Becoming of a person and becoming of world are always related. This is because a person is in the world. He discloses the possibilities of his existence through the world and the world in turn is disclosed by the person who is in it. The existential theory was the first view point to concern itself with death and dying.

Research Methods

The phenomenological method is used by the existentialists to describe and understand man's consciousness and subjective experience This theory has contributed to the field of personality, psychotherapy and counseling. The existential phenomenological approach is named as Humanistic psychology.

Summary

The existential theory is an out growth of phenomenology. It deals with the phenomenological analysis of actual human existence. It believes that the existence precedes essence. It aims at developing comprehensive view of man and understanding of man in his total existential reality what is experienced or seen is real. It does not believe in causality, dualism of mind and boy. It explains the structure of existence, world designs and modes of being in the world. The theory employs the phenomenological method. It is useful in the field of personality, psychotherapy and counseling.

Assessment and Research in George Kelly Theory

Kelly's personal construct theory represents a cognitive view of behaviour. The human being is depicted as a scientist who is continuously engaged in predicting and controlling the events that occur in his/her environment. Kelly's theoretical concepts have directly stimulated little research to date but he devised a personality instrument the Rep test which has been widely used in a variety of studies. His theory is applicable to behavioural domain like emotional states, psychological disorders, and psychotheraphy.

Role Construct Repertory Test-Assessing Personal Constructs

Kelly developed the Role Construct Repertory Test known more simply as the REP test to identify the important constructs a person uses to construct, (interpret) significant people in his/her life. The Rep test was originally devised as a diagnostic instrument to understand the client's construct system and the way he uses it to structure his personal environment. Many forms of Rep test individual and group exist like list form and Grid-form. Essentially, the Rep test permits a person to reveal constructs by comparing and contrasting a number of significant persons in his or her life. The subject is first asked to name people who fit certain roles (Boss, successful person, disliked teacher). Another phase of the Rep test involves eliciting the subjects constructs about the people in his/her life. In a clinical interpretation of the Rep test the examiner considers the number of different constructs, the manner in which various figures are related to the constructs and the relationships of the constructs to one another.

Clinical experience with public schools and college students provided the basis for Kelly's theory of personal constructs. Most of the empirical studies based on Kelly's work concern the Rep test. Several studies like Bannister and Fransella (1966) and Bannister and Salmon (1966) suggest that Rep test and Kelly's constructs help us to understand the disturbance of thought in schizophrenic are less interrelated and more inconsistent that other people's particularly interpersonal constructs. Kelly was particularly interested in using Rep test as a basis for facilitating Psychological counseling.

The Rep test has also been used to explore the complexity of an individual's construct system and changes in the construct system through out the life span. Such research has focussed on cognitive complexity-the ability to perceive differences in the way in which one construes other people. Individuals who are high in cognitive complexity are better able to predict what others will do and to relate with them.

Applications-Emotional States, Psychological Disorders and Fixed Role Therapy

Kelly had redefined may psychological concepts of emotions like anxiety, guilt, threat and hostility in terms relevant to his cognitive theory. Guilt is awareness of having deviated from the important roles by which one maintains relationships with others. Threat is awareness that one's construct system is drastically changed. Hostility is an attempt to hold invalid construct within the form of contradictory. A hostile person makes others behave in ways which fit into his unrealistic expectations. Anxiety is feeling of apprehension which result when one realizes that never no constructs with which to interpret the events we encounters. According to Kelly (1955) psychological disorders arise when a person clings and continues to use personal constructs even though they are invalid. Such a person has difficulty anticipating and predicting events and is unable to learn from experiences. The neurotic fails to develop new ways to interpret the world or rigidly holds on to constructs, that are useless. Instead of developing more successful constructs and solving problems the neurotic develops symptoms.

Kelly conceives of his therapeutic methods as 'reconstruction' rather than psychotherapy. The client is encouraged to reconstruct the world in a manner that would foster better predictions and control. The maladaptive constructs are replaced with more useful ones.

Kelly's unique contribution to therapeutic methods is developing and fostering the use of role playing. He encouraged the use of role reversal having the client play the role of the significant figures while he is a client. Role reversal allows the client to understand his/her participation more fully and also to understand the framework of the other person. Kelly also used fixed role therapy in which the client had to enact the role of someone else for a more protracted period of time because behaviour is the result of the individual's construction of a situation, playing a new role requires that one first temporarily adopt a new construct view point. This principle is applied in this therapy technique-fixed role therapy for a shy person might be asked to play confident and assertive role for 2 or 3 days to think and act like a confident person. The client has to practice the fixed role within the therapy situation to be certain that he has adopted the required behaviours and view of the world that a confident person has. By trying out a new role the client can appreciate the ways in which different constructions and behaviours lead to more satisfying life outcomes. Fixed role therapy has proved to be a very creative way to reconstrue the self under professional guidance.

Kelly's theory has wide implications for social and interpersonal relationships by alternative constructions Kelly suggested more creative ways of dealing with a problematic situation.

Kelly also encouraged the use of group therapy to help solve individual and common problems. The technique of role playing is particularly well adapted to group where several people may assist an individual in acting out a scene. Kelly also suggested ways in which his theory could be applied to solve social and international problems by understanding how different events are construed or interpreted variously by people in different countries.

Evaluation of the Theory

Kelly considered the human beings as scientists but the ways in which we validate the personal constructs involve also philosophical insights. His view of a person as a scientist is based on the philosophical position or constructive alternativism device in industry.

Kelly emphasized the rationality of the human beings. He did not believe that science can comprehend the real person. It can only provide useful constructions that can assist us in making predictions.

Kelly developed a theory that encompass cognitive, emotional behaviour, perception and motivational aspects of personality by viewing personal constructions as the primary factors governing personality. That's why his theory was classified differently by different personologists.

His theory continues to attract attention due to its emphasis on construction which is compatible with trends in cognitive psychology. His technique of assessment and role playing have proved very useful tools in psychotherapy, education, and industry.

It is also more positively regarded by psychologists who believe in a person as an information processor and interpreter of events.

However, Kelly has been criticized for being too intellectual in his view of the individual and therapy. His failure to deal adequately with emotions and instances on dichotomous concepts. He has also failed to deal with the whole of personality.

Summary

• Although Kelly's theoretical concepts have stimulated directly little research to date. He devised a personality test the Rep test which has been widely used in a number of studies to assess personal constructs. Kelly's personal construct theory is applicable in psychotherapy, education and industry. His techniques of assessment and role playing have proved to be useful tools.

• Kelly's view of a person as a scientist is based on the philosophical position of conservative alternativism the way we validate the personal constructs involve both scientific methods and philosophical insights.

• His theory failed to deal with personality and emotions, it was too intellectual in its view of the individual as therapy.

Organismic Theory of Kurt Goldstein

The leading exponent of the organismic theory today is Kurt Goldstein (1879-1965), an eminent neuro-psychiatrist. The organismic theory has borrowed many of its concepts from Gestalt psychology. The organismic psychology may be regarded as an extension of the Gestalt principle to the organism as a whole. Goldstein as a result of his investigations with brain damaged and speech disturbed patients came to the conclusion that any particular symptom displayed by a patient could not be understood solely as the product of a particular lesion or disease but had to be considered as a manifestation of the total organism. The organism behaves as a unified whole. What happens in a part affects the whole. There are laws by which the whole organism functions. These laws help in understanding any member component.

Principle Feature of The Organismic Theory

Organismic theory emphasizes on the unity, integration, consistency and coherence of the normal personality. Organisation is the natural state of the organism and organisation is pathological.Organismic theory starts with the organism as an organized system and proceeds to analyze the whole by differentiating it into its constituent members. The organizations is built into the system from the beginning. Integrity of the organism in not lost or destroyed by analysis.The organismic theory assumes that the individual is motivated by one sovereign drive i.e. self-actualization which gives direction and unity to life.It does not regard the individual as a closed system but stresses on the inherent potentialities of the organism for growth. It believes that if the potentialities of the organism are allowed to unfold in an orderly way by an appropriate environment it will produce a healthy integrated personality although malignant forces may at any time destroy or cripple the person.The theory uses the principles of Gestalt Psychology Organism theory believes in the ideographic study to get a more comprehensive view of one person rather than in the nomothetic approach of studying a number of individuals.

Structure of The Organism

The organism consists of differentiated members which are articulated together and do not become isolated or detached from one another e.g. strong anxiety. The primary organisation of the organismic function is that of figure and ground. A member part of the organism may stand out as a figure against the background of the whole organism and still retain its membership in the structure of total organism. A figure has a define boundary or contour which encloses it and background and separates it from the surroundings. The background is continuous, its surrounds and extends beyond the figures.

Goldstein distinguishes between natural figures and unnatural figures. A figure is a natural one if it represents a preference on the part of the person and the behaviour that results is orderly flexible and appropriate to the situation. It is unnatural if the task is imposed upon the person and if the resulting behaviour is rigid and mechanical. Goldstein believes that studying isolated stimulus response connections bear little or no relation to the natural behaviour of the organism and provide little useful knowledge of the laws by which the organism functions.

Although Goldstein emphasizes the flexibel and plastic nature of the natural processes as against the rigid character of un-natural processes, he recognizes that preferred activities may remain constant throughout life without loosing their intimate relationships to the whole organism. Traits do not necessarily become precipitated out and lose touch with the total matrix in which they are embedded.

Goldstein points out 3 kinds of behaviour. They are: 1) performance which are voluntary 2) attitudes which are feelings, moods and other inner experiences and 3) processes which are bodily functions experienced indirectly.

Another structural distinction that Goldstein make is between concrete and abstract behaviour. Concrete behaviour consists of reacting to stimulus in automatic or direct manner while abstract behaviour consists of actions upon the stimulus by the organism.

Dynamics of The Organism

The main dynamic concepts presented by Goldstein are:

1. The equalization processes or the centering of the organism
2. Self actualization
3. Coming to terms with the environment

1. The equalization processes or centering of the organism: Goldstein postulates an available energy supply which is fairly constant and which ends to be evenly distributed throughout the organism. This constant evenly distributed energy represent the average state of tension in the organism and it is to this average state that the organism always returns or tries to return whenever a stimulus changes the tension. The return to the average state is the equalization process e.g. eating when hungry and resting when tired are the equalization process. The goal of a normal healthy person is to discharge tension and equalize it . The level at which tension becomes balanced represents the centering of the organism.

This centre enables the organism to cope effectively with environment and actualize itself in further activities according to its nature. The principle of equalization explains the consistency, coherence and orderliness of behaviour in spite of disturbing stimuli. In an adequate environment the organism will always remain more or less in balance. The energy disturbance and balances of the system result from environmental interferences and inner conflict.

2. Self-Actualization: This is Goldstein's master motive. It is the only motive that the organism possesses. The different drives such as hunger, sex, power, achievement and curiosity are mere manifestations of the sovereign purpose of life to actualize oneself. When a person is hungry, he actualizes himself by eating. The satisfaction of any particular need is in the foreground when it is a pre-requisite for self actualization of the total organism. Self actualization is creative trend of human nature. It is organic principle by which the organism becomes more fully developed and more complete. Any need is a deficit state which motivates the individual to replenish the deficit. Although self-actualization is a universal phenomenom in nature, the specific ends toward which people strive vary from person to person.

3. Coming to terms with Environment: Goldstein recognizes the importance of the objective world both as a source of disturbance with which the individual must cope and as a source of supplies by means of which the organism fulfills its destiny. The person has to come to terms with the environment both because it is the means by which self-actualization can be achieved and because it contains obstruction in the form of threats and pressures that hinders self-realization. According to Goldstein a normal healthy organism is one in which the tendency towards self-actualization is acting from within and overcomes disturbance arising from the clash with the world, not only of anxiety but out of conquest. This suggests that coming to terms with the environment consists in primarily mastering it.

Development of The Organism

Goldstein hints that there are certain tasks peculiar to certain age levels but he does not specify them or whether they are the same for all individuals. The importance of heredity is implicit but its relative contribution is not explicit. He says if a child is exposed to situations with which he can cope, he will develop normally through maturation and training. As new problems arise he will form a new patterns to deal with them. Reactions not useful for self-actualization will drop out. If the conditions are too difficult for the child, he will develop reactions not conducive to self-actualization may lead to pathological states.

Characteristic Research and Research Methods

Much of the research is done by Goldstein on the aspect of abstract and concrete attitude with respect to brain injured cases. In a disordered individual abstract behaviour is lost. In neurotic he is not flexible to the situation. For Goldstein a symptom is not simply a manifestation of changes in specific function or structure of the organism. It is also a form of adjustment made by the sick or defective person.

Goldstein distinguishes 4 groups of symptoms:

1. Direct symptoms
2. Indirect symptoms
3. Symptoms due to catastrophic conditions and protective mechanisms against catastropher.
4. Symptoms due to fatigue and persevertation.

The direct symptoms result from disintegration (or de-differentiation) of the function involved and from isolation of the undamaged area of the brain from the damaged one with which it was formerly associated. The indirect symptoms are produced by the effect of changes in the damaged area on the other parts of the nervous system.

The third set of symptoms arise to avoid failure being more sensitive regarding his abilities than the normal individual, by developing a routine type of existence in his shrunken environment. Fatigue serves as a kind of protective mechanism which allows the patient to escape from a stressful situation. Preservation or the tendency to repeat a performance that the patient is able to do is another means by which the reason can avoid catastrophe.

The symptoms from the organismic view point have practical and theoretical implications. The therapy to be employed depends upon knowing what symptoms can be directly reminded and what symptoms have to be altered by working on the personality as a whole.

Research strategy employed by the organismic theorist:

1. Study the whole person
2. Make intensive studies of the individual cases using tests, interviews and observation under natural conditions
3. Try to understand the behaviour of the person in terms of self-actualization coming to terms with the environment, abstract Vs Concrete attitudes instead of specific responses to specific stimuli.
4. Use both quantitative and qualitative methods in the collection and analysis of data.
5. Do not employ experimental controls and standardized conditions which destroy the integrity of the organism
6. The view that the organism is a complex structure and behaviour is the result of a vast network of determinaners is always kept in mind.

Criticism

The term 'self-actualization' is much philosophical in its orientation. It is too general in character to be useful for making specific predictions.

There is not much originality in Goldstein's organismic approach. The term figure and ground for explaining the structure of the personality has been taken from Gestaltists. The concept of 'coming to terms with the environment' is the same as adjustment what social psychological theorists speak of. The concept of 'equalization' is a concept of biological and social sciences.

Goldstein's interest in studying behaviour by qualitative approach has been criticized by various psychologists. They feel it is highly subjective and unrepeatable. Others feel that the tests should be administered and scored in a standardized manner and they should not be changed to meet the individual case.

He emphasize more on maturation but not enough upon learning. His contribution to understanding brain injured in terms of abstract and concrete behaviour is said to be good.

Goldstein suffers a criticism trying to study normal personality by studying brain injured patients. A person's potentialities can be known by his/her preferences does not appear convincing.

His theory is not sufficiently holistic. Goldstein treats the organismic as a segregated unit set apart from the rest of the world. A through going holistic approach would never make such a division. Anglay's biosphere is an attempt to broaden the holistic base of the organismic theory. He does not make the innate and environmental contributions to behaviour clear.

According to Goldstein's theory environment plays only 2 function. 1) As a source of trouble and 2) as a store of things to enable the organism to equalize inner tension.

Besides this, he does not discuss much about it. The relation between the organism and the environment is over simplified by the concept of 'coming to terms'. In spite of considerable criticism it suffers from, Goldstein's theory appears interesting and convincing to the reader.

Summary

Kurt Goldstein developed an organismic or holistic theory based on many gestalt concepts. He considers the organism as a organized whole that can be differentiated in to its constituent parts. What happens in one part affects the whole, the theory emphasizes in the unity, integrating, consistency and coherence of the normal personality. He makes a structural distinction between figure and ground, abstract and concrete behaviour and performances, attitudes and processes. The individual is a total psychosocial biological entity with definite directions and growth paths which are innate and inherent. The 3 main dynamic concepts of his theory are equalization process itself actualization and coming to terms with the environment. He stressed the normal personality by studying brain injured patients. He believed in idiographic study of individual cases and employed both quantitative and qualitative methods in data collection and analysis. The test, interview and observations under natural conditions were exclusively used to study the whole organism. It rejects the reductionistic approach of behaviour.