History+of+Personality+Theory


 * History of Personality Theory **

**What is personality?** When one defines personality, it is easy to migrate towards the basic and most typically known cultural definition of personality. However, when defining personality within the context of this discipline, personality psychology, it refers to “reasonably stable patterns of behaviors, including thoughts and feelings that characterize a person’s adaptation to life” (Negy, 2009). More loosely defined, personality psychology is simply the psychological characteristics that make individuals unique (Friedman & Schustack, 2003). One may assume that personality psychology is a modern premise. Contrary to that notion, personality psychology contains a classic core that delves deeper than its modern crust. In the early twentieth century, a multitude of scientific and theoretical outlooks and contributions made conceivable the dawn of personality psychology (Friedman & Schustack, 2003, p.11). Subsequent to Charles Darwin’s publication of the //Origin of Species// in 1859 and Francis Galton’s measurement of individual differences in the 1880s, Sigmund Freud, highly aware of these new foundations, consciously published one of his more significant books, //The Interpretation of Dreams//, in the year 1900 (Friedman & Schustack, 2003, p.11). Sigmund Freud, along with others (i.e. William James, Pierre Janet, Kurt Lewin, etc), set the platform and paved the way for the development of personality theory, as he produced theories of the unconscious mind and psychoanalytic perspectives of personality (Cloninger, 2009, p.3). By the 1930s, modern personality theory was taking character and claiming its place in the psychology world (Friedman & Schustack, 2003, p.11). By 1937, the scientific field of personality was established with Gordon Allport’s publication of //Personality: a psychological interpretation//, Ross Stagner’s //Psychology of personality//, and Henry Murray’s book //Explorations in personality//, published in 1938 (Cloninger, 2009, p.3). However, what are founding figures without their historical foundation? The roots of personality psychology can be traced back deeper than one could envision and diverge in directions contrary to common knowledge. Various facets of personality psychology can be traced to religious ideas and theater, as momentary insights (Friedman & Schustack, 2003, pp.11-12). Yet, the nineteenth century developments in evolutionary biology and the biological sciences, claims the most direct and modern impact on personality psychology (Friedman & Schustack, 2003, p.13).



Let us first address personality psychology’s religious roots. Eastern philosophies’ and religions’ emphasis on altered states of consciousness, self-awareness, self-fulfillment, and the human spirit played a vital role in particular characteristics of modern personality theory. The influence that this emphasis had is most clearly noticeable in the studies of humanistic and existential psychologists such as Abraham Maslow, as well as Carl Jung, a personality psychologist (Friedman & Schustack, 2003, p.13). During the Renaissance period, with an emphasis on the seventeenth century, Western concepts of human nature began to surface as a result of religious influences. The nature of the human spirit was continuously investigated and observed throughout the next two centuries. These religious influences emerged in modern personality psychology as concepts of integrating and uniting the individual personality, as well as efforts to incorporate comprehension of the mind and body or biological and psychological knowledge (i.e. self-healing personality) (Friedman & Schustack, 2003, p.13)

 As previously mentioned, additional facets of personality psychology can be traced to the theater. Self-presentation and character identity took headway via Theophrastus, a follower of Aristotle, who was one of the earliest known originators of character sketches. Character sketches are brief interpretations of a person’s nature, per se, that can be recognized universally despite time and location (i.e. someone who is frugal, lazy, organized, etc.) (Friedman & Schustack, 2003, p.12). Not only did character sketches lead the way to personality theories, perspectives also took root by way of Ancient Greek and Roman actors who wore masks to show that they were playing characters outside of their own character. The act of wearing masks suggested that the idea of a true, un-masked, nature of the individual was rather appealing. Around the time Shakespeare came into play, actors had mostly retired the use of masks and adopted great delight with the roles they played. By being able to recognize and understand their basic characteristics, different people were able to act out the characters they played in similar ways, despite their own diverse personalities (Friedman & Schustack, 2003, p.12). During the twentieth century, playwrights such as Luigi Pirandello entertained the idea of characters stepping outside of the action and making comments or reflections (Friedman & Schustack, 2003, p.12). This is what we now refer to as a soliloquy. While the characters seemed to have a reality of their own, social philosophers challenged the idea of a core self or personality. In turn, they contemplated the idea of relative self. This is the idea that the “true” self is composed merely of masks and an underlying self is nonexistent. Not only are these theatrical notions addressed in personality psychology, they also influenced both existential and humanistic psychologists (Friedman & Schustack, 2003, p.12).

 Lastly, evolutionary biology has the most direct and lasting influence on modern personality psychology. Charles Darwin’s postulation of evolution proved to be the greatest development in biological thinking in the nineteenth century. The theory of evolution argued that the individual characteristics that advanced from generation to generation were those that allowed the organism to adapt to the demands of the environment, dominate over others, and secure their safety. These characteristics in turn enabled them to survive and reproduce. Those who could not adapt did not survive and as a result could not reproduce (Friedman & Schustack, 2003, p.13). This concentration on the function of behavior has persistently been an important contribution to the theory of personality. However, the main impact that Darwin’s evolutionary theory has had on personality psychology, is its ability to reroute thought from assumptions of divine control (Friedman & Schustack, 2003, p.13). In other words, it gives one other outlet of thought, in regards to personality, other than divine control presented by the religious roots of personality theory. As presented by Friedman & Schustack, “If we think that a divine force is in total control of human activity, then there is little reason to look for other influences on the individual (2003, p.13).” This allowed scientists to begin to study human behavior systematically (Friedman & Schustack, 2003, p.14). Many past perspectives have enabled the field of personality to develop into the discipline it is today. Various concepts lasted while others grew faint. Personality psychology would not be comprised of such an assortment of perspectives without the diverse and intellectual minds of its main contributors.

LaKeshia Martin-Ayers