Erikson’s developmental stages
- Identity and Intimacy
In his conception of
human development Erikson (1959), define each of his eight stages in terms of
two different basic attitudes, the favorable inter- relationship of which
results in a vital or psychological force.
In the first stage, for example,
hope emerges from the favorable balance between trust and mistrust, with trust
winning out when the crisis of confidence is resolved positively. Individuals enter each new stage in their
lives with the heritage of the previous stage.
This baggage from the past influences, adds or endangers the success of
subsequent developmental crisis.
Thus the young person
normally enters the stage of intimacy with the following acquisitions:
confidence and hope, autonomy and will, initiative and pursuits of goals,
industry and competency, identity and fidelity.
If the individual has not
succeeded in resolving the identity crisis positively, establishing intimate
relationships with others will prove difficult. Rather than developing a true sense of
intimacy, the young adult will live with a feeling of isolation. all interpersonal relationships consist of a pseudo-intimacy. Such
persons will be incapable of committing themselves to a true intimate
relationship with another, since they will fear the loss of part of themselves
if they do so. Such an inhibition is
often reinforced by fear of a consequences of intimacy. Normally intimacy with another leads to
generativity, i.e. to gradual expansion of interest and to love for that which
is created, produced and engendered. A
firm and well-established sense of identity is therefore a prerequisite
condition for the development of a true sense of intimacy, just as a true sense
of intimacy is a prerequisite for the development of a sense of generativity.
Definition of intimacy
In a dialogue with
Evans, Erikson pointed out that the term intimacy is often given a bad
name. For him intimacy includes such
intimate relationships as love, friendship, sexual intimacy and intimacy with
self, with one's own inner resources and with the scope of one's emotions and
commitments. Only at the end of
adolescence, i.e. when the person has become less caught up in the task of
self-definition, can intimacy develop in which love is anchored in mutual commitment.
The Eriksonian concept
of intimacy thus defined is both broad and complex. His definition includes mutuality, or shared feelings, with a love person with whom the
individual is capable of coordinating a healthy work life balance.
Since the term
mutuality constitutes a key element in the definition, is important to pinpoint
its meaning. As Bettelheim points out, the term mutuality and reciprocity are often confused. He distinguishes them as follows: reciprocity
involves only an alternating movement first in one direction and then the other
while mutuality designates a movement by both partners with respect to the
other. In mutuality the accent is on
what is happening within each of the partners not only what is happening
between them as Ian reciprocity. Erikson
considers mutuality within a relationship is in which the partners are
inter-dependent for the development of their respective strengths. On the ethical level, the individual acts so
as to actualize within him and the other such forces as are liable to raise the
level of mutuality. According to the
Erikson concept, true mutuality is based
on the ability to differentiate self clearly from “the other” and the ability to accept existing differences (sense of identity). In a truly intimate relationship the partners
take advantage of their differences in order to learn from each other and to
enrich their personalities rather than
becoming polarized by presenting opposing qualities that remain exclusive to
each.
No comments:
Post a Comment