Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
GEPSYCH –GOA
Professor: Mr. Rene Nob
1st term –Academic Year 2010-2011
As with almost every other debate, the conclusion almost always is a balance of both sides
because as the cliché goes, anything taken to the extreme is not at all good. The same goes
with the issues in the theories of personality; in the end, all things must be a balance of both. In
reality however, no matter how we try to balance things, one thing is always going to outweigh
the other. And that is what this paper is all about. Even if it has already been concluded that
everything must be a balance of both issues, I am, in this paper, going to try my best to take
sides and defend the side of the issue that I have chosen.
Before I start taking sides though, let me first rundown the issues in theories of personality:
• Freewill vs. Determinism
• Nature vs. Nurture (Nativism vs. Empiricism)
• Past vs. Present
• Uniqueness vs. Universality
• Equilibrium vs. Growth
• Optimism vs. Pessimism
Now with the issues laid down, let me start taking sides:
Between Freewill & Determinism, I choose Determinism.
Between Nature and Nurture, I choose Nature.
Between Past & Present, I choose Past.
Between Uniqueness and Universality, I choose Uniqueness.
Between Equilibrium and Growth, I choose Equilibrium.
Between Optimism and Pessimism, I choose Optimism.
Page 1 of 4
be, what we want to do, whatever. But at the end of the day, certain circumstances might hinder
us from doing what we want, from becoming what we want to be. If everything is governed by
freewill, then we shouldn’t have any problem achieving what we want, but because of pre-
determined conditions, then we lose control over situations. I concede to the fact that freewill
might be true and certainly applicable in some, if not most, instances but if we try to look
deeper, we realize that determinism is, at the end of the day, the more powerful force that
governs our lives and of course, our personalities. It is a given that freewill does exist and we
get to exercise it, but only up to a certain extent; beyond that extent where freewill is functional,
lies determinism. And the fact that determinism is a larger force than freewill proves that it is
more powerful. Moreover, it is like the argument on believing and having faith wherein it is said
that when one believes in something, it means that he can see that something and that is why
he believes in it. But having faith is way greater than just merely believing because having faith
is believing without seeing; and as it is, what is much more unexplainable is much more
powerful because what is the point of having emotions such as anxiety, nervousness, doubt and
other such feelings if freewill is more dominant than determinism?
Page 2 of 4
believe that everything is pre-determined. And of course with that said, I stand for the fact that
our past, which was pre-destined to happen before it ever did, makes up who we are and what
we are now at present. Moreover, I also believe that the term present is largely indefinable
because everything comes to past. For example, as I type in each character in this paper, it has
already become a part of the past. Or take time as another example, each second that passes
has become a part of the past. Therefore, the past really is more encompassing than the
present because even the basic argument of the definition of the term present cannot be
justified. So even at the shallow surface of things, it is really the past that determines our
personalities. But even as I have said that, I do believe that the present is more important than
the past. But that altogether is another argument. Besides, what is being tackled in this paper
are the determinants of personality and I firmly take my stand that the past is a more viable
determinant of personality than the present.
The next debate on the theories of personality would be equilibrium vs. growth;
Here, I pick equilibrium over growth.
I have always been fascinated with the saying that when one is up there is nowhere to go but
down or vice versa, that when one is down there is nowhere else to go but up. I choose
equilibrium as the more significant factor in determining personality over growth because I value
stability a lot. I also believe that it is always better to maintain whatever talents and skills we
have now and serve the world with whatever it is that we are gifted with rather than keep on
honing what little talent we have and at the end of the day end up with nothing because of our
Page 3 of 4
dreams that are to high to achieve. I hope people will not get me wrong. As with most people, I
also believe that we should keep on growing and developing our skills. However, I believe in the
virtue of contentment, and that is why I am for equilibrium rather than growth. And besides, even
if I chose growth, let us pretend that I did choose growth. There is a certain extent that we will
have reached the top and growth does stop there, of course we wouldn’t want to go back down
again; so the fact alone that we don’t want to come down again and maintain our position at the
top of our games, is equilibrium in itself. And that is why I say that equilibrium is more important
that growth; because equilibrium, even though it is harder to achieve than growth, is more
sustainable and long-lasting. And also, it is directly linked to determinism.
At the end of all this discussion, it is prevalent that a sense of balance is still most important. But
I am happy to assert that I at least have taken a stance on these issues in the theories of
personality. As amateur and unknowledgeable as I may be when it comes to matters of
psychology, I would like to believe that I have somehow made somewhat substantial arguments
with this paper. But of course, at the end of the day, works of psychology scholars still prevail.
Page 4 of 4