Gordon Conwell Theological Seminary

CO 611 Theories of Personality

Dr. Pablo Polishcuk

A Christian Critique of Adler

John Dao

Box 76A

May 5, 2010

Dao 1

Undoubtedly, one of the most influential psychologists to the field of psychology has

been Alfred Adler. His seminal works and ideas have made their way into much of

contemporary psychological thinking and personality theories, although he is often not given

much credit for them.

Adler himself was a student of Freud’s, but like most rejected Freud’s ideas. “Adler

placed a greater focus on more conscious, everyday motives and experiences such as needs for

achievement, as well on social motivation and the striving for superiority” (John, Robins, &

Pervin, 2008). Adler especially emphasized the importance of goals in a person’s life. By

understanding a person’s goal, you can understand why a person behaves in the ways that they

do. For Christians, we see our goal as becoming closer to Christ by allowing the Holy Spirit to

renew and transform us, so we take steps to avoid temptation and to strengthen our relationship

with Him.

These goals do not affect only behavior, but also shape the way we view and think about

certain topics in light of our goals. Adlerians term this series of goals and attitudes a style of life

or simply life style. It is this style of life which creates meaning and value in a person’s life

(Carlson, Watts, & Maniacci, 2006). Once a person has a goal, they have a purpose and thus

have a reason to be. This is why losing a dream can be so detrimental and traumatic, as it forces

one to reevaluate one’s existence. This is the problem with this method of finding meaning in

life, that once the goal is accomplished, given up, or resolved, one must immediately find a new

goal or face boredom and perhaps meaninglessness. The danger is removed when the source of

meaning comes from outside of oneself, as is the case with Christianity (among other world

religions), in which case faith in God and his will for your life is what relegates man’s purpose.

The only problem there lies in discerning what God’s will is for the immediately life, however

Dao 2

the eschatological goal never moves or changes: to enter into Divine relationship with the Holy

Trinity no matter what cost.

The life style also acts as a guide, a limiter, and a predictor for their possessor (Carlson,

Watts, & Maniacci, 2006). If Susan says she is a Christian, than we can expect her to do and not

do certain things. It would be safe to say that we would not expect Susan to stab a person after

Church without there being some sort of serious disconnect going on inside of her. It simply

isn’t in her character to do something like that or to even have the thought come up as an option.

In a sense, we are not free to do as we please because we limit ourselves so that at any given

moment we are not inundated with millions of options. Such a life would be chaotic and

unlivable, but that’s why our life styles also act as a guide. This is perhaps why usual character

and motives are stressed in court investigations. If there was no motive (i.e. reason or goal) for

Charles to murder Betsy and his “character” has always been that of an upstanding citizen in the

community, it is unlikely that he is guilty unless sufficient evidence shows otherwise. Based on

those things alone, we could predict Charles would not be murdering anyone in his lifetime.

Adler claims to have identified four “types” (becoming one of the originators of

typologies) of life styles people assume. They are the ruling type, the getting type, the avoiding

type, and the socially useful type (Engler, 1995). The ruling type of person seeks out power and

control with often little to no social interest aside from that which will advance his goals to reach

the top. The getting type of person are rather dependent on others to continually give to them

and may be deemed as “needy” by those around them again with not much given back to the

community. The avoiding type tries escape the problems of life altogether by either ignoring

them or distracting themselves from what is going on around them with as you may have

guessed, little to no social concern. The last type of person is the socially useful type, a person

Dao 3

who has a great deal of social affect, concern, and involvement. It is evident that social

usefulness it not very common to mankind in general, yet seems to be the only one Adler deems

to be useful. Adler’s theories generally have this socially moralistic tone to them. In the process

of becoming, one would move from being self-interested to socially interested (from which

humanist therapists would eventually term actualization). In terms of its integration with a

Christian worldview, it seems to be able to merge seamlessly with the social concerns for justice

Jesus displayed. To “deny yourself” and “carry your cross” and be “a living sacrifice” is at the

core of what is takes to be a disciple living in submission to the will of God.

The Christian life style as well guides, limits, and predicts behavior. The goal of

personality is Christ (Buckham, 1909). Indeed this is what is meant by “By their fruits you will

recognize them” (Matthew 7:20 NIV). Adler’s proposes that living “as if” you are (borrowed

from the philosophies of Vahinger) is the way one reaches their goals, so for the Christian, living

as if we were Christ is our life style and default mode of operation. Of course, we are not Christ

as we do not share in such intimate communion with the Father, nor is this saying we are

pretending to be Christ as children are wont to do, but rather we are to “be imitators of God”

(Ephesians 5:1 NIV). Paul has been saying these things well before both Adler and Vahinger!

One of the potentially problematic dangers of forming a self defined human life style is

natural apperception bias. Everyone naturally views their own lifestyle as good and proper,

perceiving only evidence which supports their belief or at least explaining away contrary

evidence. Although Individual psychology got its name from the Latin individuum (meaning

“Indivisible” and thus holistic) (Chistensen, 2004), its heavy subjectivity makes it individual in

another sense as well. Adler was interested in the uniqueness of the person (Engler, 1995), but

because of this humans have seemingly been given license to do as they please, often countering

Dao 4

each other’s goals or competing in reaching goals resulting in strife and animosity, and thus more

need for counselors in this world. There is no unity or cohesiveness to humanity and in fact this

is what builds to Adler’s conception of “the will to power.”

Adler believes that the innate human strive for superiority is our primary objective.

Adler had refined his idea on what drove the human race over the years from aggression, to a

“will to power”, to striving for individual superiority, to striving for superior society (Engler,

1995). Adler says that we share this aspect with animals in the evolutionary process (he was

influenced by the works of Darwin and his “survival of the fittest idea”, as were most scientists

of the time). From a cross cultural lens, I do not believe that our goal as a collective human race

is to build a superior society, at least not an innate one. There are plenty of civilizations still left

in the world we could consider “uncivilized” or “backwards”, however different does not mean

that it is wrong in the least bit. It reflects a very western ideal of building a utopian empire that

isn’t the global cultural norm.

“Feelings of inferiority, inadequacy, and insecurity determine the goal of an individual’s

existence” (Adler, Understanding Human Nature, 1998). This leads for the individual to

compensate for said feelings by striving for recognition and superiority (Engler, 1995). While

this may be true of the specific case, it is not true that those striving for power or recognition

always have a background of an inferiority complex or that meekness cannot result from the very

same feelings. Classically, Christianity has viewed this “will to power” as pride (not in the sense

of being proud of a son, but in the sense of “I can do this better than” competitive pride), and in

fact see the innate pride of man as the fall of Adam (and possibly is the only religion which

considers pride as such a vice).

Dao 5

Adler is right that humans experience “will to power” feelings, but the source of it seems

wrong. Striving for superiority may be more transparent in those with higher feelings of

inferiority; however in integration with a Christian worldview, it is implicit in all human beings

from pride and original sin taught to us from our parents. Although we are born as infants,

helpless in every way, it is yet to be shown if infants physically and mentally experience feelings

of inferiority. Indeed Jesus says that “Whoever cannot receive the Kingdom of God as a child,

may certainly not enter into it” (Mark 10:15 NIV), implying that feelings of “inferiority” and

humility are the right and better attitude than the “will to power”. Perhaps there is a theological

significance to being born helpless to instill in us an innate sense of God?

Perhaps I’ve criticized Adler too harshly, as he does admit that a goal may be healthy or

un-healthy, and must be judged according to its usefulness. When Adler talks about

“superiority”, he doesn’t seem to be talking about surpassing one another in competition, or even

placing ourselves above others in exaggerated positions of authority as is the pride I have

described, rather he means superiority in terms of attaining perfection in competency in what one

sets out to do. This is in accordance with what Jesus taught to “Be perfect like your father in

heaven in perfect” (Matthew 5:48 NIV), which means something more like “Be mature”. It

focuses on the teleological nature of his theory and the teleological nature of our faith. We are to

be competent proclaimers and handlers of God’s revealed truth.

As Christian counselors, it is our duty to help refine goals that seem to be destructive into

ones that are constructive towards reconciliation between our client, God, and those in his life.

Adler’s psychology relates very well to counseling as it views the person in his social context.

“The individual is seen as socially embedded in interacting social systems. Adlerian counselors

assume that one can be most successful in help an individual to change if one can change the

Dao 6

way one system (family) interprets and responds to the individual’s behavior” (Chistensen,

2004). While this is true, it is difficult in practice to change the attitudes and responses of an

individual’s family if the person in your office is the only one you are talking to. I would say

that it’s probably best to start with changing the apperceptions and responses of the person in

front of you so that they are not hurt any further before any healing can begin.

In talking about Adlerian and other neo-Freudian models, John, Robins, and Pervin

(2008) state that “Classic psychodynamic models of personality highlight the importance of

relationships with significant others for the development of strategic biases and preferences in

adults’ current relationships.” As such, it is when these relationships go wrong that personality

is impacted (see Appendix). As Margaret Lundberg puts it in her book The Incomplete Adult:

Social Class Constraints on Personality Development, “Personality similarities arise from

common ideas and experiences, that is, from having been cultured in the same medium.

Differences grow out of choice and chance” (1974). Persons who feel neglected during their

formative years can develop coping mechanisms to help them deal with their need for belonging,

however during their adult years the coping mechanisms stay with them and become a hindrance

to normative relationships with peers. Adler does not really have a strong model for

psychopathology other than his methods of interpreting early memories and recollections (due to

self-reinforcement of one’s own worldview and selective recall of memories). Adler, however,

does give an account to the types of “safeguarding mechanisms” (otherwise termed defense

mechanisms elsewhere) that are in existence because of social interactions. Adler believes that

symptoms are all created in the mind. “If people do not want to face intensified feelings of

inferiority (regardless of their particular manifestation), they can develop symptoms, such as

phobias, somatic complaints, obsessions, or the like” (Carlson, Watts, & Maniacci, 2006). It’s

Dao 7

interesting to see Adler’s use of inferiority as the central cause of psychopathologies in one

expression or another. Such a heavy emphasis on “feelings of inferiority” stem from his own

personal history as being a sickly and weak youth. Nowadays, we realize that most symptoms

are the result of chemical imbalances; however some are brought about by excess stress and

arousal. It is entirely possible that the source of distress is the feeling of inferiority, but it is just

one of many things that can lead to stress (work, deadlines, relationships, etc.).

Some other safeguarding mechanisms Adler proposes are excuses (denials,

rationalizations, etc.), aggression (depreciation of other’s worth, accusation, and self-accusation),

distance-seeking (backward movement, standing still, hesitation, and creating obstacles), anxiety

(becoming too afraid to try), and the exclusion tendency (only operating when success is a

guarantee). These share a few things in common with the ones postulated by Anna Freud,

however some of them are rather unique as they do not serve to protect the ego in as much as

they serve to avoid dealing with a stressful situation. Arguably, both confronting an

uncomfortable truth and facing a difficult challenge are both stressful situations to be “defended”

against, whereas one deals with the intrapsyche and the other with the interpsyche. In fact, this

was Adler’s shift from Freud’s and Jung’s intrapsychic emphases to a more relational and

interpsychic (interpersonal) emphasis (Engler, 1995).

Adler’s crowning achievement was his idea of a creative self. It is the aspect of self that

interprets and makes meaningful the experiences had by the individual as well as searching and

seeking out experiences that will allow the person to express their lifestyle. (Engler, 1995) A

child would develop a life-script as a child, and as they grow with it, seek out opportunities to

live it out in their surrounding environment. In this way individuals are greatly shaped by their

environments and forge their own personalities from them. Unlike Freud, Adler focuses on the

Dao 8

conscious part of the mind at the core of the human being. He believed the unconscious was

only a temporary lapse from consciousness and it is the conscious mind which imagines and

lives out the lifestyle. (Adler, Understanding Human Nature, 1998)

The ministry that Christians are called to is by no means an easy one. In my opinion,

Adler’s theories seem to have the best compatibility with a biblical worldview. Adler himself

did not reject the importance of religion in a person’s growth and well being, as his predecessor

Freud did.

Dao 9

Bibliography

Adler, A. (1964). Individual Psychology, Its Assumptions and Results. In H. Ruitenbeek, Varieties of Personality Theory (pp. 65-79). New York: E. P. Dutton & Co., Inc.

Adler, A. (1998). Understanding Human Nature. Center City: Hazelden.

Buckham, J. W. (1909). Personality and the Christian Ideal. Boston: The Pilgrim Press.

Carlson, J., Watts, R. E., & Maniacci, M. (2006). Adlerian Therapy: Theory and Practice. Washington DC: American Psychological Association.

Chistensen, O. C. (Ed.). (2004). Adlerian Family Counseling. Minneapolis: Educational Media Corp.

Engler, B. (1995). Personality Theories (Fourth Edition ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.

John, P. O., Robins, R. W., & Pervin, L. A. (Eds.). (2008). Handbook of Psychology. New York: Guilford Press.

Lundberg, M. J. (1974). The Incomplete Adult: Social Class Constraints on Personality Development. Westport: Greenwood Press.

Dao 10

Appendix A: My personality Theory

In taking with Adler’s social theories, I believe there is a strong relational aspect to

Personality formation. In fact, it is our everyday social interactions which shape our

personalities from birth to present. You can tell a lot about personality and how it’s affected by

studying what can go wrong with it i.e. personality disorders. For instance, histrionic types of

people may have had a past history of neglect so that they compensate to gain attention. My

theory is similar to Adler’s theories, but wider in scope as to what can affect personality (not just

inferiority complexes).

In thinking about Bowlby’s Attachment theory, attachment is a large part in how a person

develops the way in which they relate to other people. The way a child interacts with their

parents forms an imprint or a schema of what a relationship should be like in the child’s mind.

This then becomes the standard of reference to which the child forms relationships with peers

and ultimately romantic relationships. However, in the face of hostile feelings or reception, the

child will develop “safeguarding mechanisms” to distance themselves from the pain they feel.

This is completely natural and serves to protect the child so that he can develop otherwise

normally, however the safeguarding mechanisms will carry over into adulthood and the

relationships there. What once served a function to protect the child now serves to ruin any hope

for normalcy in relationship. The four types of personality types Adler noted (ruling, avoiding,

etc.) correspond loosely to the four types of attachment styles (except for socially useful).

Interpersonal relations and attitudes are only one part of personality however. Depending

on the circumstances and environment a child is raised in, a child can develop certain traits in

how he views the world. Worldview is as much a part of personality as anything else as it

Dao 11

influences how one perceives and responds to a given situation. A child can see the world as

random and chaotic or ordered and good depending on what happens to them and how they are

taught and raised. This is part of the power of the Bible: its ability to completely and totally

transform a person’s worldview if it is believed. What once seemed like luck now is the divine

grace of God, and what was once death is now life. Misfortune can be suffered because of

providence and worries can be abated to allow for a focus on socially constructive endeavors.

When we aren’t worried for our own well being, we begin to see when others are struggling to

offer them assistance.

In addition, genetics cannot be ignored when it comes to development of personality.

OCD, depression, and schizophrenia will dramatically alter one’s view of the world and affects

ones attitude towards it. In addition, it will shape how those around them will treat them,

potentially causing even more personality changes and the development of traits. Depending on

how much and how often a certain trait is enforced can influence the expression of that trait in an

individual. Traits in this way can either be static or fluid depending on how they are enforced.

For example, let’s view a person as a garden. Each plant in the garden determines what

the garden will look like and can potentially influence other plants in the garden. Depending on

how long each plant has been there will dictate how deep its roots will go and thus how ingrained

it is to the garden and how difficult it would be to move. For instance, weeds can be plucked

easily, but trees would take some considerable effort to remove completely. So then traits are

like the plants in the garden, certain ones are easy to remove and are not so essential to the look

of the garden (e.g. smoking, liking hats, etc.) whereas others are very core to how the garden

looks (e.g. faith, attitudes, extraversion, etc.). Again, as with Adler’s theory, it is a holistic

model of personality as the look and feel of the garden is greater than the sum of its parts.

Dao 12

In a sense, it is also a narrative sense of personality, as it is the account of all the

experiences and relationships of an individual’s journey through life. When developing a

character in a story or narrative, it is important to identify the key events and figures shaping that

character’s life. It is through the main character’s learning and growth as he endeavors to

accomplish his goal that builds his character and personality. Even as we read in the bible that

suffering “produces perseverance; perseverance, character; and character, hope” (Romans 5:3-4

NIV), we see the development of the story God is telling of His people in Israel leading up to the

climax of Christ on the cross. In this way God is the author of our lives, shaping and molding us

to become who he has set out for us to be.

However, his will for our lives does not come unchallenged. There are many distractions

that can make us forget about God and many times we cannot see what we are supposed to do

because our sin and others’ gets in the way of our vision. Freedom is not the ability to do

whatever we wish to lead a fulfilling life; rather freedom is the ability to become what God has

made us to be. We are free from obstructions to block us because we are with one who is

mightier than any obstacle. Despite evils or less than optimal childhoods, God causes good to

come out of them. This is not to say God caused these evils or that they are not devastating,

however God has been redeeming history and turning bad situations into miracles since time

began. Indeed in this way, suffering can have meaning as it shapes how we can relate to the

world.

Last but not least, our culture can determine a lot of our personality traits and attitudes.

People born in a Chinese culture and people born in an American culture think about the same

concepts very differently and have very different values. Culture plays a significant role in child

rearing practices and thus a significant role in personality development. Even the interplay of

Dao 13

cultures can drastically affect a child’s development. As I was growing up as a Vietnamese child

in American culture, I learned to adapt to one culture at home and one at school. Not so

surprisingly enough, my American culture became my dominant one (partially due to not being

able to speak the Vietnamese language), and I saw home life as oppressive to my rights as a child

to live in an individualistic culture where obedience to parents was not so much valued. The

interplay of my being an American cultured child being raised in a Vietnamese cultured home

greatly affected how I dealt with the world and my view of my relationship with my parents was

skewed. It was not until way later that I learned that my home life was the culturally accepted

way to display love and affection (through a stricter authoritarian household style), but I received

what was meant as love as injustice. With all that said, culture does not translate as well as

would be hoped.

In summary, personality is affected by five factors: social relationships, faith and

worldview, genetics, trait reinforcement, and culture. These five factors are very well tied

together, each influences the others to create a picture of personality that cannot be fully

explained by anyone factor alone. It is a holistic approach, integrating and borrowing ideas from

many personality theories and philosophies that can give structure while maintain flexibility and

a reasonable grounds for psychopathology.