Individual Psychology versus Systems/ Cybernetics Perspectives
Most of us have learned appropriate behaviors and ways of thinking that are firmly rooted in the Western, Lockean, scientific tradition (Becvar & Becvar, 2009). Rather we are around our peers or family members; we develop and are taught social norms that allow us to become productive members in our society (Becvar & Becvar, 2009). For many of us we are taught the linear cause and effect thinking to situations and that “any problem is solvable if we can find the answer to the question, why (Becvar & Becvar, 2009)? An example normally given is, “A” causes “B” to happen therefore creating event “C” (Becvar & Becvar, 2009). Most of us are familiar with the Lockean tradition, which emphasizes to understand the world around us we must view the world as consisting of “subjects” and “objects” (Becvar & Becvar, 2009). From this frame of thinking, reality is considered to be separate from us and exist outside of our mind (Becvar & Becvar, 2009). The framework that surrounds the individual psychology approach is possibly familiar to most because it is very much apart of our culture. The concept of individual psychology was formulated in the process in which Alfred Adler broke away from the psychoanalytic school of Sigmund Freud (Shepard, P., 2011). Adler’s goal was the creation of a wholistic perspective with recognition that to be understood, behavior must be considered in context (Shepard, P., 2011). Alder’s individual psychology is based on a humanistic model of a man (Shepard, P., 2011). For the individualistic way of thinking, focus is either on the individual and their behaviors or on the internal events of the human mind (Shepard, P., 2011).
The framework of the system/ cybernetic perspective focuses on relationships and relationship issues between individuals (Becvar & Becvar, 2009). There is a great emphasis on share responsibility, or circular causality. In other words, an event where each one...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document