Generativity: The Key to a Happy Life Read the following features of Generativit

Question

Generativity: The Key to a Happy Life Read the following features of Generativity Versus Stagnation:

• The psychological processes that promote generativity are person-environment interaction and creativity. Generativity relates to the concerns of people within their community. People want to contribute to their community through their work, parenting, and creative efforts. Contributions improve the quality of life for community members.

• The virtue or ego quality that arises out of generativity is caring. People in the stage of generativity care about themselves, their families, their communities, and the peoples of the world.

• Erikson believed that without generativity people stagnate. Stagnation suggests a lack of growth. Those unable to cope with life experiences may become stagnant.

• Narcissistic people—those who care mostly about their own satisfaction—tend to focus on creating personal wealth or accumulating things for themselves. They may be perfectly happy, but psychologically stagnant, which puts them at risk for difficulties as they face old age and death.

• Chronically depressed people have difficulty promoting generativity , because they fail to see the worth of their work and behavior. • The psychological pathology that arises from stagnation is rejectivity—that is, to reject or refuse to embrace others, which may lead to hostility toward others. This hostility may be toward individuals in the family, or other families, or other community groups, or other cultural groups. Erikson was concerned that a high level of rejectivity within a society promotes societal stagnation, which may in turn cause groups to dominate or promote a desire to annihilate other groups.

QUESTION: Do you think Erikson’s theory may be wrong about the potential of societal stagnation? If so, What evidence would you want to see in place to support Erikson’s view of generativity and stagnation?

Explanation / Answer

Yes, I feel that the Erikson theory on the potential of societal stagnation is wrong. This is because, it looks impossible for a society at large to be chronically depressed. It is definitely possible that a society has negative opinion about other group, but the line of thoughts he presents for such negativity seems illogical. The evidence I would like to see to support Erikson's view of generativity and stagnation would be real cases of his theory being proved right. Till then, it sounds illogical or beyond practicality to me.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse G
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.