Lynnette Lockwood
Introduction to Sociology
Library Research
Belief in the Existance of the Multiple Personality Disorder
Multiple personality disorder (MPD) has been described as a splitting of a person’s personality to form new people when the stress of the world is too much to handle. Dissociation disorder is when a person experiences changes in their consciousness and identity, but not in their personality. The debate about the extreme level of dissociation advancing into the existence of MPD has been prevalent since the story of Sybil. There have been many studies conducted to determine the existence of dissociation disorder/MPDs, but skepticism continues. In the research article Belief in the Existence of Multiple Personality Disorder among Psychologists and Psychiatrist (Dunn, Gary 1994) a survey was sent to all the 1900 psychiatrists and 1700 psychologists that provided services in the VA medical centers throughout the United States. Some of the questions entailed “Do you believe in the existence of dissociation/MPD? Have you ever treated any patients with dissociation/MPD?” Both males and females were surveyed as well as the number of years they had been employed. General consensus supported that the diagnosis of dissociation disorders existed but requires more specific diagnostic labels. 78.9% of males and 82.8% of females believed in the existence of dissociation/MPD. The survey found that the psychiatrists and psychologists that were younger and with less experience were more likely to believe in the existence of dissociation/MPD. Older psychiatrists and psychologists with more experience were less likely to believe that dissociation/MPD existed. The survey found that the psychiatrists and psychologists that had treated patients diagnosed with dissociation/MPD were more likely to believe in the existence. Major variables that could have skewed the results are that the survey only occurred in VA systems of health professionals working with military veterans and a limited survey return rate.
Dissociation/MPD diagnoses can be approached by applying the structural-functional theory. The structural-functional theory looks at society as a complex framework of parts working towards solidarity and stability. Milder forms of dissociation can be relatively stable within society unless a stressor triggers the dissociation state. However, MPDs are not as stable and do not function well in a social environment. The splitting of one’s personality causes the walking self to blackout, not function properly and experience memory difficulty associated with the experiences of the different personalities. MPDs have extreme difficulty maintaining healthy relationships in work, romance, and families. The debate continues and it is clear that further research is indicated.
Saturday, February 18, 2012
Chapter 14 Connection Task Peter the Great
Chapter 14 connection task
1) Peter wrote to his son, Alexis, that he doesn’t want him to engage in war without just cause. However the "art of war" must be understood and learned because it is one of two important ingredients for a successful government. War can bring about order and defense, both which are necessary for government. Peter became known as the great because of his strong abilities to govern. By practicing his art of war he expanded his country’s territory, modernized the military, and bolstered manufacturing. His skill caused the Russian government to flourish and become stronger. He over took underdeveloped countries to gain territory, drastically increased the national economy and gained very important access to the seas.
2) When Peter wrote to his son he had not been speaking with him. He felt that by not speaking to him for some time would correct his son’s undesirable personality. Peter told him that he had a wicked and stubborn disposition that no talking or beating had been able to correct. He told him that he was weak, but not of mind or body as Peter claims. He told him that he doesn’t listen, doesn’t want to do good, and has buried his God given talents. He told Alexis that he was a gangrenous member of his family that could be permanently cut off. Peter told his son that he lacks desire to learn and has no knowledge of military and is unfit to manage state affairs. He asked his son how he could expect to be a good leader if he knows nothing. He doesn’t want his son to take over for him when he dies if he doesn’t mend his ways and not be hypocritical.
3) He singled out the Greeks. He stated that the Greeks were very similar to Russia but they were way too peaceful. They desired not to wage war, but to live peacefully and therefore were constantly serving their tyrants. He was trying to point out that Russia without strong leadership could end up like the Greeks who always gave way to their enemy and eventually perished.
4) Peter the Great began to rule at the age of 10 years with little formal education. He was known as being severely punishing to his opposition. He did major reforms to administration, industry, commerce, technology and culture. He enforced the priests to teach the children to have awe for their tsar. He was known by his military personnel as having large amounts of restlessness, energy, and impulsiveness. He was known for beating his officials with a stick due to his anger. He was also known for his insatiable capacity to work. The letter shows that the Tsar is a strong leader and cares about his son and wants him to be a great leader too but highly doubts that this is possible.
Many times famous rulers have lots in common. It was very interesting to me after reading the letter from Peter the Great, the tsar of Russia, to his son, Alexis. Upon further research I discovered that Peter put lots of pressure on his son Alexis because he was to be the successor to the throne. Alexis was so pressured that he left the country. Peter contacted Alexis and asked him to come back home. In 1718 Peter had a plan and he tried his own son for treason, sentenced him to death and imprisoned him. Alexis actually died before he could be executed from wounds he had received due to being tortured. Peter the Great killed his own son.
Another famous ruler comes to mind that had very similar traits to Peter the Great. Ivan the Terrible was also the tsar of Russia before Peter the Great. Ivan was known to have an uncontrollable anger. He was physically abusive to everyone around him including his own family. In 1581he disliked the way that his son Ivan’s wife was dressed during pregnancy and began to slap her. His son Ivan came to his wife’s rescue and Ivan killed his son in a fit of rage. His son was to be his successor to the throne.
Both men were famous, strong rulers with faulty depositions. Both men had male successors to their throne upon their death, but both killed their own sons. Neither son lived long enough to become tsar themselves.
1) Peter wrote to his son, Alexis, that he doesn’t want him to engage in war without just cause. However the "art of war" must be understood and learned because it is one of two important ingredients for a successful government. War can bring about order and defense, both which are necessary for government. Peter became known as the great because of his strong abilities to govern. By practicing his art of war he expanded his country’s territory, modernized the military, and bolstered manufacturing. His skill caused the Russian government to flourish and become stronger. He over took underdeveloped countries to gain territory, drastically increased the national economy and gained very important access to the seas.
2) When Peter wrote to his son he had not been speaking with him. He felt that by not speaking to him for some time would correct his son’s undesirable personality. Peter told him that he had a wicked and stubborn disposition that no talking or beating had been able to correct. He told him that he was weak, but not of mind or body as Peter claims. He told him that he doesn’t listen, doesn’t want to do good, and has buried his God given talents. He told Alexis that he was a gangrenous member of his family that could be permanently cut off. Peter told his son that he lacks desire to learn and has no knowledge of military and is unfit to manage state affairs. He asked his son how he could expect to be a good leader if he knows nothing. He doesn’t want his son to take over for him when he dies if he doesn’t mend his ways and not be hypocritical.
3) He singled out the Greeks. He stated that the Greeks were very similar to Russia but they were way too peaceful. They desired not to wage war, but to live peacefully and therefore were constantly serving their tyrants. He was trying to point out that Russia without strong leadership could end up like the Greeks who always gave way to their enemy and eventually perished.
4) Peter the Great began to rule at the age of 10 years with little formal education. He was known as being severely punishing to his opposition. He did major reforms to administration, industry, commerce, technology and culture. He enforced the priests to teach the children to have awe for their tsar. He was known by his military personnel as having large amounts of restlessness, energy, and impulsiveness. He was known for beating his officials with a stick due to his anger. He was also known for his insatiable capacity to work. The letter shows that the Tsar is a strong leader and cares about his son and wants him to be a great leader too but highly doubts that this is possible.
Many times famous rulers have lots in common. It was very interesting to me after reading the letter from Peter the Great, the tsar of Russia, to his son, Alexis. Upon further research I discovered that Peter put lots of pressure on his son Alexis because he was to be the successor to the throne. Alexis was so pressured that he left the country. Peter contacted Alexis and asked him to come back home. In 1718 Peter had a plan and he tried his own son for treason, sentenced him to death and imprisoned him. Alexis actually died before he could be executed from wounds he had received due to being tortured. Peter the Great killed his own son.
Another famous ruler comes to mind that had very similar traits to Peter the Great. Ivan the Terrible was also the tsar of Russia before Peter the Great. Ivan was known to have an uncontrollable anger. He was physically abusive to everyone around him including his own family. In 1581he disliked the way that his son Ivan’s wife was dressed during pregnancy and began to slap her. His son Ivan came to his wife’s rescue and Ivan killed his son in a fit of rage. His son was to be his successor to the throne.
Both men were famous, strong rulers with faulty depositions. Both men had male successors to their throne upon their death, but both killed their own sons. Neither son lived long enough to become tsar themselves.
Independent Self
The independent self is defining one’s self in terms of one’s own internal thoughts, feelings, and actions. These are beliefs that we have that define who we are. Westerners use this view of self and favor uniqueness. In the United States people get married to have children, for love and to receive economic security. Some people will even get married to get citizenship into the United States. Mary who is going to get married soon and with the independent view of self she might say I will get married because I love my fiancé, I want to have children, I need someone to provide for me emotional support, and be there when I need someone to go out with socially. The desire to have children and have a family is especially high for Americans but being in a marital situation is not expected. Being independent or raising children in a single parent home is a frequent occurrence. Sometimes people get married because of unplanned pregnancy, but people desire internally love, companionship, and commitment. Even though many Americans chose to marry it is just as fine not to marry. Independence is favored in the American culture. Both men and women in today’s society strive to stay independent even when they enter into a close intimate relationship.
The interdependent self is a relationship between its members that is dependent on each other. Easterners use this type of self and favor feeling connected and interdependent with other people. This concept says that without the other person the relationship can’t survive. They will be emotionally, economically, ecologically, and morally reliant on others. They strive to be part of a social group. In Eastern culture marriage is a must and remaining single isn’t an option. Easterners want to get married to have children as well, but they are allowed to have only two children. They also want to get married because of social status. Mary might say she is getting married because she is loved by her fiancés parents and friends and that she is dependent on him to meet her needs. Being dependent upon each other is a main ingredient in their relationships. Their thoughts, feelings and actions are connected to the relationship they have with others. They are motivated by the concept of family, belonging to a religious group and feeling obligated to others.
The interdependent self is a relationship between its members that is dependent on each other. Easterners use this type of self and favor feeling connected and interdependent with other people. This concept says that without the other person the relationship can’t survive. They will be emotionally, economically, ecologically, and morally reliant on others. They strive to be part of a social group. In Eastern culture marriage is a must and remaining single isn’t an option. Easterners want to get married to have children as well, but they are allowed to have only two children. They also want to get married because of social status. Mary might say she is getting married because she is loved by her fiancés parents and friends and that she is dependent on him to meet her needs. Being dependent upon each other is a main ingredient in their relationships. Their thoughts, feelings and actions are connected to the relationship they have with others. They are motivated by the concept of family, belonging to a religious group and feeling obligated to others.
Arousal
Physiological arousal involves increased heart rate, increase in the focus of attention, sweaty palms, dry mouth, deeper breathing, and wide eyed electricity in your body that a person feels. After a person becomes physiologically aroused they need to interpret what has caused the arousal. Arousal is not limited to sexual pleasure.
The misinterpretation of arousal is the process that people experience when they make a mistake about the cause for their arousal. Misinterpretation of arousal occurs most often in times of heighten stress such as interacting with someone on top of a high building, but misinterpreting the stress as being due to sexual attractiveness towards the other person, not the height.
I could use the misinterpretation of arousal to my advantage if I wanted a male to notice me. When someone experiences fear they could be more likely to be seduced. I could invite a male friend to a rope course for some high wire activities and then flirt and tease with him during the drills. Because of his anxiety or fear due to the high rope activities he may misinterpret his feelings and analyze his feelings as a strong attraction towards me.
The misinterpretation of arousal is the process that people experience when they make a mistake about the cause for their arousal. Misinterpretation of arousal occurs most often in times of heighten stress such as interacting with someone on top of a high building, but misinterpreting the stress as being due to sexual attractiveness towards the other person, not the height.
I could use the misinterpretation of arousal to my advantage if I wanted a male to notice me. When someone experiences fear they could be more likely to be seduced. I could invite a male friend to a rope course for some high wire activities and then flirt and tease with him during the drills. Because of his anxiety or fear due to the high rope activities he may misinterpret his feelings and analyze his feelings as a strong attraction towards me.
Monday, February 13, 2012
Oliver
Oliver Cromwell was a military and political leader of the 1600’s. He was a solider that earned fair greater wages than a great body of people. He put their lives in jeopardy for the liberties of the protestant religion of England. In 1628 he was elected a Member of Parliament. From 1642 to 1646 he was the military commander of the New Model Army. During his time as a military leader he overthrew the English Parliament and changed England from a monarchy to a commonwealth. A commonwealth is a government that protects the welfare of its citizens as a large body instead of a small privileged class. He ruled for nine years. On April 20th 1653 he put an end to Rump Parliament. This was the first step toward his dictatorship. He signed the death warrant of Charles the I to have him beheaded so that it cleared the way for him to take over the power. He created a new parliament with men that had fidelity, honesty and shared his political views. He was later appointed Lord Protector. This gave him king like power and he received royal treatment. Cromwell loathed Irish Catholics. He drove them out of their homes and sold their land to Protestants to repay war debts
According to the Mind of a Dictator in 2011 by James Fallon a dictator has many qualities. They have charm, power hungry, controlling, have no restraint, lack compassion, have high self confidence, very intelligent, sadistic, malignant, masterful liars, and extremely self absorbed. Most dictators are narcissistic, psychopaths, are addicted to torture and killing, megalomaniacal and usually have held a high military office. Dictators rule by autocracies, have totalitarian government, have stratocracies, usually suspend elections and civil liberties, and kill off any opposing power. It appears according to the history books and the actions of Cromwell he possessed all of these characteristics.
A good reason to study history is to learn from past experiences and hopefully learn not to make the same mistakes. When one studies about Cromwell other historical leaders come to mind, but none are as parallel in nature to Cromwell as Adolph Hitler.
Adolph Hitler approached the German people convincing them that they could become the “master race”. He exhibited all the characteristics of a dictator according to Fallon’s definition. He was able to take over the government and become Germany’s leader. He ruled by dictatorship, was ruthless and killed six million Jews in concentration camps during WWII. Cromwell and Hitler were similar in their technique to obtain power, maintain the power and in promoting genocide.
According to the Mind of a Dictator in 2011 by James Fallon a dictator has many qualities. They have charm, power hungry, controlling, have no restraint, lack compassion, have high self confidence, very intelligent, sadistic, malignant, masterful liars, and extremely self absorbed. Most dictators are narcissistic, psychopaths, are addicted to torture and killing, megalomaniacal and usually have held a high military office. Dictators rule by autocracies, have totalitarian government, have stratocracies, usually suspend elections and civil liberties, and kill off any opposing power. It appears according to the history books and the actions of Cromwell he possessed all of these characteristics.
A good reason to study history is to learn from past experiences and hopefully learn not to make the same mistakes. When one studies about Cromwell other historical leaders come to mind, but none are as parallel in nature to Cromwell as Adolph Hitler.
Adolph Hitler approached the German people convincing them that they could become the “master race”. He exhibited all the characteristics of a dictator according to Fallon’s definition. He was able to take over the government and become Germany’s leader. He ruled by dictatorship, was ruthless and killed six million Jews in concentration camps during WWII. Cromwell and Hitler were similar in their technique to obtain power, maintain the power and in promoting genocide.
Self Serving Basis
The self serving basis occurs when people use praise or blame when they have a success or failure. People will contribute their success by their personality but when people fail they are more likely to blame outside sources instead of themselves for the failure. Western and Eastern cultures share different approaches in the use of attributions.
Western cultures look at people as individuals. People are more independent and self- centered. Behavior is looked at through personality traits. Western cultures have an analytical thinking style which involves internal characteristics such as traits, attitudes and aptitudes. They are more conscious and deliberate in their actions. They use controlled reasoning. When the government passes a law the people will meet and debate if it’s a good or bad law. They will consider their individual rights and fight for their rights. The western culture strives to prove the truth and in people’s individual rights. They strive for success and self achievement and believe in the external nature of money, faith and popularity to reach that success. They favor individual leaders that are more outgoing, charismatic and think for themselves. They view their leaders as an outstanding individual that stands out from the rest. Western culture many times view Eastern people as secretive, dishonest and inauthentic.
Eastern cultures examine life as a group and as a social being. They have a holistic way of thinking which involves belief structure, habits and norms. They are more spontaneous and preconscious. They use automatic mental processes. When the government passes a law the people will go along with it and if it interferes with their lifestyle they will find a way within their inner self to adjust to it. They accept the truth as given and seek balance from inner self. They view acceptance and adjustments as a social responsibility. They are follower with groups and they more readily conform. They view their leaders as very powerful and large in nature within their social group. Eastern culture is more conservative in their views; they are loyal, have piety to parents, have a close relationship with their families and are very aware of culture and tradition. Eastern people view western people as rude, loud and too outgoing.
In a failure situation such as the next great baker a group of Eastern decent people could compete against a group of western decent people. When a baking product failed an assessment of the situation would occur to explain what happened that contributed to the failure. The Eastern decent group would state that their group failed as a whole. Each person would do self reflection, self blame and then attempt to seek an inner balance to seek peace within. The Western decent group could state the cause was due to individual failure. They would base this upon having a bad disposition, poor leadership skills, poor decision making, lacking aptitude or having a bad attitude. People of Eastern decent use situational attribution while people of Western decent use dispositional attribution for explanations of situations and behaviors.
Western cultures look at people as individuals. People are more independent and self- centered. Behavior is looked at through personality traits. Western cultures have an analytical thinking style which involves internal characteristics such as traits, attitudes and aptitudes. They are more conscious and deliberate in their actions. They use controlled reasoning. When the government passes a law the people will meet and debate if it’s a good or bad law. They will consider their individual rights and fight for their rights. The western culture strives to prove the truth and in people’s individual rights. They strive for success and self achievement and believe in the external nature of money, faith and popularity to reach that success. They favor individual leaders that are more outgoing, charismatic and think for themselves. They view their leaders as an outstanding individual that stands out from the rest. Western culture many times view Eastern people as secretive, dishonest and inauthentic.
Eastern cultures examine life as a group and as a social being. They have a holistic way of thinking which involves belief structure, habits and norms. They are more spontaneous and preconscious. They use automatic mental processes. When the government passes a law the people will go along with it and if it interferes with their lifestyle they will find a way within their inner self to adjust to it. They accept the truth as given and seek balance from inner self. They view acceptance and adjustments as a social responsibility. They are follower with groups and they more readily conform. They view their leaders as very powerful and large in nature within their social group. Eastern culture is more conservative in their views; they are loyal, have piety to parents, have a close relationship with their families and are very aware of culture and tradition. Eastern people view western people as rude, loud and too outgoing.
In a failure situation such as the next great baker a group of Eastern decent people could compete against a group of western decent people. When a baking product failed an assessment of the situation would occur to explain what happened that contributed to the failure. The Eastern decent group would state that their group failed as a whole. Each person would do self reflection, self blame and then attempt to seek an inner balance to seek peace within. The Western decent group could state the cause was due to individual failure. They would base this upon having a bad disposition, poor leadership skills, poor decision making, lacking aptitude or having a bad attitude. People of Eastern decent use situational attribution while people of Western decent use dispositional attribution for explanations of situations and behaviors.
Attributions
People make attributions about themselves and other people’s behavior all the time. Attributions are inferences people use to explain their own behavior or the behavior of others during an event. The attribution causes people to see the behavior rather than assume that the behavior is random. It allows people a feeling of some control over their own behavior and situations. Attributions are strongly influenced by the way people interact with each other.
Attribution theory was first addressed by Heider in 1958. He stated that what people perceive and believe about what they see dictates how they act; even when beliefs are invalid. The attribution process is a dichotomy that involves determining internal versus external cause for an event or behavior. The internal attribution is dispositional coming from within the person. The external attribution is situational coming from the environment that surrounds the person.
When an event occurs a person observes the behavior. Then they determine if the behavior is deliberate and then attributes the behavior to internal or external causes. An internal attribution is the blaming factor, agent or the force that someone controls for causing an event. Behavior is caused by personal factors such as traits, abilities or feelings. It can be contributed to disposition, a person’s ability or effort put forth. An external attribution is that the behavior is caused by the situation that surrounds the person. .
Attributions are made based on three criteria; consensus, distinctiveness and consistency. Consensus would be if others react to a certain situation the same. Distinctiveness would be does the behavior happen the same each time. Consistency would be does the behavior occur in similar situations. For example if Sarah is getting yelled at by her boss the consensus would be; do other people frequently yell at her too? Distinctiveness information would be does the boss yell at other employees, as well, or just at Sarah? Consistency information would be does the boss yell at Sarah frequently?
Attribution is also considering the situation that surrounds the person. In western culture most people don’t make it to this step. Western culture frequently does the fundamental attribution error which means that people overestimate dispositional and underestimate situational causes for behavior. They feel that behavior is caused by the person, not the situation. This step requires more effort and more conscious attention. It helps people to slow down before making a judgment. They don’t assess the situation that surrounds the person to see if the environment is contributing to the person’s behavior. For example, if Donna is nasty towards her husband most people would just assume that she is grumpy. But some situational factors that may have contributed to Donna’s mood are maybe she didn’t get enough sleep last night or maybe she is just stressed at work.
Attribution theory was first addressed by Heider in 1958. He stated that what people perceive and believe about what they see dictates how they act; even when beliefs are invalid. The attribution process is a dichotomy that involves determining internal versus external cause for an event or behavior. The internal attribution is dispositional coming from within the person. The external attribution is situational coming from the environment that surrounds the person.
When an event occurs a person observes the behavior. Then they determine if the behavior is deliberate and then attributes the behavior to internal or external causes. An internal attribution is the blaming factor, agent or the force that someone controls for causing an event. Behavior is caused by personal factors such as traits, abilities or feelings. It can be contributed to disposition, a person’s ability or effort put forth. An external attribution is that the behavior is caused by the situation that surrounds the person. .
Attributions are made based on three criteria; consensus, distinctiveness and consistency. Consensus would be if others react to a certain situation the same. Distinctiveness would be does the behavior happen the same each time. Consistency would be does the behavior occur in similar situations. For example if Sarah is getting yelled at by her boss the consensus would be; do other people frequently yell at her too? Distinctiveness information would be does the boss yell at other employees, as well, or just at Sarah? Consistency information would be does the boss yell at Sarah frequently?
Attribution is also considering the situation that surrounds the person. In western culture most people don’t make it to this step. Western culture frequently does the fundamental attribution error which means that people overestimate dispositional and underestimate situational causes for behavior. They feel that behavior is caused by the person, not the situation. This step requires more effort and more conscious attention. It helps people to slow down before making a judgment. They don’t assess the situation that surrounds the person to see if the environment is contributing to the person’s behavior. For example, if Donna is nasty towards her husband most people would just assume that she is grumpy. But some situational factors that may have contributed to Donna’s mood are maybe she didn’t get enough sleep last night or maybe she is just stressed at work.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
