Feist−Feist: Theories of
Personality, Seventh
EditionII. Psychodynamic
Theories- Fromm: Humanistic
Psychoanalysis
(^216) © The McGraw−Hill
Companies, 2009
210 Part II Psychodynamic Theories
More specifically, Fromm’s view of humanity is summed up in his definition of
the species: “The human species can be defined as the primate who emerged at that
point of evolution where instinctive determinism had reached a minimum and the de-
velopment of the brain a maximum”(Fromm, 1976, p. 137). Human beings, then,
are the freaks of nature, the only species ever to have evolved this combination of
minimal instinctive powers and maximal brain development. “Lacking the capacity
to act by the command of instincts while possessing the capacity for self-
awareness, reason, and imagination... the human species needed a frame of ori-
entation and an object of devotion in order to survive” (p. 137).
Human survival, however, has been paid for by the price of basic anxiety,
loneliness, and powerlessness. In every age and culture, people have been faced
with the same fundamental problem: how to escape from feelings of isolation and
find unity with nature and with other people.
In general, Fromm was both pessimisticand optimistic.On one hand, he be-
lieved that most people do not accomplish a reunion with nature or other people
and that few people achieve positive freedom. He also had a rather negative atti-
tude toward modern capitalism, which he insisted was responsible for most people’s
feeling isolated and alone while clinging desperately to the illusion of indepen-
dence and freedom. On the other hand, Fromm was hopeful enough to believe that
some people will achieve reunion and will therefore realize their human potential.
He also believed that humans can achieve a sense of identity, positive freedom, and
growing individuality within the confines of a capitalistic society. In Man for Him-
self(1947), he wrote: “I have become increasingly impressed by... the strength
of the strivings for happiness and health, which are part of the natural equipment
of [people]” (p. x).
On the dimension of free choice versus determinism,Fromm took a middle
position, insisting that this issue cannot be applied to the entire species. Instead,
he believed that individuals have degrees of inclinations toward freely chosen ac-
tion, even though they are seldom aware of all the possible alternatives. Never-
theless, their ability to reason enables people to take an active part in their own
fate.
On the dimension of causality versus teleology,Fromm tended to slightly favor
teleology. He believed that people constantly strive for a frame of orientation, a
road map, by which to plan their lives into the future.
Fromm took a middle stance regarding conscious versus unconscious motiva-
tion,placing slightly more emphasis on conscious motivation and contending that
one of the uniquely human traits is self-awareness.Humans are the only animal that
can reason, visualize the future, and consciously strive toward self-erected goals.
Fromm insisted, however, that self-awareness is a mixed blessing and that many
people repress their basic character to avoid mounting anxiety.
On the issue of social influencesversus biological ones,Fromm placed some-
what more importance on the impact of history, culture, and society than on biol-
ogy. Although he insisted that human personalities are historically and culturally
determined, he did not overlook biological factors, defining humans as the freaks
of the universe.
Finally, whereas Fromm placed moderate emphasis on similarities among peo-
ple,he also allowed room for some individuality. He believed that although history