Scan barcode
carlylottsofbookz's review
3.0
This was an interesting read, and considering the topic, rather fast. I wasn't agonizing over the pages, which made me happy.
Alfred Adler had some very distinct viewpoints on human beings, and that we as people struggle with inferiority and superiority complexes. His ultimate view is that neither are healthy, and that we need to always keep in mind what is best for the social good. That is the real judge of all actions: Is this contributing to society?
It was a thought provoker...but I'm not sure I'm too inclinded to read more of Adler.
Alfred Adler had some very distinct viewpoints on human beings, and that we as people struggle with inferiority and superiority complexes. His ultimate view is that neither are healthy, and that we need to always keep in mind what is best for the social good. That is the real judge of all actions: Is this contributing to society?
It was a thought provoker...but I'm not sure I'm too inclinded to read more of Adler.
ayla_derammelaere's review against another edition
informative
reflective
fast-paced
3.0
Adler was a student of Freud but went his own way and created the 'individualpsychology'. He doesn't believe in personalitytraits that people are born with and doesn't believe there is hidden trauma that still has it's impact on how someone develops his/her life.
Adler says there are 2 big forces that form a person : the fact that people are social beings and that we live and function in a society + our drive to achieve power and be meaningful in life. Adler tells us that, from the moment that we interact with other people and the world, we create our own lifes-purpose and we develop our personalitytraits to combine the 2 forced to achieve our lifes-purpose.
To me, this sounds a lot like the 2 forces that Freud tells us have an impact on development : eros and thanatos or the power to create (love) and the power to destroy (dead).
Adler also tells us that the only way how we can work on personalitytraits that interfer with us being happy and accomplished, is to find why we used certain behaviour for the first time ever, link that to the behaviour that we still use and by understanding, behaviour can be changed. Again, this sounds a lot like 'trauma' in the subconscience that works through in day-to-day life as said by Freud, but I can be biased.
In the end of the book, Adler lets us know that families are not a good way to raise children and teach them to become healthy adults : parents often have their own problems, they are not psychologists so they don't know how to fix traits,.. teachers are also not ideal but better than parents since they have had schooling to deal with children and be more aware of what impact they have.. I found this last remarks really baffeling..
I was disappointed by the book : I was really excited in reading it and learning a new way of looking at things but that didn't happen : it feels like a lot of what he said was or a rip-off of Freuds theory or a summation of popular opinions or very shallow ideas that still need time to develop. I must say, this is the first time I ever read something by Adler so maybe he has developed his ideas and I just didn't read the newest book.
pwyllugh's review against another edition
4.0
Interessanter Einblick in die Grundlagen der Individualpsychologie. Die Spannung zwischen Streben nach Macht und Gemeinschaftsgefühl hatte ich so zuvor nicht gekannt. Besonders der Ursprung für viele negative Gefühle werde ich mir immer mal wieder anschauen.
virtualmima's review against another edition
informative
medium-paced
4.5
Of the big three founders of psychoanalysis, Adler was the only one who knew what he was talking about. I put off reading him for a long time because I expected him to be just another Freud or Jung coming up with confused and harmful conceptions of the human mind but I was pleasantly surprised to learn otherwise.
Some important things that Adler was right about:
- A person's character, personality, and behavior are not inherited or congenital.
- The effects of the endocrine system is largely a myth created to perpetuate popular prejudices (such as the four "humors") that have persisted since antiquity, and there is no scientific evidence to prove that our glands control our minds in any way.
- Interactions with other humans especially in childhood forms the roots of how we perceive ourselves and interact with the world, but we're also not doomed to stay that way if we put in work.
- Psychological differences between men and women are artificial and young children are especially aware of this, but as we grow we accept the absurdities that society leads us to believe about gender. Until we reach true equality between the sexes humanity will always suffer.
- Through education and parenting reform we can change human behavior to better serve humanity, but neither parents nor teachers have the adequate psychological training or education to raise a child properly.
Things Adler was wrong about:
- Nothing
Some important things that Adler was right about:
- A person's character, personality, and behavior are not inherited or congenital.
- The effects of the endocrine system is largely a myth created to perpetuate popular prejudices (such as the four "humors") that have persisted since antiquity, and there is no scientific evidence to prove that our glands control our minds in any way.
- Interactions with other humans especially in childhood forms the roots of how we perceive ourselves and interact with the world, but we're also not doomed to stay that way if we put in work.
- Psychological differences between men and women are artificial and young children are especially aware of this, but as we grow we accept the absurdities that society leads us to believe about gender. Until we reach true equality between the sexes humanity will always suffer.
- Through education and parenting reform we can change human behavior to better serve humanity, but neither parents nor teachers have the adequate psychological training or education to raise a child properly.
Things Adler was wrong about:
- Nothing
koohesefid's review against another edition
3.0
حقیقت این اواخر حوصله ام از دست این کتاب سر رفته بود. آدلر یک نظریه ی کلی داره در باب این که انسان ها در مسیر غلبه بر عقده ی حقارت خودشون در پی کسب برتری و قدرت نسبت به بقیه هستند. این برتری طلبی و تکبر باعث اخلال در حس اجتماعی و انجام وظیفه ی اجتماعی میشه. از نظر آدلر هر چیزی که به حس اجتماعی بشر آسیب میزنه مضر هست و این هم از ایده های مارکسیستی ای میاد که حس می کنم در معرضش بوده. با وجود این نقدها به نظرم توجه آدلر به محیط و بحث آموزش و همچنین دید مترقی اش نسبت به زنان قابل تمجید هست. حالا این کتاب متن مجموعه ای از سخنرانی هاش بوده شاید در دو کتاب دیگه اش مطالب رو بهتر شرح داده باشه ولی این کتاب به نظرم از جایی به بعد حرف جدیدی خیلی نداشت بزنه.
batoolm's review against another edition
challenging
informative
reflective
tense
slow-paced
3.25
كتاب جيد للتعربف على فلسفة ادلر وارائه. الجزء الاول من الكتاب كان قيماً ورائعاً على الرغم من تركيزه على نقطة رغبة الجميع بالسيطرة على الاخرين كمبرر لافعال ومشاعر كل شخص كالليبدو عند فرويد 🙂
الجزء الخاص بوصف الشخصيات والمشاعر التي تنتاب الانسان اشعرني وكأن الانسان الة يستطيع اطفاء وتشغيل مشاعره و قولبتها واظهار اعراض اخرى معها كما!!! يحب ويشاء!!! هنا قلت لعقلي أن يتمهل ويمحص جيداً ما يقوله ادلر، لقد قرأت في كتاب اخر ان ادلر لا يعترف اصلا بوجود الصدمة النفسية او Trauma فهو حسب اعتقاده أن الصدمة انما محاولة الشخص للتهرب من واجباته ومشاعره وهدفه الحقيقي هو الحصول على التعاطف!!!
رهاب المجتمع والقلق والتفكير واي نوع من المخاوف *الخوف من الظلام الذي يرجعه ادلر الى رغبة الشخص بالسيطرة على كل شيء حوله؟؟؟* هي امور حقيقية تعود الى صدمات نفسية وليست اموراً ارادية يستطيع الشخص التحكم بها و ايقافها متى ما شاء 🙂🙂
هذا الكتاب يدعو الجميع الى أن يكونوا منفتحين ومحبين ومتعاطفين Extrovert ويدعو الى كراهية العزلة ونبذها لأنها لا تفيد المجتمع الانساني وبالتالي من يحب العزلة ويرغب بالوحدة هو في الواقع انسان مريض ولا يحب اخوته في الانسانية و هذا ظلم كبير للاشخاص الذين طاقتهم الاجتماعية محدودة introverts والتي اثبتت الدراسات انهم مجرد اناس خجولين غير راغبين بالاختلاط ولديهم من الاكتفاء الذاتي ما يكفيهم ولكن نسبة التعاطف والمحبة عندهم تكاد تفوق نسبتهن عند الاناس المنفتحة فغالباً ما يكون الextrovert محبين لانفسهم اكثر من غيرهم ويحاولون فرض انفسهم.
لدي الكثير من الانتقادات لهذا الكتاب ولكن على الرغم منها ففصل رعاية الاطفال و فصل دونية المرأة كانا رائعين جداً بالاضافة الى بعض الفصول للاخرى
الجزء الخاص بوصف الشخصيات والمشاعر التي تنتاب الانسان اشعرني وكأن الانسان الة يستطيع اطفاء وتشغيل مشاعره و قولبتها واظهار اعراض اخرى معها كما!!! يحب ويشاء!!! هنا قلت لعقلي أن يتمهل ويمحص جيداً ما يقوله ادلر، لقد قرأت في كتاب اخر ان ادلر لا يعترف اصلا بوجود الصدمة النفسية او Trauma فهو حسب اعتقاده أن الصدمة انما محاولة الشخص للتهرب من واجباته ومشاعره وهدفه الحقيقي هو الحصول على التعاطف!!!
رهاب المجتمع والقلق والتفكير واي نوع من المخاوف *الخوف من الظلام الذي يرجعه ادلر الى رغبة الشخص بالسيطرة على كل شيء حوله؟؟؟* هي امور حقيقية تعود الى صدمات نفسية وليست اموراً ارادية يستطيع الشخص التحكم بها و ايقافها متى ما شاء 🙂🙂
هذا الكتاب يدعو الجميع الى أن يكونوا منفتحين ومحبين ومتعاطفين Extrovert ويدعو الى كراهية العزلة ونبذها لأنها لا تفيد المجتمع الانساني وبالتالي من يحب العزلة ويرغب بالوحدة هو في الواقع انسان مريض ولا يحب اخوته في الانسانية و هذا ظلم كبير للاشخاص الذين طاقتهم الاجتماعية محدودة introverts والتي اثبتت الدراسات انهم مجرد اناس خجولين غير راغبين بالاختلاط ولديهم من الاكتفاء الذاتي ما يكفيهم ولكن نسبة التعاطف والمحبة عندهم تكاد تفوق نسبتهن عند الاناس المنفتحة فغالباً ما يكون الextrovert محبين لانفسهم اكثر من غيرهم ويحاولون فرض انفسهم.
لدي الكثير من الانتقادات لهذا الكتاب ولكن على الرغم منها ففصل رعاية الاطفال و فصل دونية المرأة كانا رائعين جداً بالاضافة الى بعض الفصول للاخرى
specialk046's review against another edition
3.0
I didn't get all the way through but I do like some of Adler's ideas as they relate to childhood and the family constellation.
epictetsocrate's review against another edition
4.0
Principiile cunoaşterii omului sunt de aşa natură încât să nu permită generarea unei
prea mari infatuări şi trufii. Dimpotrivă, adevărata cunoaştere a omului nu poate să inspire
decât o anumită modestie, prin aceea că ne demonstrează că avem de-a face cu o sarcină de o
excepţională însemnătate, la a cărei îndeplinire umanitatea lucrează chiar de la începuturile
civilizaţiei, fără a o fi abordat în mod sistematic, cu o clară conştiinţă a scopului, în aşa fel
încât vedem mereu ieşind în faţă numai câţiva oameni mari, ici-colo, care au dispus de o mai
bună cunoaştere a omului în comparaţie cu media. Atingem aici un punct sensibil: dacă
verificăm pe neaşteptate gradul de cunoaştere a omului într-un eşantion oarecare, constatăm
că majoritatea subiecţilor îşi declină competenţa în această materie. Nimeni nu se poate lăuda
cu o profundă cunoaştere a omului. Aceas-tă situaţie ţine de existenţa noastră individualistă.
Se poate afirma că niciodată oamenii nu au trăit mai izolaţi decât azi. încă din copilărie avem
prea puţine raporturi între noi, o slabă coeziune. Familia ne izolează. întregul nostru mod de
viaţă ne refuză contactul mai intim cu semenii noştri, care este de o absolută necesitate în
elaborarea unei arte cum este cunoaşterea omului. Cele două elemente se află în
interdependenţă: nu putem restabili contactul cu ceilalţi oameni pentru că, în lipsa unei mai
bune comprehensiuni mutuale, ei ne dau impresia a ceva cât se poate de străin.
prea mari infatuări şi trufii. Dimpotrivă, adevărata cunoaştere a omului nu poate să inspire
decât o anumită modestie, prin aceea că ne demonstrează că avem de-a face cu o sarcină de o
excepţională însemnătate, la a cărei îndeplinire umanitatea lucrează chiar de la începuturile
civilizaţiei, fără a o fi abordat în mod sistematic, cu o clară conştiinţă a scopului, în aşa fel
încât vedem mereu ieşind în faţă numai câţiva oameni mari, ici-colo, care au dispus de o mai
bună cunoaştere a omului în comparaţie cu media. Atingem aici un punct sensibil: dacă
verificăm pe neaşteptate gradul de cunoaştere a omului într-un eşantion oarecare, constatăm
că majoritatea subiecţilor îşi declină competenţa în această materie. Nimeni nu se poate lăuda
cu o profundă cunoaştere a omului. Aceas-tă situaţie ţine de existenţa noastră individualistă.
Se poate afirma că niciodată oamenii nu au trăit mai izolaţi decât azi. încă din copilărie avem
prea puţine raporturi între noi, o slabă coeziune. Familia ne izolează. întregul nostru mod de
viaţă ne refuză contactul mai intim cu semenii noştri, care este de o absolută necesitate în
elaborarea unei arte cum este cunoaşterea omului. Cele două elemente se află în
interdependenţă: nu putem restabili contactul cu ceilalţi oameni pentru că, în lipsa unei mai
bune comprehensiuni mutuale, ei ne dau impresia a ceva cât se poate de străin.