Can there be a grand unified theory of Psychology? Discuss. :: essays research papers

Can there be a Grand Unified hypothesis of Personality?Bradley Templeton ScobieNo maven theory of personality can adequately explain the full habit of human conduct.Psychodynamic approaches often come under a lot of lit crit as they fail to be explicit about the underlying bases of the theory. cognitive theories are not very comfortable with explaining emotions and behavioural theories have difficultness explaining the mechanisms of improvements.It has become quite clear in the field of Psychology, and to some Psychologists standardized Windy Dryden (Individual Therapy) explicitly clear that there is a missing linkand that somewhere amongst the mass of theories on personality, the answer is staring them in the face.These Psychologists often answer a form of Psychology called Eclectism, which takes a little out of for each one theory and unites it during therapy with a knob. You cant use this sort of therapy as a theory however because all the Eclectic Psychologist is doing is ignoring the fundamental ideologic underpinnings of the particular theories he is using and taking the parts relevant to their client in therapyThis render will explore one of the possible combinations of theories on personality and explain how it can be applied in pragmatical therapy. Eysenkes theory of biological bases in behaviour is the base of this essays approach. It provides the rules within which the some other two personality theories (Kellys Personal Construct Theory and Maslows Hierarchy of human beings needs) can function.Using Eysenkes theory on extravert and introvert behaviour it is possible to determine from birth, very general traits about which a person is willing to work within (aggression, anxiety tolerance and sociability etc) which is where this essay believes Kelly slightly misunderstands this concept and defines it as his Range Corrollary. Really the person is experiencing a fundamental shift from Extravert behaviour or thinking to draw in or vice ve rsa which causes slight unease and can account for things resembling shyness etc.One of the major criticisms of Kellys Personal Construct Theory is that he finds it hard to explain wherefore constructs are laid tidy sum in the first place and why one would rigourously defend the menace to a core construct. What kick starts the Construct system into defending itself when demand is clearly and explicitly lacking in his theory?Eyesenkes theory provides an lovable solution. If we could assume that this information was genetically coded in to the cells at birth then(prenominal) this no longer becomes an issue and we can explain hows and why the constructs are laid down to a loose genetic templet i.