Erich Fromm was one of my favorite research topics during my undergrad classes. For those of you who aren’t familiar with psychological theorists, Erich Fromm, born as Erich Seligman Fromm, was one of the world’s leading psychoanalysts. He’s also attributed as being a social behaviorist, a philosopher and a Marxist.
Fromm became more relevant to my real life lately because he is also considered one of the forefathers of socialist humanism. His analysis of human development, personality, and behavior provide insight that’s arguably more relevant today that it was when it was presented in the 50’s.
The birth of Fromm’s theory arose as a result of his rejection of scientism. Fromm believed that the scientific approach to studying personality was inadequate and could not comprehend the entire scope of human nature.
Using base work by Freud, Fromm used emerging disciplines such as sociology and anthropology to develop his own theory. However Fromm’s principles clashed with American Freudiens. Fromm attributed a person’s psyche as being the result of a combination of biology as well as society. His primary emphasis was on the ramifications of consumerism on the consciousness of one’s own individuality.
After much scrutiny of Freud’s work, Fromm identified and presented inconsistencies in his theories, pointing out loopholes and Freud’s two-fold thinking. Fromm denounced him as a misogynist bound by his inability to reason beyond the patriarchal norms of his time. But conceded Freud’s incredible contributions to the turning of an era.
The nature of human life and the evolution of human’s physical and intellectual capabilities fascinated Fromm. Primary observation techniques were used to develop his theory, Fromm actively engaged patients stating that “the therapist must feel what the patient is talking about and recognize the common humanity” between patient and therapist in order for treatment to be successful. This empathy is ultimately what Fromm believed helped his patients, as it allowed them to realize they are not alone in their feelings.
Fromm’s initial thesis began with the ideal that freedom is a basic human condition which advances a psychological problem. This concept was derived from Fromm’s realization that as the human race gained more freedoms through evolution beyond other species, humans have become pre-isolated and separated.
Loneliness is a key concept of Fromm’s work. Fromm postulated that in order to escape from this vast loneliness, humans developed escape mechanisms. Fromm’s three common mechanisms:
- Authoritarianism: Rids an individual of loneliness by submitting alternate domination
- Destructiveness: Rids an individual of others and/or the outside world
- Automaton Conformity: When an individual adopts a personality born of their culture, ultimately ridding themselves of their own personality
These escape mechanisms can be destructive in themselves, and do not lead to happiness. In a world gradually heading towards a soulless mechanical existence impelled by technology, he fought for ways to preserve the spirit of humanity, the life force of existence, the purpose of life and disintegration of society. Fromm suggests that individuals can have positive freedom, however it depends on recognizing basic needs, and understanding one’s character.
As Fromm focused his theory on the more broad human condition, he concluded humans have six basic needs.
- Relatedness: individual’s ability to relate to others and being able to love productively.
- Transcendence; rising above lesser creatures in the animal kingdom and becoming active creators.
- Rootedness: the feeling of belonging.
- Identity: becoming aware of ourselves as individuals
- Frame of Orientation: having a established, constant frame of reference which allows us to organize perceptions and understand our environment.
- Excitation and Stimulation: actively striving for a goal rather than simply responding to stimuli.
Based on Fromm’s findings, these basic needs focus on what is required in order for a person to fully develop. Having witnessed the two world wars, and the horrors they created, Fromm deliberated on the terrifying consequences of modern technology and warfare, which is a consequence of the same technology.
He firmly believed that conviction in humans, and in our affirmative abilities, together with harmony among all cultures were the foundations for a more positive and happy future. Even today we continue to see evidence that the demands of the society will shape an individual’s inner needs, and ultimately help to define the individual’s personality.
In realizing this, Fromm identified five common character orientations in regard to an individual’s personality. These orientations center on qualities which are shared by individuals who stem from the same or similar sub-cultures
- Receptive Personality – holds the belief that outside sources will provide things they wish to obtain; their reactions are typically passive.
- Exploitative Personality – takes the things they want by force, exploiting others in the process.
- Hoarding Personality – stockpile and protect things they have, isolating themselves from others.
- Marketing Personality – are those who are opportunistic. They view themselves as something on the market and can change themselves as the market fluctuates.
- Productive personality – knows their worth. They value who they are as individuals. Their perceptions of the world and others in it are generally accurate.
Fromm believed that an individual can identify with multiple character orientations and even went further by defining character orientations. He distinguished between personalities with biophilous characters and those with necrophilous characters. Individuals with a biophilous character seeks to live life fully and completely, where as those with a necrophilous character are attracted to things that are dead or decaying; these individuals seek to destroy life.
Towards the second half of his life, Fromm became increasingly occupied with the notions of death and mutability. The Anatomy of Human Destructiveness, Fromm’s book, demonstrates this idea at length. This is also where he discusses his belief that the most important principle driving mankind is the impulse that arises out of the absence of a genuine existence and individuality.
As his last significant work, based on socioeconomic properties, Fromm added two basic modes to his theory. The first of which is the ‘having mode’. Indicating the individual’s possessions; it causes fear and isolation as a result of causing greed for power. ‘Being mode’, on the other hand, is only concerned with existing. ‘Being’ is governed by the spirit of communal harmony and constructive actions, producing love and achieving happiness and cohesion.
Fromm concluded that ‘having’ and ‘being’ were the two components that made up life. He emphasized on the need to have a balance between the two components because an overriding ‘having’ would bring about chaos and destruction in the world. Thus, he felt that a better future was contingent upon harmony of the two forms in life.
When considering the political climate and civic decay that is currently eroding American culture, I find it difficult to agree more with Fromm’s view that Western culture must be transformed— through the application of psychoanalytic principles to social issues—into societies that recognize the primacy of human beings as responsible, sovereign individuals and that are conducive to the attainment of individual freedom, which he sees as the ultimate goal of humanity’s existence.
What’s your take on this piece of humanity’s relevant past? Let me know in the comment’s section below!
For more info, here are the sources I used..
References:
Engler, B. (2009) Personality Theories 8th Ed. Houghton Mifflin
http://allpsych.com/personalitysynopsis/fromm.html
http://psychology.jrank.org/pages/261/Erich-Fromm.html