Abstract
Because of the very way in which the question was formulated, room has not been left in psychological theory and pedagogical practice for the study of child character nor for the examination of its development and formation. The question has been approached statistically, so that character has been viewed as a steady and constant entity, always internally consistent, present, and seen as a given. Character has been understood as a status, not as a process; as a condition, and not as a formation. The classical formula of this traditional view was given by T. Ribot, who set forth two necessary and sufficient conditions for establishing an understanding of character: unity and stability. With this formula he implied a unity across time. The true sign of character, according to Ribot, is that which appears in early childhood and remains constant throughout the course of life; genuine character is innate.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
There has been extensive comment on the notion that behavior could be accounted for because motive forces or psychic energy were conserved and re-directed. Despite disputes among advocates who explored the notion from a variety of philosophical vantages, Vygotsky’s Marxist treatment of the theme here reveals its prevalence in the Zeitgeist of the early 20th century. The list of Freudian mechanisms (displacement, suppression, repression, sublimation, and so on) may be read as a detailed elaboration of the ways in which Lipp’s Stauungen are re-directed. A relatedness between the Freudian and Pavlovian approach has later been noted among students of instinct (see, for example, Lorenz. K., On Aggression. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1966.) Interestingly, Vygotsky does not acknowledge the degree to which Adler’s formulations are derivative from Freud’s. Instead they are presented in a context which would make them appear to be essentially related to the Pavlovian view although he asks whether Adler’s view are thoroughly Marxist (Section 2 of this chapter) and concludes that they are and they are not (see the Concluding Section of this chapter). In the passage here, Vygotsky provides a remarkable clarification of the degree to which the Pavlokian system and its kindred systems are teleological in their formulation although he associates teleology with idealism, which he eschews. Later in the chapter, overlooking Freud’s therapeutic ambitions, he denies that this teleology may be available in the Freudian system. Throughout, Vygotsky, the optimistic Marxist and educator, favors the theory which provides the latitude for environmental manipulations and the greatest possibilities for the amelioration of defects. [Ed.]
The Russian text ends this chapter with an ellipsis. In this passage Vygotsky seems to re-iterate thoughts which appeared in his Questions of Theory and the History of Psychology: Historical Signi cance of the Crisis in Psychologgy (Voprosy teorii i istorii psikhologii: Istoricheskii smysl psikhologicheskogo krizisa) in [Rus J Volume 1 of the Collected Works.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2004 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Rieber, R.W., Robinson, D.K. (2004). The Dynamics of Child Character. In: Rieber, R.W., Robinson, D.K. (eds) The Essential Vygotsky. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-30600-1_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-30600-1_9
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4757-1010-6
Online ISBN: 978-0-387-30600-1
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive