25 Aug What, if any, are the basic structures of personality and consciousness?
I need assistance with my final paper for my psych class. Attached are the instructions and a chart of what was covered.
Requirements: 5-6 pages (as instructed) | .doc file
Final Paper
We have covered a large range of perspectives on personality in this course. In each lesson, you have completed assignments that have required you to take on the perspective of other personality theorists. For this final paper, you will present your own perspective on personality.
While the specific organization is up to you, the paper should be presented in an appropriate manner for an upper-division college course (proper grammar and spelling, clear sentences, and sensible paragraphs).
If you have questions about formatting, I suggest you use APA as a default, but you will not be graded on adherence to APA guidelines. Keep your paper between 5 and 6 double spaced pages in Times 10-point font. This is not an absolute restriction—I’d rather your paper spilled onto the seventh page than you feel you had to make your margins a quarter inch and your font tiny, for example—but do try to stay within these reasonable guidelines.
For full marks, your paper needs to answer the question “What is a person?” (however you choose to define person). This is a personal position paper, but I expect you to give a rigorous defense of your position. You are not required to make specific comments on theorists we’ve covered in this course; however, if your own position is similar to one of those, it would be wise to note the similarities and differences. Likewise, just as many of our theorists have defined themselves in contrast to other theorists (it’s the dialectic!), you may find that doing so works well for your position.
A fully developed personality position paper should include thoughts on answers to various big questions of personality (all answering aspects of “What is a person?”) such as
What, if any, are the basic structures of personality and consciousness?
What is the process of normal development?
What is the root (cause) of abnormal personality (psychological illness)?
How should psychological illnesses be addressed or treated?
What distinguishes one person from another? Are there individual differences as such? (This includes other questions regarding traits, temperaments, and kinds.)
What is the good life, and how is this defined? (Sometimes this is the same as psychological health; other times it has strong moral components. It may be the same for all individuals, or it may be unique.)
How, if at all, do individuals relate to one another? Are they individuals first or relationships first?
Other questions (don’t feel limited by this list).
Some of these questions may not be as applicable to your perspective on personality, but you should still be able to address how your own theoretical perspective would address them (much like Skinner, who didn’t believe in personality, was still able to discuss how behaviorism would handle all of the above). However you go about presenting your position, special attention should be given to your underlying assumptions. Put some thought into what you have learned over the course, consider the implications of various assumptions. Ensure that your assumptions in one part of your paper are consistent with the implications of your position in other parts of your paper.
Submit your paper as a Microsoft word .DOC or .DOCX file, with this naming convention: PSYCH341_JaneSmith_FinalPaper.doc
READ THIS ONLY IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN GETTING A B+ OR ABOVE:
A few points may be helpful if you want to ensure the best possible grade for your final paper.
Avoid a potpourri perspective. There’s a strong tendency to simply say, “I like a little of this and a little of that”—to be eclectic without much thought for how (if at all) the various ideas you’re stitching together mesh. Whatever your perspective is (and it is OK if different parts do relate to different sources), it should come together into some cohesive whole. (Even dialectical perspectives have a unity about them!)
Don’t regurgitate. I have a pretty good idea of what the various theorists we’ve covered believed. I don’t need you to review theirperspectives in this paper. Furthermore, the purpose of this paper isn’t to demonstrate that you have a handle on their perspectives either (that’s more the job of the exams). Rather, use the learning from this course to illustrate your own perspective.
Similarly, your own voice should be more than just “I like this” or “I don’t like that” (as in “I like the idea of collective conscience but I don’t think everything is based on a sex drive”). You can offer a deeper analysis here than on a Facebook wall.
While I’m not saying I would dock points if you start your paper “People have debated about personality throughout history . . .,” I am saying you can probably do a little better than that as an opener. I’ve read some version of it a lot. Pro tip: Go ahead and use it for your first paragraph if you’re having trouble getting started, but then (for mercy’s sake) go back and rewrite that first paragraph after finishing your paper. You don’t have a lot of space, and you’re probably best off jumping right in to your own perspective. An opener can still be broad while leading into that (like “Personality, in my view, is best conceived of like an onion . . .” or “My fundamental postulate is that human beings are divine agents . . .” or “Life is like a box of chocolates . . .” ©™ or “Ultimately, all humans beings want the same thing . . .” or “No two people are the same . . .” or “Family is the source of all an individual’s psychological problems, and potentials . . .” or “Just as we have five physical senses . . .” or “The term ‘personality’ is a misnomer . . .” or “There are dynamic and static forces in everyone’s life. . . .” I’m interested in reading the rest of the papers that started with these sorts of openers. They seem to promise a specific personal perspective that demonstrates thought and effort.
A note about tone and rigor: in some ways this paper may be a little different from others you typically are asked to write. It is not an academic paper in the sense that you need to cite a lot of sources and have a ton of references and make the author of the paper disappear with unwieldy use of third-person as this teacher tries not to ever do. However, it is still an academically rigorous assignment in which your ideas should be well thought out and reflect the learning of the course. The specific content (your particular position) will not be evaluated, but rather your demonstration of engagement with the assignment (putting together your own personality perspective). Consider the various “in their own words” readings we’ve encountered in the course. They’ve embodied various perspectives, tones, levels of formality, and length. Yet each of them succeeded in conveying their own particular personality perspective. Similarly, your papers can vary in tone and style but should still have that quality of rigor or depth of engagement with the topic.
