fei75766_ch19_610-639.indd 615  02/06/20 01:53 PM
Chapter 19     Kelly: Psychology of Personal Constructs615
revision or replacement” (p.15).Hereferred tothisassumption asconstructive 
 alternativism andsummed upthenotion withthese words: “The events wefacetoday 
aresubject toasgreat avariety ofconstructions asourwitswillenable ustocon-
trive” (Kelly, 1970, p.1).Thephilosophy ofconstructive alternativism assumes that
thepiece-by-piece accumulation offactsdoesnotadduptotruth; rather, itassumes 
thatfactscanbelooked atfrom different perspectives. Kelly agreed withAdler (see
Chapter 3)thataperson’s interpretation ofevents ismore important thantheevents 
themselves. Incontrast toAdler, however, Kelly stressed thenotion thatinterpreta -
tions havemeaning inthedimension oftime, andwhat isvalid atonetimebecomes 
falsewhen construed differently atalatertime. Forexample, when Freud (see
Chapter 2)originally heard hispatients’ accounts ofchildhood seduction, hebelieved 
thatearly sexual experiences wereresponsible forlaterhysterical reactions. IfFreud 
hadcontinued toconstrue hispatients’ reports inthisfashion, theentire history of
psychoanalysis would havebeen quite different. Butthen, foravariety ofreasons, 
Freud restructured hisdataandgaveuphisseduction hypothesis. Shortly thereafter, 
hetilted thepicture alittleandsawaverydifferent view. With thisnewview, hecon-
cluded thatthese seduction reports weremerely childhood fantasies. Hisalternative 
hypothesis wastheOedipus complex, aconcept thatpermeates current psychoana -
lytictheory, andonethatis180degrees removed from hisoriginal seduction theory. 
IfweviewFreud’s observations from yetanother angle, suchasErikson’s perspective 
(seeChapter 7),thenwemight reach astilldifferent conclusion.
Kelly believed thattheperson, notthefacts, holds thekeytoanindividual’s 
future. Facts andevents donotdictate conclusions; rather, theycarry meanings for
ustodiscover. Weareallconstantly faced withalternatives, which wecanexplore if
wechoose, butinanycase, wemust assume responsibility forhowweconstrue our
worlds. Wearevictims ofneither ourhistory norourpresent circumstances. Thatis
nottosaythatwecanmake ofourworld whatever wewish. Weare“limited byour
feeble witsandourtimid reliance upon what isfamiliar” (Kelly, 1970, p.3).Wedo
notalways welcome newideas. Likescientists ingeneral andpersonality theorists in
particular, weoften findrestructuring disturbing andthusholdontoideas thatare
comfortable andtheories thatarewellestablished.
Personal Constructs
Kelly’s philosophy assumes thatpeople’s interpretation ofaunified, ever-changing 
world constitutes theirreality. Inthechapter opener, weintroduced Arlene, thestu-
dentwiththebroken-down automobile. Arlene’s perception ofhertransportation 
problem wasnotastatic one.Asshetalked toamechanic, aused-car dealer, anew-
cardealer, abanker, herparents, andothers, shewasconstantly changing herinter-
pretation ofreality. Insimilar fashion, allpeople continually create theirownviewof
theworld. Some people arequite inflexible andseldom change theirwayofseeing 
things. They cling totheirviewofreality evenastherealworld changes. Forexample, 
people withanorexia nervosa continue toseethemselves asfatwhile theirweight 
continues todroptoalife-threatening level. Some people construe aworld thatissub-
stantially different from theworld ofother people. Forexample, psychotic patients in
mental hospitals maytalktopeople whom nooneelsecansee.Kelly (1963) would Final PDF to printer