Historians, scholars, teachers, and textbook writers use a number of images
and metaphors to describe Sigmund Freud ’s work and influence. Some picture
Freud defiantly marching against the stream of contemporary thought and va-
lues. Others describe him as a pioneer blazing new trails into the previously
unknown territory of the unconscious mind. I ’ve also seen Freud compared
with a diligent detective piecing together clues about the true nature of the
human mind or a shrewd lawyer cutting away the ego ’s defenses one by one.
But the metaphor I like best compares Freud with a tree. Like a giant oak
standing in the middle of a grove, Freud ’s theory is the oldest and most for-
midable of the many psychoanalytic approaches to understanding personality.Just as the oak drops acorns that sprout into their own trees, so did Freud ’s
Psychoanalytic Society generate several scholars who went on to develop their
own theories of personality. However, like the surrounding saplings that re-
semble the great oak, the ancestry of these later personality theories is clearlyFreudian.
The collection of scholars who gathered in Vienna to study with Freud
included some of the leading thinkers of the day. Not surprisingly, many of
these psychologists eventually developed their own ideas about the nature of
personality. Unfortunately, Freud and some of his followers often viewed
these contributions as more than elaborations or professional disagreements.
Sometimes the failure to adhere strictly to psychoanalytic theory as espoused
by Freud was seen as blasphemy. Freud apparently viewed almost any devia-
tion from or disagreement with his works as something akin to treason.
Gradually, many followers left the Psychoanalytic Society, sometimes forming
their own associations and new schools of psychology.
Although none of the theorists described in this chapter ever developed
as much fame or influence as Freud, each made a substantial contribution
to the psychoanalytic approach to personality theory. Although at the time
their differences with Freud may have seemed great, with the perspective oftime, we can see that their contributions were more accurately elaborations
of Freud ’s theory rather than radically new approaches to personality.
Hence, these theorists have come to be known as the neo-Freudians .F o r
the most part, the neo-Freudian theorists retained the unconscious as a keydeterminant of behavior. Most also agreed with Freud about the impact of
early childhood experiences on personality development, although many feltthat later experiences also influenced adult personality. Most of these theor-
ists also readily accepted such Freudian concepts as defense mechanisms and
dream interpretation. In short, the neo-Freudian theories should be viewedas different perspectives within the general psychoanalytic approach to
personality.
One feature that remains from the tradition of loyalty and divisions
found in that early group of theorists is the tendency to treat the theory ’s de-
veloper more as a prophet than a theorist. People often identify themselves as
a Jungian or an Adlerian psychologist. Although space doesn ’t allow more
than a brief examination of a few of the major theorists ’contributions, you
may find that one or two of the neo-Freudians have a grasp on the nature ofThe Psychoanalytic Approach 95