Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.
Multiculturalism
Several prior developmental theories from Freud, Erikson, and Kohlberg present development toward the single ‘natural’ endpoint of independence and rationality. However, the multiculturalism approach opposes an unequivocal equation development with independence (New, 2010). This opposition simultaneously clarified and challenged my view of development. At the beginning of the course, it seemed quite natural to measure development by a degree of rational thinking and independent analysis. However, I had to reconsider what rational and independent truly meant and how much weight they held in evaluating development.
The older theories present a single sequential idea of how humans should develop, thus creating an arbitrary hierarchy of achievement. Such a hierarchy then easily becomes ethnocentric, dictating how a human should be (Gauvain et al., 2011). In Piaget’s and Kohlberg’s frameworks, people who progress differently are effectively deemed underdeveloped and paths that did not reach the single endpoint – deviant (Gauvain et al., 2011). However, as Day (2010) stressed, encouraging positive development can have lasting effects. Overall, the hierarchical model seems to be largely irrelevant in the context of the multicultural approach.
Furthermore, rather than labeling different developmental trajectories as pathological, the new approach gives space for multiple perspectives to flourish. Unlike the prior view, the multicultural approach states that there may be several different termini to human development (Markus & Kitayama, 1991). By the end of the course, I reconsidered my inclination to only judge growth by these two parameters. My view on human development changed to being more flexible and aware of embedded Western ethnocentrism.
Biology and Sociology
Freud has proposed the traditional ‘medical model’ of evaluating human development. Within this framework, each issue must be fitted by strict criteria as either fitting the ‘normalcy’ or not. However, the new psychology movement questions the well-established definitions of normal, acknowledging that social and political factors influence this notion in addition to the medical reality. This concept expanded my understanding of human development by shifting my perspective from a medical model to a mental health model. In contrast to the ‘symptom-patching’ strategy that a medical model offers, a mental health model accentuates holistic preventative measures based on an increasing understanding of the psychological state’s biological and social contexts.
Moreover, a modern revision of the medical model emphasizes the role of genetics in psychological and physical development. Certain diseases may not be attributable solely to the social context but rather be pre-determined by the genetic makeup. In this context, passing a moral judgment onto the behavior that may purely be a function of someone’s biology is unwarranted (Ivey & Ivey, 1999). Hence, I had to reconsider my previous views regarding certain behaviors or addictions by the end of this course.
Moreover, unlike the medical model, which deems all conditions as inherently violating an absolutist norm, the new outlook highlights the present flexibility in views. According to Freud, social opinions on ‘deviance’ change frequently – for instance, homosexuality, a pathology that turned out to be a natural variation in human development (Ivey & Ivey, 1999). Overall, the new approach brings the element of biology in discussing the development of human traits that are frequently judged solely in a societal context. Lastly, I pondered how much people should rely on genetic predisposition in judging others: for instance, people who may genetically be more likely to commit violent crimes. In my opinion, it would be morally wrong to discriminate against them, given the mentioned genetic complexity and unpredictability. At the beginning of this course, I knew very little about genetics’ role in social development; however, my perception of human development is less judgemental now.
Feminist Perspectives
The feminist perspective on the theory of human development states that women’s voices have historically been excluded. Kohlberg’s original theory presents the masculine idea of justice as the highest form of moral reasoning. Moreover, Freud, Kohlberg, and Erikson embraced the predominantly male view in human development research and theory. The famously known research conducted by Dr. Gilligan challenged this view while finding that there were indeed significant differences between men and women (Muuss, 1988). At a glance, men appeared to have stronger moral reasoning when using a ‘male’ template of equating it with the morality of rights (Muuss, 1988). However, Dr. Gilligan stated that while men associated reasoning with justice, women associated it with mercy. Importantly, the level of complexity behind the arguments of either sex was equal – therefore, there was no reason for the male view to be automatically superior (Muuss, 1988). Female thinking is just as comprehensive, well-supported, and potentially more compassionate than male thinking.
This lecture resonated with me by finding similarities with the multicultural perspective – the limitations of assessing behavior from a single Western male viewpoint became evident by the course’s end. Lastly, the feminist approach challenges older theories within the framework of Vygotsky and Bandura’s theories. The ‘male pattern’ approach can work with Vygotsky’s claim that the immediate social environment transforms a child’s cognition by tailoring it to the needs of a certain culture (Gauvain et al., 2011). However, when I think about Bandura’s assertion that observing good role models will shape a better behavior than negative ones, the question arises: what is a good role model for a girl (Gauvain et al., 2011)? The biggest learning experience that the feminist perspective brought by the course’s end was that ‘different’ does not always imply an inferior-superior dynamic.
References
Day, J. (2010). Religion, spirituality, and positive psychology in adulthood: A developmental view.Journal of Adult Development, 17(4), 215–229. Web.
Gauvain, M., Beebe, H., & Zhao, S. (2011). Applying the cultural approach to cognitive development.Journal of Cognition & Development, 12(2), 121–133. Web.
Ivey, A. E., & Ivey, M. B. (1999). Toward a developmental diagnostic and statistical manual: The vitality of a contextual framework.Journal of Counseling & Development, 77(4), 484. Web.
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation.Psychological Review, 98(2), 224–253. Web.
Muuss, R. E. (1988). Carol Gilligan’s theory of sex differences in the development of moral reasoning during adolescence. Adolescence, 23(89), 229–243.
New, R. S. (2010). Cross-cultural research on children’s development: Deep roots and new branches.Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 41(4), 522–533. Web.
Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.