Etiology vs Teleology · Agency World

Etiology vs Teleology

Alright, I've been learning about some stuff recently and wanna open up a floor for discussion/debate/discourse here. Drop your thoughts in the comments, let's see where this goes and what we can learn together.

In sales, it's obviously important to understand human behavior -- why people do the things they do.

Now, the prevailing view of modern psychology (from 19th-20th century research, and still the primary view taught in 21st century psychological academia and practiced in the clinical and therapeutic sphere) is one of etiology.

This was Freud's view: it basically says that your behavior is a product of your PAST. Specifically past experiences that supposedly shape how you behave today.

But back in Freud's day, there were three major psychologists (they're nicknamed "The Big 3" -- very fancy lol). Sigmund Freud, Carl Jung, and Alfred Adler.

Most people know about Freud and Jung... very few know much about Adler.

Adler actually opposed Freud's views of etiology, and I've only recently been learning about his perspectives... and frankly I find it quite interesting (as someone who got a minor in Psych back in college, have studied Freudian psychology deeply, and until recently, never questioned it).

Adlerian psychology rejects the idea of etiology and instead proposes teleology: the perspective that every human behavior is TOWARD a goal (usually an unconscious goal).

Freud says people are a certain way because of who they were shaped to be.

Adler says people are a certain way because of who they are CHOOSING to be in this very moment, based on their implicit goals.

To make this make more sense, here's a quick list of hypothetical examples of certain behaviors and how each pscyhologist could interpret it:

Procrastination

Freud: "This person was told they were incapable as a child."

Adler: "This person wishes to not be proven wrong, so they avoid the action."

Over-explaining

Freud: "Childhood anxiety around being dismissed created compulsive over-explaining."

Adler: "Wants to control the conversation so they are seen as smarter and higher status."

Self-sabotage

Freud: "The superego punishes success because they lost something after achieving a great success in the past."

Adler: "Failing on purpose avoids the exposure or responsiblity that real success demands."

Ghosting after expressing interest

Freud: "This person retreats because they were scolded as a child and has a fear of vulnerability."

Adler: "This person is avoiding the feeling of discomfort of being "found out" as a liar or chicken."

They can subtly look the same, but Adler argued that if etiology was taken to its logical conclusion, it results in determinism, thereby disempowering the individual. I know Adlerian psychology is not as popular, and many folks haven't even heard of it, but I'm seeing it beginning to slowly gain traction in the self-help industry. So it is worthy of discussion.

Now I've got my current views on all this... but I'm very curious what you guys make of it...

So... do you guys think Freud was right, or is Adler's view more accurate? A little bit of both? If so, how do you reconcile their differences? Or is there another view altogether you stand on and both of them are just coockoo?

3 comments