Your Perfect Assignment is Just a Click Away

We Write Custom Academic Papers

100% Original, Plagiarism Free, Customized to your instructions!

glass
pen
clip
papers
heaphones

GCU The Voluntary Nature of Communal Feeling Discussion Responses

GCU The Voluntary Nature of Communal Feeling Discussion Responses

Description

I need a response to each selected peer: 

Although in long and common use in and outside of Adlerian psychology, both the term and the meaning of belongingness stir up frequent and hot debates among researchers and practitioners. Please read Bitter and West’s interview with Ansbacher first, then Corsini’s response second, and then listen to Hofstra’s presentation. In your post for this week, please address the following:

How does the debate relate to the topic of communal feeling?

What parts of the debates touched you especially strongly as a socially responsible practitioner, what parts of the debate are the most relatable to socially responsible practice?

Where are you in the debate?

Response 1

Regarding the debate, I’d be keen to hear Ansbacher’s response to Corsini’s argument of semantics to undermine Ansbacher’s interview responses. I appreciate Corsini bringing to light the issues that come up through multiple meanings of words and the complexity of the English language. Belonging and the intended use of the word is directly related to communal feeling. Corsini corrects Ansbacher’s use of belonging to mean associate voluntarily with a sense of dependence (Corsini, 1980), whereas Ansbacher stipulates that belonging is akin to ownership, is too limited and is “an inadequate description of a desired human relationship” (Bitter & West, 1979). Connectedness is the basis of communal feeling, being able to empathize and feel with others, and identify with others (people and things) outside of us (Hofstra, 2019). We only exist in relationships and define ourselves based on relationships with others (Hotstra, 2019). What we do affects others and what others do affects us (Hotstra, 2019). As for where I am in the debate, Ansbacher believed that belonging wasn’t the appropriate term to describe communal feeling and I agree with that, it doesn’t feel adequate for the powerful connection that people have with each other and the world.  

Based on the readings and Hofstra’s presentation, the part of the debate touched me especially strongly as a socially responsible practitioner and the part of the debate is the most relatable to socially responsible practice is the idea of empathy. Hofstra’s presentation demonstrated the self-boundary awareness model beautifully and how empathy is staying within our private inner world yet being able to feel and listen to others. This demonstrates the powerful connection we can have with others when we have interconnectedness and communal feeling. It also demonstrated the importance of respecting other people’s feelings and protecting our own while still being connected, deciding how we let the world affect us which will in turn affect how we interact with others.

Response 2

How does the debate relate to the topic of communal feeling?

Alfred Adler, Heinz Ansbacher, and Ray Corsini all believed that communal feeling, or belonging to a group or community, is essential for human well-being. They argued that belonging and society can promote cooperation, teamwork, and social responsibility. 

Adler defined communal feeling as “the sense of unity with the entire human race.” He believed humans are naturally social creatures who want to connect with others and feel a sense of belonging. He also believed that communal feeling could be cultivated through education and experience (Bitter & West,1979)

Ansbacher defined belonging as “the need to be connected to others and to feel that one is part of a group.” He said the communal feeling is “the sense of shared identity and purpose that comes from being part of a community.” He believed that people with a sense of belonging are happier, healthier, and more productive. He also thought they would likely be involved in their communities and contribute to society (Bitter & West, 1979)

Corsini defined belongingness as “the sense of being connected to others and a larger community.” He defined equality as “the belief that all people are created equal and deserve to be treated with respect and dignity.” He also believed that belongingness and equality are complementary concepts. He said belongingness provides the foundation for equality and creates the conditions for belongingness. These concepts foster cooperation, teamwork, and social responsibility, making them essential for social justice (Corsini,1980)

In conclusion, Adler, Corsini, and Ansbacher believed communal feeling is essential for human well-being. They also believed belonging and community, can promote cooperation, teamwork, and social responsibility. 

What parts of the debates touched you especially strongly as a socially responsible practitioner, what parts of the debate are the most relatable to socially responsible practice?

As a socially responsible practitioner, the debate on belongingness affected me in several ways. First, I was struck by the significance that all three speakers placed on belongingness for people to thrive. Everyone agreed that those who experience a sense of belonging are more likely to be happy, healthy, and productive.

Where are you in the debate?

I agree with Ansbacher, Corsini, and Adler that a sense of belonging is necessary for human well-being. Everyone has an innate desire to feel connected to others and a sense of belonging to something greater than themselves. This need is not only psychological but biological as well. We evolved to live in communities as social organisms. People are more likely to be happy, healthy, and productive when they experience a sense of belonging.

Additionally, they are more likely to participate in their communities and contribute to society. In contrast, when individuals experience isolation and disconnection they are more likely to develop mental health issues such as depression and anxiety. They are also more likely to engage in risky behaviors like substance addiction and violence.

Order Solution Now

Our Service Charter

1. Professional & Expert Writers: Writers Hero only hires the best. Our writers are specially selected and recruited, after which they undergo further training to perfect their skills for specialization purposes. Moreover, our writers are holders of masters and Ph.D. degrees. They have impressive academic records, besides being native English speakers.

2. Top Quality Papers: Our customers are always guaranteed papers that exceed their expectations. All our writers have +5 years of experience. This implies that all papers are written by individuals who are experts in their fields. In addition, the quality team reviews all the papers before sending them to the customers.

3. Plagiarism-Free Papers: All papers provided by Writers Hero are written from scratch. Appropriate referencing and citation of key information are followed. Plagiarism checkers are used by the Quality assurance team and our editors just to double-check that there are no instances of plagiarism.

4. Timely Delivery: Time wasted is equivalent to a failed dedication and commitment. Writers Hero is known for timely delivery of any pending customer orders. Customers are well informed of the progress of their papers to ensure they keep track of what the writer is providing before the final draft is sent for grading.

5. Affordable Prices: Our prices are fairly structured to fit all groups. Any customer willing to place their assignments with us can do so at very affordable prices. In addition, our customers enjoy regular discounts and bonuses.

6. 24/7 Customer Support: At Writers Hero, we have put in place a team of experts who answer all customer inquiries promptly. The best part is the ever-availability of the team. Customers can make inquiries anytime.