Page 244 - Communication and the Evolution of Society

221 Notes

out passing through all those preceding it; further, that in later stages
of development the elements of earlier phases are transformed (aufge-
hoben) and re-integrated at a higher level; and moreover that for the
sequence as a whole a direction of development can be specified (growing
independence from stimuli and greater objectivity). (c) These stages of
development are of psychological interest above all for the following
reason: from the fact that individuals always prefer problem-solutions
corresponding to the highest level attained by them, and that schemata
which spring from a superseded stage are in general avoided, we can
infer that the development is not merely an externally constructed and
imputed ordering schema, but corresponds to a psychologically and
motivationally significant reality.” R. Débert and G. Nunner-Winkler,
“Konflikt- und Rickzugspotentiale,” p. 302.
10. J. Cumming and E. Cumming, Ego and Milieu (New York, 1967).
uz. E. Turiel, “Conflict and Transition in Adolescent Moral Develop-
ment,” in Child Development (1974) :14-29.
12. [Compare the discussion of “ego-demarcations” in the concluding
section of “What is Universal Pragmatics?” szpra.]}
13. E. H. Erikson, Identity and the Life Cycle (New York, 1959),
chap. 3, “The Problem of Ego Identity,” pp. ror ff.
14. J. Loevinger, “Origins of Conscience,” unpubl. MS (Washington
University, St. Louis, 1974).
15. J. Loevinger, ‘‘The Meaning and Measurement of Ego Develop-
ment,” in American Psychologist 21 (1966) :195-206; J. Loevinger and
R. Wessler, Measuring Ego Development (San Francisco, 1970); J. Loe-
vinger, ‘Recent Research on Ego Development,” unpubl. MS (Washing-
ton University, St. Louis, 1973); cf. also the dissertation by J. M. Brough-
ton, The Development of Natural Epistemology in Adolescence and
Early Adulthood (Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass., 1975).
16. T. Parsons, The Social System (London, 1951) and ‘Social Inter-
action,” in the International Encyclopaedia of Social Science, vol. 7, pp.
429-441; J. Habermas, ‘‘Stichworte zur Theorie de Sozialisation,” in Kal-
tur und Kritik, pp. 118-194; and H. Joas, Die gegenwartige Lage der
soziologischen Rollentheorie (Frankfurt, 1973).
17. J. Habermas, “On Social Identity,” in Telos, 19(1974) :91-103.
18. A. W. Gouldner, “The Norm of Reciprocity,” in American Soci-
ological Review (1960):161-178; cf. also his Enter Plato (New York,
1965). .
19. J. Sandler, “Zum Begriff des Uber-Ichs,” in Psyche (1964) :721-
743, 812-828; R. A. Spitz, Genetic Field Theory of Ego Formation (New
York, 1959); E. Jacobson, The Self and the Object World (New York,
1964); amd M. Mitscherlich, “Probleme der Idealisierung,”’ in Psyche
(1973): 1106-1127.
20. A. Freud, The Ego and the Mechanisms of Defense (New York,
1946); G. E. Swanson, “Determinants of the Individual’s Defenses against