I'll explain myself. Many theories exist to explain personality structure and function: the Big 5 traits theory, the psychodynamic-analytic orientation based on the 3 psychic instances, etc. Now, each theory is considered as a simple tool depending on the objectives of an intervention. However, would it be possible to conciliate many if not all these tools to have a mega-tool, as each one describes a part of the psyche? What do you think?
I suspect not. Although clinicians on a daily basis do some form of theoretical integration as they come up with outlines for assessments and case reports. The search for mega tools tends to be driven by researchers, whose variables are only loosely tied to real-life events. In the clinical setting, because of the complexity of personalities and their social settings, we look for a range of theoretical explanations and the terms associated with them. One thing that theories, or at least theoretical terms, offer is the putting into words of what was in the realm of what Christopher Bollas phrased as "the unthought known." Concepts, mini-theories etc. bring experience into the realm of language and thought. The mega-theories don't facilitate communication and healing in the same way.
You might want to take a look at Woods and Anderson's (2015) work on a periodic table of personality. Though their work is in its relative infancy, they're working towards unifying the relatively disparate personality literature using Big Five trait circumplexes (i.e. combinations of two traits) as a framework on which to map non-Big Five personality constructs.
You can read their paper here:
Article Toward a Periodic Table of Personality: Mapping Personality ...
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Psychology