GCU The Voluntary Nature of Communal Feeling Discussion Responses

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.