as a teenager I was trying to find where I fit in. When I was in high school there were different groups, each one dressed different, acted different and most of them had a main activity they did. Jocks, skaters, ect., ect.. As an adolescent I hung out with whom I liked and I did what I liked, but I did follow the image that went along with it. I dressed a certain way and I still dress that same way now. People judge you by the clothes you wear more than anything, because it’s the first thing that they see. That’s how our society works. I think that development of an identity is much more of a complicated process now, then when Erikson studied it. Times have changed so much, finding an identity and becoming an individual is so much more of a trial and error process then he says it is. The formation of an identity is one that is an ongoing process through your whole life. You don’t just become something or somebody and stay that way forever. We are ever changing with everyday, certain events, such as having a baby, have a much bigger impact on what kind of person we become. We set goals of the kind of person we want to be and the image we want to portray. Overall I think that both psychologists’ were on the right track with the stages of development and that I fit into both of their categories one way or another. As people get older I think it is much harder to pinpoint things that all people feel, we are all different, we’ve all been through different things and we’ve all had different feelings. To try to sum up all peoples’ lives and place them into a category, or a stage is a task that can’t be achieved. Adults all develop different traits at different times. Some pick up traits that others don’t. The development of an adult can’t be put into a step-by-step basis. I feel their analogy of the younger stages, up to adolescence is very well put and that they di...
