The control inquiry ultimately led to many different theories that held validity in light of the psyche. Adler, Heider, and Langer made leaps and bounds by trying to pinpoint the drive, the need, the obsession, for control in an otherwise uncontrollable world. Yet they all branched out from the idea of control to create theories that did not relate to each other. While Adler discussed control as an innate need to provide order, which then boosts one’s power and stability or comfort ability, Langer felt that it was the environment that melded the personality which then contributed to the wish or want for control. While Heider believed it was a combination of external and internal influences.
Then, a bigger question is prompted: which theory is the “right” theory? Which one is correctly justifies humankind’s manipulative tendencies?
It then placed in the indefinite realm of inquiry – no true answer. It can be seen as a shame for some by not acquiring an answer, to a an age-old question. But I view this “quest” in a different, more optimistic light. Even though I did not uncover any answers, I still acquired an abundance of knowledge about those who have come before and shared their thoughts on control in itself. While yes it would been nice to uncover control’s complexities, reading past works reveals that it is not an easy subject to pinpoint. And a college student would not be able to find such revelatory evidence in personality studies, more specifically control studies.
Now we must ask the question: can control even be deduced to being innate or learned? Or will it always be an anomaly? That is what I am curious about – not if control is innate or learned, but if that question can even be answered.
We will see where more studies may lead us as we continue to question our motives. Be conscious of those around you. You may see theories play out right before your very eyes.