The Individual Versus Society ‐ an Analysis of Variance

Abstract

Is there an inherent conflict between the individual and society? One needs only to read current news reports and magazine features to conclude that there is. How can the individual survive in a mass society? Concurrently, how can the society be responsive t o the needs of the citizen while maintaining order? Indeed, must the social order be maintained at the expense of the individual? This article is addressed to these and related questions. The notion of viability is central t o this discussion. Viability is the capability for growth or development or the state of being workable. The thought I would like t o develop is that both individual persons and the society at large need not be in conflict t o assure their viability. Indeed, the viability of each is, t o a large extent, contingent upon the parallel viability of the other. Anthropologists report that throughout man's recorded history, all societies have concerned themselves with remaining viable and ensuring the viability of their citizenry. To the extent that individuals are not viable, they perish; and to the extent that societies are not viable, they also perish. Society in general, however, can only retain its viability-its ability t o maintain its integnty while at the same time adjusting t o changed circumstances-to the extent that its institutions remain open and receptive to meeting the needs of citizens. At the same time, the individual attempts to attain some degree of viability, e.g., by establishing his identity and attempting t o retain his integrity while also growing and changing through (a) developing a strong ego, (b) learning new skills, (c) increasing his efficiency in decision-making, (d) improving his geographic mobility, and so on. The individual must grow in these ways so that he can meet changed situations (Ehrle, 1969). CONFLICT BETWEEN THE INDIVIDUAL. AND SOCIETY Newspaper reports, current TV features, and legal decisions suggest that an increasingly large number of individuals either are in conflict with society or feel that they might be. This feeling is particularly justifiable when one considers accounts of wire-tapping, anti-war demonstrations, welfare rights confrontations, civil rights 182 JOURNAL OF EMPLOYMENT COUNSELINGactivities, gun control proposals, police surveillance, income tax monitoring, and so forth. Some writers have led us t o believe that at this time a dichotomy or polarity does indeed exist between the objectives of the individual and those of society. According t o Webster's Dictionary, a dichotomy is a "division or process of dividing into especially mutually exclusive or contradictory groups," while polarity is "the quality or condition inherent in a body that exhibits opposite properties or powers. . . ." The thesis of this article is that dichotomy and polarity need not occur and that, in effect, the individual and society must ultimately complement each other. Complement is defined by Webster as "something that fills up, completes or makes perfect." Although we are witnessing a flowering of individuat...