Richard Nixon Lifespan Analysis

1201 Words5 Pages
Lifespan Development and Personality Richard M. Nixon was selected for this assignment because he was a famous individual from the 20th or 21st century. In recent history Richard M. Nixon was one of the most complex individual of this era. He is best recognized for Watergate. Watergate continues to echo in American politics even 25 years after the incident. On the other hand, Watergate cannot entirely eclipse the constructive results of Nixon's presidency. He was a proficient diplomat, and knowledgeable in foreign affairs, Nixon was the president who enhanced relationships between Communist China and the United States. Nixon’s visit to China in 1972 was the first time by an American president. He also enhanced relations between the Soviet…show more content…
To tolerate and abide by the rules was what he learned early in life. This was the only way to avoid punishment. To avoid punishment he also learned how to be persuasive by telling lies. Sometimes his father also disciplined him with his money. His father would withhold money he had, and also made his sons and wife held responsible for every cent. Being kicked or the matter of kicking by his father was seen early in Nixon’s life. Although, this matter whether his father kicked him or not was unsure by Nixon even though his memory believed he was kicked by his father (Brodie, 1981). Mother Nixon’s mother described by many as either too gentle or cranky and Puritanical was from a Quaker household. His mother was known by the main remark that she stated that Richard (Nixon) everyday seemed to need her more than her other four sons. In Nixon’s life one of the chief paradoxes that a man raised by this calm and loving Quaker should have so rejected the Quaker inheritance. It is also another mystery that a child raised by a mother full of caring and love could have been so obsessed with hate (Brodie, 1981).…show more content…
Psychodynamic is the next theory that fits as well. This is associated more with childhood experiences and the unconscious mind of the individual. According to Grove (1994), “But are persons really responsible for their actions in the sense that they (1) assess the possible alternative courses of action available to them, (2) choose a particular course, and (3) construct a complex set of acts to achieve intended results” (p. 74). Our laws, our religions, and our emotional responses are established on the principles that these are factual intentions. When the events of others have an effect on our lives, and we recognize their reactions to be determined entirely by power beyond their limitations, there is then no cause for feelings of either anger or gratitude (Grove,
Open Document