The “identity crisis” as proposed by Erik Erikson has become a powerful concept in psychology, even though it became popular in the 1960s. is such a concept, for it was eagerly adopted by American society in the 1960s. According to Erikson, the stage of “identity versus role confusion” takes place at a time in a person’s life that falls between leaving childhood and reaching full adult status – a time that is heavily influenced by hormonal changes, but also by the pressure for that young person to prepare for the increasing responsibility and demands of society. Erikson saw adolescence as a crucial stage of development in which earlier psychosocial conflicts return in a new form, and from which adolescents form the foundations for the development of intimacy, generativity, and understanding that lead to positive outcomes in later stages in life. During the identity crisis of adolescence, we develop things such as: temporal perspective which allows us to have a clear sense of past and future; we acquire self-certainty or self-confidence to try new things; we experiment with roles, often imitating different people as role models; we often begin to experiment with work and relationships; we begin to question authority and begin to develop our own philosophy of life. Of interest is the way adolescents inevitably decide on their sexual orientation and as a function of society, adolescents are freer to question their gender identity, not just their gender role. Regardless of where one falls in the LGBTQI+ there is often great pressure to conform (we will talk about conformity in Social Psychology) to sexual roles that parents and most peers consider “normal.” “Erikson wrote about the aspect of sexual polarization that can be described as “comfort and confidence in the role of male or female.” In early adolescence, young people often feel sexually inadequate because their bodies are less than perfect, or because they feel inferior to peers who tell tall tales of sexual adventures and prowess. Furthermore, sexual roles are changing at the same time that adolescents must form a sexual identity” (Ciccarelli, ) Discussion questions:After reviewing Erikson’s stages of psychosocial development, discuss whether you think that adolescents today have a more difficult time in resolving the stage of “identity vs. role confusion” than in past decades. Make sure you explain why or why not.Do you agree with Erikson that adequate resolution of the “task” of earlier stages make us more emotionally stable and well-adjusted adults? Feel free to add your opinions on how Erikson’s theory speak to your personal development, as long as you feel comfortable doing so.

Remember my Last Name is AustinYou have been divided into two groups. For this forum, Group A (Last name A-L) will assume the role of an individual who supported the American Revolution (a Patriot or Whig), while Group B (Last name M-Z) will argue against it as Loyalist or Tory citizens.Loyalist James Chalmers, under the pseudonym of Candidus, wrote Plain Truth in response to Thomas Paine’s famous pamphlet Common Sense. You can click on the enclosed link to read Thomas Paine at Gutenberg Project. Then read the excerpted text from Chalmers below, shaping your statement in support or in opposition to Chalmer’s argument. Your submission should be a minimum of 250 words in length. Try not to make assumptions. Instead, assume the historical role of someone who lived in the colonies in the period up to, and including, the American Revolution. You could be a Colonial politician, a merchant, a farmer, a shop owner, or even a Southern plantation owner. Be creative.After your initial submission, you are then required to continue the debate by responding to three of your classmates. Your responses should be a minimum of 100 words, and should contribute to the dialogue. Your initial response is due by 11:55pm, ET, Friday and your responses to 3 other students by 11:55pm, ET, Sunday. For this forum, Group A (Last name A-L) will assume the role of an individual who supported the American Revolution (a Patriot or Whig), while Group B (Last name M-Z) will argue against it as Loyalist or Tory citizens. Remember my Last Name is Austin ok.Chalmer's Argument:"I have just heard the news of a small group of ruffians who have dumped a large amount of tea into the Boston Harbor. The initial report was that this group was a roving band of Indians. I refuse to be influenced by the underground rebellious press that continues to feed us with false reports and slanted view points that support a rebellion against the Crown. I and many loyal Colonists have found the truth to this report. The ruffians were actually a group of men , most of them are associated with the secret societv of Masons. The event demonstrates a useless destruction of property against the East India Company. I am writing to inform you that the tea which was destroyed was sent to the Colonies to be sold at a very competitive price as the East India Tea Company has a surplus of tea. King George has authorized the sale of this tea to benefit the Colonies. This tea would have also helped the financial state of the East India Tea Company of which we certainly hope would stay solvent. We have also found information alluding to the tea smuggling operations of John Hancock and other of the rebellion supporters. Could it be that the tea in Boston Harbor was destroyed to prevent competitive pricing of tea? (are we merely changing tax collectors?) Why do we continue to anger King George by useless acts of property damage?I urge you all to consider the price we would pay for rebellion against the Crown. Some of our Colonists call this revolution but you must realize that this is a huge mistake, any actions against the Crown represent a mere rebellion.[1][1] Excerpt taken from: Drake, Allison Stark. Headlines From History: The Boston Massacre Five Colonists Killed By British Soldiers. New York: The Rosen Publishing Group, Inc., 2001