Character is instinctual structure reshaped by social conditions into rationalized behavior.

Evidence

But most important of all, these “psychological” explanations refer us ultimately to inexplicable original givens. These are the simple bodies of psychology. We are told, for example, that Flaubert had a “grandiose ambition” and all of the previously quoted description depends on this original ambition. So far so good. But this ambition is an irreducible fact which by no means satisfies the mind. The irreducibility here has no justification other than refusal to push the analysis further. There where the psychologist stops, the fact confronted is given as primary. This is why we experience a troubled feeling of mingled resignation and dissatisfaction when we read these psychological treatises. “See,” we say to ourselves, “Flaubert was ambitious. He was that kind of man.” It would be as futile to ask why he was such as to seek to know why he was tall and blond. Of course we have to stop somewhere; it is the very contingency of all real existence. This rock is covered with moss, the rock next to it is not. Gustave Flaubert had literary ambition, and his brother Achille lacked it. That’s the way it is. — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 1322 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

The behavior patterns of assimilated Jews, determined by this continuous concentrated effort to distinguish themselves, created a Jewish type that is recognizable everywhere. Instead of being defined by nationality or religion, Jews were being transformed into a social group whose members shared certain psychological attributes and reactions, the sum total of which was supposed to constitute “Jewishness.” In other words, Judaism became a psychological quality and the Jewish question became an involved personal problem for every individual Jew. — Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 219 (#expands, via linked claim)

In fact, the territory of a character’s mind is most likely to be the center of the action. Aristotle says that a man “is his desire,” that is, his character is defined by his ultimate purpose, good or bad. Thought, says Aristotle, is the process by which a person works backward in his mind from his goal to determine what action he can take toward that goal at a given moment. — Janet Burroway; Elizabeth Stuckey-French; Ned Stuckey-French, Writing Fiction, Tenth Edition, 251 (#expands, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Instinctual drives interact metabolically with environment to reshape human character; Character is defined by desire and backward reasoning toward action. — Janet Burroway; Elizabeth Stuckey-French; Ned Stuckey-French, Writing Fiction, Tenth Edition: A Guide…, 251; Social pressure converts a people into a set of shared psychological traits — Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 219 (+1 more)

Broader Connections

• Psychological explanations that stop at irreducible character traits beg the question #corroborates (0.85) — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 1322
• Social pressure converts a people into a set of shared psychological traits #expands (0.80) — Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 219
• Character is defined by desire and backward reasoning toward action. #expands (0.75) — Janet Burroway; Elizabeth Stuckey-French; Ned Stuckey-French, Writing Fiction, Tenth Edition, 251