Another point: there are more negative than positive terms to describe human emotions and mental states. This is because: a) Over evolutionary time it has increased our reproductive success (and survival) to be particularly sensitive to potentially harmful conditions, and b) Life for human beings, as Buddha suggested, is intrinsically unsatisfying, and filled with suffering and discomfort.
It is therefore "natural" that psychology should stress negative over positive states/conditions. Paul Okami ----- Original Message ----- From: "jim clark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, October 09, 2004 11:37 AM Subject: Re: positive psychology > Hi > > On Fri, 8 Oct 2004, Annette Taylor, Ph. D. wrote: > > Positive psychology and what it might and might not mean > > (i.e., whether or not this is a revival of humanism, I was > > struck by one of the opening sentences that Marie posted from > > Seligman's website: > > > As a group of psychologists, do we agree that "For most of > > the 20th Century, the field of psychology has focused largely > > on understanding and healing psychological ailments within a > > disease model." ? I for one, don't think that that statement > > correctly characterizes the psychology and history of > > psychology that I've studied,,,,,,but then, I'm not a > > clinician. What have I missed? > > I had a letter in the Monitor a few years ago that made this > point and several others (see below). I thought the evidence for > this claim was weak. Seligman responded simply with a > re-statement of the evidence that he had earlier presented (and > with which I was familiar). The evidence was from a PsychINFO > search on negative and positive words, with the number of hits > being the dependent variable. More hits for negative terms. I > believed (and still do) that examination of textbooks, and other > approaches to this question would be less telling. > > More disturbing to me was that APA has been accepting funds from > the John Templeton organization to make awards in positive > psychology. Templeton has committed much money to reconciling > science and religion, including an award each year for the person > best advancing this agenda, funding for conferences and workshops > on science and religion, and like projects. Seligman responded > that all funding sources, including NSF, have an agenda. I'm > still astounded that anyone would compare NSF to Templeton's > organization, let alone someone of Seligman's stature. > > Coming back to the original observation and Humanistic > psychology, I do believe that the Positive Psychology movement > has given new life to what appeared to be a fading (or already > faded) perspective in psychology, that is, the humanistic > perspective. And I do not think it is for the better for > scientific psychology. > > Best wishes > Jim > > ============================================================================ > James M. Clark (204) 786-9757 > Department of Psychology (204) 774-4134 Fax > University of Winnipeg 4L05D > Winnipeg, Manitoba R3B 2E9 [EMAIL PROTECTED] > CANADA http://www.uwinnipeg.ca/~clark > ============================================================================ > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
