Principles of Positive Psychology - Research Paper Example

? In Happiness. Unlocking the Mysteries of Psychological Wealth, Ed Diener adheres closely to a scientific method in order to demonstrate the value of 'positive psychology' as a form of praxis or lifestyle. It is a praxis, as we shall see, driven by outcomes based research that stands to defend positive psychology. In a phrase of terms it can be said that on the positive side of Diener’s positivist psychology, is the very positivist attitude toward science exhibited throughout the work. For Diener, you can’t get more positive than being scientific which is what is implied on that play on words, and in regard to the positivist school of scientific thought. It will be argued that however much there is attention paid to the ‘social’, and moreover, the relative differences that make or have made happiness such a difficult topic to study with any real scientific rigor. His main contribution in the book in question, is to provide rigor and legitimacy to the field of happiness. In the Preface to the book, which is written by Diener’s wife, who is also a psychologist, Diener had to return to the topic after establishing himself in a different area of academic psychology first. It was not until he was tenured, and took some time off to travel and experience other cultures, and also read Aristotle, Aquinas and other philosopher’s on the subject of happiness, that he returned to the topic that he originally wanted to pursue as a subject for his Doctoral Dissertation[Diener X]. When he initially proposed writing a dissertation on the subject of happiness among laborer’s, he was told that it couldn’t be possible to establish any objective definition of it, and that it was equally impossible that a general farm worker could be happy [Diener page X]. While the discouragement did ultimately cause him to defer what interested him, it also caused him to pay careful attention to the details of scientific or empirical justifications. He had to overcompensate or legitimate the very field of happiness studies itself. However much there is cultural relativity informing his view of happiness, he is always consistent with also finding scientific evidence for his central arguments. Moreover, for a psychologist who is interested in mind and culture, it can be said that the type or form of evidence that is often most compelling are the basic biological studies. That is, studies that suggest to the reader that there is an important boundary being established between the outer limits of what is a biological fact, and that which is a social one. Consider for example the ‘qualitative’ and ‘quantitative’ difference that he presents in a discussion of the medical procedure of a “colonoscopy" [Diener 195]. This is a medical procedure that is particularly known as painful and on the easy side of the evaluation, very uncomfortable at the least. For the experiment or research in question, individuals who had to have a colonoscopy were divided into two groups “A” and “B” [Diener 195]. One group would experience the procedure for less time than the other. The assumption that was challenged by this experiment according to Diener, is that individuals with the greater amount of time spent with pain would express or maintain a greater degree of discomfort: “folks tend to remember and overemphasize the peak (best or worst) moment and the last moment”.[Diener 195] Rather, the results were really mixed, and it was not the case that it was solely a ‘quantitative’ variable that determined unhappiness that those individuals who endured a longer duration. What the patients or subjects reported in this experiment, was that the initial or first shock of the pain is what stuck out in their memories [Diener 195]. A second experiment that Diener uses to demonstrate some important ‘quantitative’ and ‘qualitative’ boundaries and intersections, is one that was conducted at University College London [Diener 149]. The study in question was a long-term and longitudinal analysis of children maturing into adulthood. It examined both social and biological differences, or the qualitative and quantifiable information that qualifies as defining that line between hard science and what is ‘subjective’ and socially constructed within a single culture. On one of the biological components of the DNA evaluation, the study ascertained that: “people with the specific allele of the 5-HTP gene react more in emotional areas of the brain, such as the amygdala, when they are shown disturbing pictures, and ruminate more in response to stress.” [Diener 149]. Concerning this sensitivity, it is one of the main means by which he articulates individuals who are not well, so to speak. One of the important considerations of Diener's work in question, is how he does treat that which is systematically challenged by positive psychology. The very concept of 'positive' cannot be considered without its converse, and also, that which it can largely be said to be reactionary toward, namely, the negative. Until the advent of positive psychology in its current form or as expressed in the lineage that was handed down to Diener's approach, research in psychiatry, behavior and psychology was primary focused on problems – or, 'abnormal psychology' and the topic area of 'deviance'. That is, the pathologies that result in the hospitalization or the medicating of individuals in order to control symptoms. Just as the set of all positive and negative numbers belong to the set of integers, so too is there a positive connection with the negative in a larger set, so to speak. One of those differences of degree, is basically the emotional sensitivity described by the study described above, but also in passages like the following that depict a negative that is basically on the same scale as the positive: “Without regulating our empathy to some degree, intensely negative events, such as genocide or watching a parent undergo cancer treatment, could quickly become overwhelming.” [Diener 63] In a similar vein, he describes an individual and a student who suffers from a debilitating form of bipolar illness. While the case in question could have their symptoms controlled by medication [Diener 211], they chose not to take them because of many of the side effects that were paralytic and debilitating. While competent and on schedule when medicated, off medication the case experiences the type of “exuberance” and grandiosity that results in starting a multitude of projects but not finishing any of them [Diener 211]. There is no question that there was both competence and genius exhibited by “Peter”, but ultimately there is no avoiding the fundamental negative of the disorder: “Peter’s story illustrates the potential downsides of having too much exuberance” [Diener 211]. Likewise, the negative aspect of being basically over-sensitive or not “regulating” one's emotions consistently in a Diener highly moderate model of subjective well-being can result in notable outcomes that go beyond the self-harm that is typically exhibited in various pathologies. Diener does not shy away from stressing that certain non-moderate or “non excessive” [Diener 212] behavior patterns can build up as in the case of the person who is overly sensitive to negative information constantly streaming through every news medium. If it bleads, it leads as they say in a very sarcastic and cliche way in the business of news. On the positive and negative scale, it is not uncommon that an individual who builds up negative reactions with some consistency, might take a turn and as is noted, such a turn or line that is crossed is clear in those situations -- actions or decisions where the outcome is harm to others or “when we injure others” [Diener 63]. The division between the sensible reaction, and the cognitive one is pronounced in this duality articulated by Diener. And, this division is one of the themes that pervades the work. For instance, although most or the majority of individuals believe through their emotions that having children ought to be a means toward our common end. However, the converse is true and moreover, it is one of the known facts about the topic of happiness through “many studies” that people tend to refuse to believe: “Most happiness studies have not shown children to be an important cause of happiness ... many people are shocked by this ?nding, and are reluctant to accept it” [Diener 61]. There is unquestionably a dynamic that Diener maintains betweeen the emotional drives and the intellectual capacity to find a 'mean' between the extremes toward a moderate stance. As implicated in the title or subject heading of “subjective well-being”, there is a built in assumption of a concept of subjectivity in Diener's main or best known association with positive psychology. As he states early on in the work: “subjective interpretations play an important role in happiness” [Diener 17]. At the same time, there is a significant amount of information that is hardly subjective regarding the notion of well-being. For instance, he states that “work, health and relationships” [Diener 4] can provide for such a degree of happiness that an individual does not even finding themselves wanting for more than they have. In so many of the studies that have taken on the topic of happiness, the question at the foreground driving the research has conventionally measured income levels alongside happiness. His book is even littered with references to individuals of enormous wealth like “Oprah Winfrey” [Diener 3; 109] and the programmer who founded and owned a majority stake or set of shares in the largest and most profitable software company in the world, namely, Microsoft's “Bill Gates” [Diener 3; 109]. In conclusion, Diener's play between positive and negative on the issue of wealth, is essentially pretty 'moderate' or pragmatic. Moreover, it can't be stressed enough that 'subjective' can be one of the operative terms especially when considering that according to Diener's criteria of happiness it was actually pretty high among “holocaust survivors” [Diener 156]. Likewise, with individuals who are affiliated with a religious organization or who at the very least makes it a point to incorporate some form of spiritual practice into their lives: “Psychologists who have studied whether religious people are happy or unhappy have often reached a general conclusion – religious people are on the whole happier than the nonreligious.” [Diener 114]. Moreover, it was demonstrated in this analysis that 'positive' is really just a difference of degree from the 'negative'. By using a number of scientific studies, Diener demonstrates unequivocally that happiness is not strictly a 'subjective' enterprise. In particular, he raises research studies that prove that there is an important boundary being established between the outer limits of what is a biological fact, and that which is a social one, or what is ‘qualitative’ over and against what is ‘quantitative’. This distinction, dividing line or boundary is an expression of a difference that he presents in a discussion of the medical procedure of a colonoscopy, the crossing of a line from happiness to manic exuberance with respect to a mentally ill student, and with the division between what we feel emotionally like the desire to have children against what we know intellectually: that children are statistically not actually a cause for happiness. Works Cited: Diener, Ed. 2008. Happiness. Unlocking the Mysteries of Psychological Wealth. Oxford: Blackwell. A Critical Overview of Key Themes in Happiness. Unlocking the Mysteries of Psychological Wealth by Ed Diener Read More