The History of Positive Psychology
The history of Positive Psychology can be viewed in different angles. Some psychologists say that it started as early as 1950s but others say that it started much later. Seligman (2008) defines positive psychology as the study of how human beings flourish in the face of adversity and hardship. In this context, positive psychologys goal is to strengthen the abilities and good qualities of humans for them to be able to live worthily and equip them to progress as an individual and as a society. Generally, it is believed that in positive psychology it is important to determine the specific situation of the environment, the progression, and the different circumstances that make people act and function positively.
A review of literature showed that psychofortology is actually an alternative designation for positive psychology, and fortology (Latin fortis strong), an antonym for pathology. The positive psychologists concepts can be grouped into higher order personality factors (like the socialization process and personal growth) and spiritualityreligiousness. In fact, from the late 1950s up until early 1970s, there was focus on the personal growth orientation. Scholars felt that fortological theory and research in the areas or disciplines of socialization and interdependencies theories had been left out which should be attended to soonest.
Allport (quoted by Stumpfer, 2005) also commented on the tendency of academics and graduate students to conclude that old literature is worthless and should not be given importance. This, he disputed by saying that when one does take the trouble to return to the writings of earlier generations, one is sometimes surprised by their freshness and insightfulness.
Seligman (2008), meanwhile, reported that such foundational knowledge is also important if one really wants get a glimpse of the holistic view of the concept. It was also becoming very obvious that normal functioning cannot be understood mainly within a problem-orientated framework. For example, they pointed out that psychologists have little knowledge of what makes life worth living. According to them, what was wanting was a knowledge of what kind of families produce children who flourish, of what leads to well-being in individuals and communities, of what work settings lead to the greatest work satisfaction, of what policies lead to the strongest civic engagement generally, to an empirically sound, as well as understandable and attractive, vision of the good life (Bugawan, 2008). Largely, what was available was knowledge about repairing consequences of adverse conditions, not about building positive qualities. There was too much focus on the negative aspect of life, of disorder, and the need for repair because someone or something is damaged. What was also lacking was an understanding of the fact that, despite all the difficulties, the majority of people manage to live lives of dignity and purpose (Seligman et al., 2005).
Martin Seligman (2008), in fact, aroused his fellow-psychologists to the tasks of positive psychology. He wrote that he started using it almost certainly by the end of 1997 in speeches and column writing in 1998. Seligman (2008) repeatedly stressed to his colleagues that the field of positive psychology has been side-tracked. According to him, psychology is not just the study of weakness and damage it is also the study of strength and virtue. Treatment is not just fixing what is broken it is nurturing what is best within ourselves.
In 2005, this initiative of Seligman et al. was given an immense impetus when launched, with a special issue of the American Psychologist, edited by Seligman. The two said, The aim of positive psychology is to begin to catalyze a change in the focus of psychology from preoccupation only with repairing the worst things in life to also building positive qualities.
On the other hand, a different designation for the same field of psychology, the construct of psychofortology, was introduced by Wissing and van Eeden (quoted by Stumpfer, 2005) to suggest a new sub-discipline, in which not only the origins of psychological well-being shouldwill be studied, but also the nature, manifestations, and consequently ways to enhance psychological well-being and develop human capacities. They derived the term fortology from Strmpfer (2005), who argued that Antonovskys (quoted by Stumpfer, 2005) construct of salutogenesis (Latin salus health Greek genesis, from gen- be produced) should be broadened to fortigenesis (Latin fortis strong), referring to the origins of strength.
Linkage with Humanistic Psychology
But in order to fully trace back the roots of positive psychology, the overview of the history of humanistic psychology may be traced as well. Humanistic psychology, as the term implies, is the study of psychology pertaining to the behavior and psychology of a human being (Seligman et al., 2005). It is in this school of thought that the influence of humanistic psychology in positive psychology surfaced. Going back, it was stated that positive psychology deals with the processes and conditions that give the human being the ability to progress and flourish in times of difficulty and hardship this is very reminiscent of humanistic psychology since it deals with human beings as well and employs a different approach to study the human behavior.
One of the principles applied in the study of humanistic psychology which is used in positive psychology is the impact of the idea of existentialism and phenomenology (Linley et al., 2006). However, many psychologists agreed that the inclusion of existentialism is not really observed in positive psychology since existentialism employs much negative approach which should not be the case. On the other hand, the influence and impact of phenomenology was adhered to by many this is because the very philosophy of phenomenology means that as a human being, people always have the consciousness to intentionally have a form of self contentment. (Jacobsen, 2007) Until today, psychologists seem to still disagree on the relation of existentialism and phenomenology to humanism and eventually positive psychology.
But according to Seligman (2005), the real roots of positive psychology in humanistic psychology can be traced back during the 1950s in the work of William James. James utilized the scientific approach and concluded that in order to fully study the optimal functioning of human, there is a need to consider the individual experience and utilize a positive approach. This approach has a counter analysis in the form of existentialism. Looking back, scientists and psychologists perceived at existentialism as a negative approach to analyzing human beings. However, in 2007, Jacobsen further looked in the subjective experience by taking into account the notion and concept of happiness in the field of Existential Psychology. He defined that the concept of happiness in the realm of Existential Psychology has both bodily and spiritual dimensions. Jacobsen further explained the definitions of the types of happiness which are ordinary and real happiness. He stated that ordinary happiness is the individual feeling of the fulfillment of goals and need.
On the other hand, real happiness incorporates the surroundings and the environment to which the fulfillments of goals and needs are balanced. Furthermore, Strumpfer (2005) stated that the need to have an existentialist influence in the study of positive psychology will reassure that the notions and views to the self with regards to the conditions of existence and their emotions actions and responsibilities. Therefore, it has been noted that the relationship of having an existentialist view in positive psychology is crucial. However, the negative outlook of psychology as a whole was also part of the reason why positive psychology flourished.
Maslow said that the science of psychology has been far more successful on the negative than on the positive side. It has revealed to us much about mans shortcomings, his illness, his sins, but little about his potentialities, his virtues, his achievable aspirations, or his full psycho- logical height. It is as if psychology has voluntarily restricted itself to only half its rightful jurisdiction, and that, the darker, meaner half. (Linley, 2006) It is in the light of this reality of psychology that Seligman presented an alternative study and realm of thought to the overwhelming amount of focus on the humans suffering and various negativities in life. The emphasis of positive psychology ranges from (but not limited to) strength, virtues, fulfillment and happiness. However, it has been noted by Simonton in 2005 that the need for scientific research in positive psychology be done. This is due to the historical downfall of the study of humanistic psychology because of the lack of research. In view of this scenario, existentialist approach on happiness therapy may not really be the cure for human suffering. The treatment of humans in a negative way may well be the reason why there is so much mental illness in the system.
In 2008, Seligman reported that psychology has been focusing too much on the negative aspect of human thinking and this led to a distorted view of what the real human experience is like. He then later mentioned as an example, Beethoven, Beethoven was said to be depressed and suicidal at the age of 31 but he overcame his despair and was able to produce the Ode to Joy. The objective of helping out to improve the human condition was good but it fell short because it was not able to reach out to all those who really suffered. This is exemplified by the fact that most ordinary people needed to be lectured on how to have a happy and fulfilling life. In humanistic psychology, the concept is that every man develops throughout his life and continues to change his views in regards to happiness (Robbins, 2008). Analyzing this, it is evident that humanistic psychology and positive psychology have overlaps in terms of their goals, objectives and scope of interest.
These related fields of human and positive psychology differ in their methodologies and this is because humanistic psychologists or humanists employs the use of qualitative methods in order to assess, evaluate and have a better grip of the whole human behavior. On the other hand, the positive psychologists make use of more precise methods. These methods include (but not limited to) the meticulous quantitative approaches and various deductive methods (Seligman, 2008). These research methods were also tackled by Maslow and in 1954, he reported that humanistic psychologists needed to alter their methods of investigation and research by employing another realm of approach phenomenology. Maslow further discussed that with the purpose of gauging the extent of human excellence and prospective, these humanistic psychologists need to use both positivistic and humanistic approaches (Bugawan, 2008).
But the origin of existentialism and phenomenology will always be reminiscent of what positive psychology is today. These challenges include ton of criticisms and reactions from the realm of psychologists alike. These challenges will push the positivist to have more research and to have a distinct interpretation without always referring back to its roots. However, it has been reported by Strumpfer in 2005 that the real roots of positive psychology can be dated back hundreds of years ago. This started out from the years of the Buddha and of the Chinese healers. He mentioned that these Chinese healers have objectives of supporting the whole personality and well-being of a human in order to be more resilient and resistant to lifes challenges and difficulties. This realization is a direct root of origin of positive psychology. Furthermore, part of the healing and supportive role of these Chinese healers is that they included the mind, body and soul as a reference point of for human improvement.
The origin of positive psychology was also attributed to the research of Carl Jung. Carl Jung is a psychiatrist and he devoted much time on the field consciousness. These involve senses like feeling, hearing and seeing. The definitive studies of Jung made him part of the origins of positive psychology of introverts and extroverts. Introverts relate to their inner self thus the individual experience and extroverts relate to the outside world which is the environment to which their behavior is manifested. These are directly opposing ideas of inward and outward views and Jung was able to develop a psychological unity of these aspects.
These different works and studies of psychologists contribute to what we know today as positive psychology. Additionally, tracing back to roots of positive psychology will lead us to Charlotte Buhler. Strumpfer (2005) stated that the work of Buhler in German which is entitled The human life course as a psychological problem, is a very important part of psychology. The reason for this is because in Buhlers book, she analyzed hundreds of biographies. Based from these analyses, she developed a five stage structure of a normal human development which includes exploration, establishment, maintenance and decline (Strumpfer, 2005) The main point of these research is that way back in 1935, Buhler did another research and she has created a list of practical uses of her findings. These practical uses or applications were termed by her as positive aspects which relates us back to positive psychology. Furthermore, Buhler also wrote about creative expansion. Creative expansion is the tendency of a person to move forward and progress in and alter or modify the world creatively through the utilization of physical or mental efficiency. In this realm, Buhler used the concept of intentionality, which basically means that the life of a person is dependent on the urge to give purpose and meaning their lives. This intentionality is a very crucial factor in positive psychology which gives more dimensionality to it as a science (Strumpfer, 2005).
Another proponent of the founding ideas and studies of positive psychology is Abraham Maslow, going back we stated that Maslow has his contributions to positive psychology. Maslows contributions include the creations of a hierarchy of needs and also growth motives which supplement the deficiency of motives (Linley et al., 2006). Additionally, it has been noted that Maslow was the first one to really use the term Positive Psychology. Later on, Maslow also termed this as health-and-growth psychology. (Strumpfer, 2005)
Positive psychology also encompasses different disciplines in medicine and philosophy (Seligman, 2008). One of the close relatives of positive psychology is its connection with cognitive science as a way of research and a way of giving meaning to mind and happiness. In order to view this relationship with cognitive science, let us take a quick insight on the definition of it. Cognitive science is the study of the different interrelationships, similarities, differences and functions of the mind and intelligence. This also includes embracing philosophy, together with psychology, artificial intelligence, neuroscience, and anthropology linguistics. Cognitive science began around the 1950s and it was continuously contributing to the base foundation of psychology (Linley et al., 2006).
Having a good foundation of knowledge from the different researches done in the past is necessary as positive psychology is the new frontier in todays world and it is only in the unification of the sciences of psychology that its importance will be realized by many..
Categories:
0 comments:
Post a Comment