To take the risk of starting a theological debate the phrase “pleasure can undermine happiness” seems genius. Maybe what the Christian religion lacks in its structure is this principle. Of course the Catholic’s are never about happiness (they are about guilt), the Baptists are about a personal relationship with Jesus, and the Mega-Churches are about pray bringing you wealth. They all taut charitable deeds but are any of them truly altruistic. Are their charities really providing for others (do starving children in Africa dying from aids really need bibles). These groups argue the way of Jesus. Wasn’t Jesus a self-declared man of acceptance. It is hard for me not to get excited about the idea that pleasure undermines happiness and we should actual work to improve our overall self. To paraphrase the second speaker by throwing our handfuls of troubles into a lake of strengths we still have fresh water. It is interesting the Christian dynamic all pleasures are sinful. The devil gives you pleasure; god gives you redemption. In the video it is implied pleasure is wonderful but the blind consumption of focusing on pleasures gives you nothing but salt water to drink. I believe Buddha achieved god status by being an ideal person of altruistic and inner strengths. It brings us to the question is happiness a state or a lifestyle. Should positive psychology be about being happy or should it about being better at all aspects in life. Whether that is determined by our treatment of others is up to the individual. But, it does seem that most people that skirt the boundaries of laws have a pleasure focused lifestyle and the ones that I know aren't usually that happy.
To quote Rogers we all have a need for positive regard. But is true happiness the ability to achieve our place within the world while giving unconditional positive regard to all others.
Great points from the speakers in the comment section on this one, especially about how we're hard-wired to find fault and fear change.
How do we make PERMA moral, Seligman? Good point. In a world without consequences, I'm all for a scientific oligarchy, but I don't think controlling the masses through social morays is quite the goal we should be aiming for. Or is it? If we can't get the masses (ourselves included) to take the simple steps to try to optimize their (our) happiness, is it then moral to frame the pursuit in such a way that people are compelled to undertake it? Good tie-in to the first article in this week's section. Whose responsibility is it to be responsible?
I had a hard time understanding Ricard in his section of the presentation but I do understand what he is saying as far as the idea of how to look at a moment and almost what we just got done doing in class, ;earning how to savor these moments and in turn turn them into happiness and long lasting moments. We should be slowly trying to find happiness in our lives one moment at a time. We may be having these moments but not looking into them enough or realizing they are there and how much they exist in our lives. Gilbert spoke about his gratitude study and that people should be writing down three things they are happy about a day and this would put people in a place as far as finding happiness. He said that doing this for one week showed that people were less depressed. It would be interesting to see how this would effect people who tried this for longer or even tried this younger and stuck with it at least five days a week.Would this change how a child thought when they grew up? Would they in a way be programed to see the more positive side of things naturally and in turn have a happier life? Could the same thing happen for an adult who began now and stuck with this practice for a long period of time?
What is the true route for alturistic love and compassion? Ricard's part of the presentation caught my attention a lot more than Seligmans aproach. It wasn't that Seligman didnt mention some interesting points, its just what Ricard was saying that sparked some in depth thought. I thought it was interesting to point out that there is no "compassion gymnasium." The tools to gain compassion come from a set of skills in which you maximize by ridding our selves of inner conflict. We need to extend our skills to bring forth the aspect of happiness.
I think its important to address that no one action or skill will lead to happiness, but it will begin to make a path that can start to be traveled. We can approach change in several different manners, but its the ones that maximize our inner strength, compassion and inner freedom that allow us to foresee prospective changes for the better.
I have tried to watch this video on 2 separate occasions and I am really having difficulty with the video. The volume is very low and it also keeps freezing will not play consecutively for me. I noticed this video had less comments, so maybe others are having the same issue.
I did want to comment on what John had said about Buddha and his achievement of God status, because I completely agree. I also think that it is a good point to say that positive psychology should not only be about happiness in itself. I think positive psych can study how to improve all aspects in life and live a better or maybe more purposeful life. There does seem to be a lot research relating altruism to happiness.
I also think Lauren makes a good point that happiness will never come from one point or from one variable. It really is a compilation of variables or maybe a path we choose to take in life.
Paul Bavineau I enjoyed when all 3 speakers talked about why people generally do not actually practice the things that bring them happiness. I feel as though Marty Seligman touched upon, perhaps, that happiness exists already and that we just need to bring attention to it. This is certainly true for the exercise he spoke about (eg. remembering 3 things that went well in our day and why). This suggests that we are not forming new happy experiences, but rather merely bringing awareness to the happiness that already exists. Matthieu Ricard expressed that it does take effort only because our mind has to be convinced of the outcome. This makes me think of Dan Gilbert’s work with predicting outcomes. Maybe people are just not good at predicting the outcome of the effort of the various exercises presented by each speaker. I believe that the act of doing gets the motor running. We can’t know with any certainty how something with feel without first trying it. I remember reading a quote from Wayne Dyer years age where he said, “If you are depressed, do anything.” Anything you do will get the motor running, and then experience will begin.
I am having the same problem as Jessica in watching this video.
I think that Jacqueline's point is a really good one. I also wonder if children would be more positive if they did these gratitude studies while growing up. I think they might appreciate what they have more, because I often see kids who are extremely ungrateful.
I agree with Lauren that no single action will make us happy. That brings me back to the lottery winners we spoke about earlier in the semester. We came to the conclusion that it isn't the lottery winning which has the potential to make us happy, it is what we do with the money. This could be why it often has a larger impact if we spend the money on others, rather than ourselves.
Throughout this course listening to Martin Seligman I kept thinking to myself that alot of what he says, especially about being grateful and the whole concept of gratitude in itself, is so strongly related to what you might hear if you spend some time with a recovering addict or drunk who has been through 12 step work. So it really wasn't a surprise when he talked about doing alot of research/work with addiction. Another concept you might hear if you spend time with recovering people is that they don't just talk about quitting drink/drugs but how great their life is, not because the suffering has diminished, but because they use their energy to make a good life even better. I would like to sit down with Dr.Seligman and ask him how much of his "work" is really just taking concepts learned from 12 step programs. Go to just about any 12 step meeting in the world and the concept of keeping a gratitude list or journal is almost universal.
The other guy was talking about meditation which unfortunately seems so associated with spirituality and unfortunately spirituality is enmeshed with religion. I think meditation would be sold better to scientists if they removed those attachments and just labeled it as a bodily function such as eating, pooping, running ect. If you choose to turn it into something more thats fine or if you use it to relax your body and strengthen your focus on whatever.
The best way to sum up the agreements and disagreements in this video is that a psychologist tends to look from the outside in while a person with a more spiritual perspective looks from the inside out.
What I got from Seligman was what people can do with their lives to increase perma. These things were gratitude visits and simple positive psychology interventions we hae previously learned about, didn't see much new in the information he provided here. The only thing I hadn't heard before with his speech was the part about the anti-depression exercise. I think it makes sense to write down three things that went well that day before going to bed because I find it awful to sleep after thinking of bad day things. I believe this change in the thoughts will help in increase awakening with having a happy affect compared to rolling out of the wrong side of bed in the morning. I think it would increase happiness in the terms of affect.
I like that he talks about the difference between the results of an intervention like the one I just mentioned and those used in therapy being that positive psychology interventions tend to be self-maintaining and you stay happier longer than skill-building exercises used in therapy.
Overall I found the video bland and long and hard to follow and stay focused on though I tried my best.
It seems that both Seligman and Matthueu Ricard believe that happiness is a skill that needs to be practiced regularly. I appreciated Ricard's metaphor about learning how to use a musical instrument, and what that looks like compared to learning how to specialize in particular skills or thought processes. Both require the same elements: continuous practice and fine tuning. We cannot expect to feel lasting happiness if we cultivate particular skills once every 15 days for 8 hour periods. Instead, it is best to repeat sessions of cultivation, and learn the skills that make us happier over time.
When I personally apply the logic of continued practice and fine-tuning to the way I go about my daily life, it is easier for me to believe that I can make long-lasting changes in my mood by simply practicing particular skills. Ricard mentions that when individuals begin training their minds to think differently, their mind will drift - the 'feel good' feelings will be fleeting. Ricard emphasizes how important it is to keep cultivating that 'feel good' feeling every time it disappears. I think a lot of people get discouraged when they feel their mind drifting from the emotion they're trying to maintain, and that those negative feelings interfere with one's ability to continuously implement the skills were trying to learn and feelings or behaviors we're trying to master. If anything, I can say that is the case for myself.
Ricard specifically points out that we 'vastly underestimate the potential for change,' which is a notion I agree with as well. If we believed in the potential for change, and felt compelled to make such changes, I do not think there would be as high rates of mental illness and psychological impairments.
Seligman's idea that we tend to gravitate to 'bad weather' was something that got my wheels turning, but even after all of the commentary I have a hard time wrapping my head around the "why" component of things.
Something that I noticed is how much Seligman's acronym PERMA: positive emotion, engagement (being completely absorbed), relationships, meaning and purpose, accomplishment (achievement and mastery), and Ricard's notion of altruistic love and compassion share interconnected factors, and depend on on another in order to be actualized. For example, Seligman's idea of "active constructive responses" relies on a relationship between two individuals, where an individual is expressing something meaningful and purposeful to another individual. In order to cultivate an active constructive response, the recipient must be fully engaged, and ready to share their feelings of compassion towards the individual. Like Ricard said, pleasure depends on time, sacrifices and people. We are not independent entities. If we only try to obtain selfish happiness, we find ourselves in a state of misery. We're interdependent creatures who thrive on meaningful human connections.
Ricard explains how it is important to have an idea of what well being means on a personal level. He says this, because he makes the point that happiness is a way of being. It is cluster of human qualities: love, passion, inner peace, etc. Like I already mentioned, all of our qualities can be cultivated to produce deep sense of well-being -- however if we are unaware of what our qualities are, cultivating them might be challenging.
It personally think it would be interesting to see how one can go about learning to recognize their own skills and qualities without taking Seligman's online test. I think if we learned how to identify skills ourselves, we may tend to believe in them more, and perhaps even try harder to fine tune them.
This video was very hard to hear due to low volume, and was hard to follow, not just because it seemed a little dry, but because it froze every 10 minutes.
Even through these irritations I could still pick up on a few ideas that caught my attention. One was savoring, which is the intervention that we just finished doing ourselves, seems to have a positive effect on mental health and happiness. Just thinking of 3 things a day, before bed, that made you happy during that day for a week can alleviate depression for up to a month (I believe is what was said). I do believe this, because just doing the intervention helped me take a look at things in life that cause happiness or joy, but are constantly overlooked in our fast-paced world we live in today. If we just slowed our pace down and learned to take in our surrounds for the beautiful things they are we might enjoy life a little more. We have become so desensitized from the world that little joys have become unnoticed and unappreciated. This also goes with the theory that happiness is like a goal, it is something we need to work toward achieving, it takes thought and feeling and cannot be present when we aren't even noticing our lives as they pass by us.
The idea of writing down three things every day that have gone well is a great way to maintain a positive outlook. Focusing on the good that occurred during the day will lead to more positive memories opposed to looking back at all the bad that has happened.
Happiness is a way of being. I think this is extremely important to understand. In order to maintain happiness in our life, we need to understand our interdependence. Our ability to identify moments of happiness and savior that feeling on a regular basis can change our outlook on life.
Both of these strategies to maintain happiness are simple enough where I think most people would be able to practice this. Although these may not work for everyone, I think most people would benefit greatly from this.
I thought the idea of using signature strengths to make doing things you don't normally like more enjoyable was particularly interesting. I know for myself, and likely for most other people, that when I have to do something I dread and don't like doing, especially at work, I usually make the situation less enjoyable by thinking negatively about it; I focus on how much I don't want to do whatever it is, and make the activity even worse for myself. It's a good idea to use a strength you have in order to enjoy the activity more, because if you are good at something else that can be incorporated into what you are doing, you focus on being happy about your strength and being able to use it.
I also had a hard time hearing this video. My volume was turned all the way up and his voice was still too low! I gathered that Ricard was assigning interventions to the audience much like we have been doing in class. He is advising them to immerse themselves in positive experiences and reflect on them at the end of the day. I agree with Lorraine that dread and anticipation consume our thoughts more then the process of actually doing something and being in the moment. If we are forced to do something we don't want to do, the dread and worry before the activity is more stressful than the activity. This could be eliminated if we could focus on something positive associated with the activity.
I wish I could spend a day with a brain transplant from either one of these guys. I particularly enjoyed the section of the video where Ricard talks about cultivating compassion. He thinks of exercising the mind in the same way as exercising the body which makes a lot of sense to me considering there could never be mind without body or vice versa. He believes we vastly underestimate our capacity for change and that it just takes a little perseverance and compassion. I think that both of these men have brilliant things to say and can’t even write a reaction to it without wanting to just repeat everything. Seligman’s PERMA is very useful to me because the acronym allows me to easily remember the personal practices. I think these two have a lot of ideas in common and my favorite is basically that happiness has no meaning if we are in isolation.
I have to say that I really loved what was said about PERMA and the four interventions he mentioned. The first one he described was a lot like our gratitude intervention, which we know works well. The engagement one was a little more confusing, but I can understand why focusing on one's strengths while do a job they don't enjoy could increase their well being. For instance I hate being a cashier, but I always try to have wonderful interactions with people because when I do it makes me feel better about my job. The gratitude visit was my favorite he talked about because I've considered doing something similar. But I don't think the effects last only a month. I think that if we think about those who have influenced us and helped in a positive way, those memories alone can elicit positive emotions within ourselves. The last one he talked about I thought was really sweet and could work well for any social interaction. Active constructive listening and engagement really helps make sure that what people say doesn't create negative affect within people. I think that if more people used that kind of engagement, there would be less negative affect in the world. It's the little things we can do to make both ourselves and other feel better.
16 comments:
To take the risk of starting a theological debate the phrase “pleasure can undermine happiness” seems genius. Maybe what the Christian religion lacks in its structure is this principle. Of course the Catholic’s are never about happiness (they are about guilt), the Baptists are about a personal relationship with Jesus, and the Mega-Churches are about pray bringing you wealth. They all taut charitable deeds but are any of them truly altruistic. Are their charities really providing for others (do starving children in Africa dying from aids really need bibles). These groups argue the way of Jesus. Wasn’t Jesus a self-declared man of acceptance. It is hard for me not to get excited about the idea that pleasure undermines happiness and we should actual work to improve our overall self. To paraphrase the second speaker by throwing our handfuls of troubles into a lake of strengths we still have fresh water. It is interesting the Christian dynamic all pleasures are sinful. The devil gives you pleasure; god gives you redemption. In the video it is implied pleasure is wonderful but the blind consumption of focusing on pleasures gives you nothing but salt water to drink. I believe Buddha achieved god status by being an ideal person of altruistic and inner strengths. It brings us to the question is happiness a state or a lifestyle. Should positive psychology be about being happy or should it about being better at all aspects in life. Whether that is determined by our treatment of others is up to the individual. But, it does seem that most people that skirt the boundaries of laws have a pleasure focused lifestyle and the ones that I know aren't usually that happy.
To quote Rogers we all have a need for positive regard. But is true happiness the ability to achieve our place within the world while giving unconditional positive regard to all others.
Jonathan Bellino
Great points from the speakers in the comment section on this one, especially about how we're hard-wired to find fault and fear change.
How do we make PERMA moral, Seligman? Good point. In a world without consequences, I'm all for a scientific oligarchy, but I don't think controlling the masses through social morays is quite the goal we should be aiming for. Or is it? If we can't get the masses (ourselves included) to take the simple steps to try to optimize their (our) happiness, is it then moral to frame the pursuit in such a way that people are compelled to undertake it? Good tie-in to the first article in this week's section. Whose responsibility is it to be responsible?
I had a hard time understanding Ricard in his section of the presentation but I do understand what he is saying as far as the idea of how to look at a moment and almost what we just got done doing in class, ;earning how to savor these moments and in turn turn them into happiness and long lasting moments. We should be slowly trying to find happiness in our lives one moment at a time. We may be having these moments but not looking into them enough or realizing they are there and how much they exist in our lives.
Gilbert spoke about his gratitude study and that people should be writing down three things they are happy about a day and this would put people in a place as far as finding happiness. He said that doing this for one week showed that people were less depressed. It would be interesting to see how this would effect people who tried this for longer or even tried this younger and stuck with it at least five days a week.Would this change how a child thought when they grew up? Would they in a way be programed to see the more positive side of things naturally and in turn have a happier life? Could the same thing happen for an adult who began now and stuck with this practice for a long period of time?
Jacqueline Nizer
What is the true route for alturistic love and compassion? Ricard's part of the presentation caught my attention a lot more than Seligmans aproach. It wasn't that Seligman didnt mention some interesting points, its just what Ricard was saying that sparked some in depth thought. I thought it was interesting to point out that there is no "compassion gymnasium." The tools to gain compassion come from a set of skills in which you maximize by ridding our selves of inner conflict. We need to extend our skills to bring forth the aspect of happiness.
I think its important to address that no one action or skill will lead to happiness, but it will begin to make a path that can start to be traveled. We can approach change in several different manners, but its the ones that maximize our inner strength, compassion and inner freedom that allow us to foresee prospective changes for the better.
-Lauren Goudreau
I have tried to watch this video on 2 separate occasions and I am really having difficulty with the video. The volume is very low and it also keeps freezing will not play consecutively for me. I noticed this video had less comments, so maybe others are having the same issue.
I did want to comment on what John had said about Buddha and his achievement of God status, because I completely agree. I also think that it is a good point to say that positive psychology should not only be about happiness in itself. I think positive psych can study how to improve all aspects in life and live a better or maybe more purposeful life. There does seem to be a lot research relating altruism to happiness.
I also think Lauren makes a good point that happiness will never come from one point or from one variable. It really is a compilation of variables or maybe a path we choose to take in life.
Jessica Hews
Paul Bavineau
I enjoyed when all 3 speakers talked about why people generally do not actually practice the things that bring them happiness. I feel as though Marty Seligman touched upon, perhaps, that happiness exists already and that we just need to bring attention to it. This is certainly true for the exercise he spoke about (eg. remembering 3 things that went well in our day and why). This suggests that we are not forming new happy experiences, but rather merely bringing awareness to the happiness that already exists. Matthieu Ricard expressed that it does take effort only because our mind has to be convinced of the outcome. This makes me think of Dan Gilbert’s work with predicting outcomes. Maybe people are just not good at predicting the outcome of the effort of the various exercises presented by each speaker.
I believe that the act of doing gets the motor running. We can’t know with any certainty how something with feel without first trying it. I remember reading a quote from Wayne Dyer years age where he said, “If you are depressed, do anything.” Anything you do will get the motor running, and then experience will begin.
I am having the same problem as Jessica in watching this video.
I think that Jacqueline's point is a really good one. I also wonder if children would be more positive if they did these gratitude studies while growing up. I think they might appreciate what they have more, because I often see kids who are extremely ungrateful.
I agree with Lauren that no single action will make us happy. That brings me back to the lottery winners we spoke about earlier in the semester. We came to the conclusion that it isn't the lottery winning which has the potential to make us happy, it is what we do with the money. This could be why it often has a larger impact if we spend the money on others, rather than ourselves.
-Chelsea Craig
Throughout this course listening to Martin Seligman I kept thinking to myself that alot of what he says, especially about being grateful and the whole concept of gratitude in itself, is so strongly related to what you might hear if you spend some time with a recovering addict or drunk who has been through 12 step work. So it really wasn't a surprise when he talked about doing alot of research/work with addiction. Another concept you might hear if you spend time with recovering people is that they don't just talk about quitting drink/drugs but how great their life is, not because the suffering has diminished, but because they use their energy to make a good life even better. I would like to sit down with Dr.Seligman and ask him how much of his "work" is really just taking concepts learned from 12 step programs. Go to just about any 12 step meeting in the world and the concept of keeping a gratitude list or journal is almost universal.
The other guy was talking about meditation which unfortunately seems so associated with spirituality and unfortunately spirituality is enmeshed with religion. I think meditation would be sold better to scientists if they removed those attachments and just labeled it as a bodily function such as eating, pooping, running ect. If you choose to turn it into something more thats fine or if you use it to relax your body and strengthen your focus on whatever.
The best way to sum up the agreements and disagreements in this video is that a psychologist tends to look from the outside in while a person with a more spiritual perspective looks from the inside out.
What I got from Seligman was what people can do with their lives to increase perma. These things were gratitude visits and simple positive psychology interventions we hae previously learned about, didn't see much new in the information he provided here. The only thing I hadn't heard before with his speech was the part about the anti-depression exercise. I think it makes sense to write down three things that went well that day before going to bed because I find it awful to sleep after thinking of bad day things. I believe this change in the thoughts will help in increase awakening with having a happy affect compared to rolling out of the wrong side of bed in the morning. I think it would increase happiness in the terms of affect.
I like that he talks about the difference between the results of an intervention like the one I just mentioned and those used in therapy being that positive psychology interventions tend to be self-maintaining and you stay happier longer than skill-building exercises used in therapy.
Overall I found the video bland and long and hard to follow and stay focused on though I tried my best.
-Christina Valeriani
It seems that both Seligman and Matthueu Ricard believe that happiness is a skill that needs to be practiced regularly. I appreciated Ricard's metaphor about learning how to use a musical instrument, and what that looks like compared to learning how to specialize in particular skills or thought processes. Both require the same elements: continuous practice and fine tuning. We cannot expect to feel lasting happiness if we cultivate particular skills once every 15 days for 8 hour periods. Instead, it is best to repeat sessions of cultivation, and learn the skills that make us happier over time.
When I personally apply the logic of continued practice and fine-tuning to the way I go about my daily life, it is easier for me to believe that I can make long-lasting changes in my mood by simply practicing particular skills. Ricard mentions that when individuals begin training their minds to think differently, their mind will drift - the 'feel good' feelings will be fleeting. Ricard emphasizes how important it is to keep cultivating that 'feel good' feeling every time it disappears. I think a lot of people get discouraged when they feel their mind drifting from the emotion they're trying to maintain, and that those negative feelings interfere with one's ability to continuously implement the skills were trying to learn and feelings or behaviors we're trying to master. If anything, I can say that is the case for myself.
Ricard specifically points out that we 'vastly underestimate the potential for change,' which is a notion I agree with as well. If we believed in the potential for change, and felt compelled to make such changes, I do not think there would be as high rates of mental illness and psychological impairments.
Seligman's idea that we tend to gravitate to 'bad weather' was something that got my wheels turning, but even after all of the commentary I have a hard time wrapping my head around the "why" component of things.
Something that I noticed is how much Seligman's acronym PERMA: positive emotion, engagement (being completely absorbed), relationships, meaning and purpose, accomplishment (achievement and mastery), and Ricard's notion of altruistic love and compassion share interconnected factors, and depend on on another in order to be actualized. For example, Seligman's idea of "active constructive responses" relies on a relationship between two individuals, where an individual is expressing something meaningful and purposeful to another individual. In order to cultivate an active constructive response, the recipient must be fully engaged, and ready to share their feelings of compassion towards the individual. Like Ricard said, pleasure depends on time, sacrifices and people. We are not independent entities. If we only try to obtain selfish happiness, we find ourselves in a state of misery. We're interdependent creatures who thrive on meaningful human connections.
Ricard explains how it is important to have an idea of what well being means on a personal level. He says this, because he makes the point that happiness is a way of being. It is cluster of human qualities: love, passion, inner peace, etc. Like I already mentioned, all of our qualities can be cultivated to produce deep sense of well-being -- however if we are unaware of what our qualities are, cultivating them might be challenging.
It personally think it would be interesting to see how one can go about learning to recognize their own skills and qualities without taking Seligman's online test. I think if we learned how to identify skills ourselves, we may tend to believe in them more, and perhaps even try harder to fine tune them.
-Bianca Sturchio
This video was very hard to hear due to low volume, and was hard to follow, not just because it seemed a little dry, but because it froze every 10 minutes.
Even through these irritations I could still pick up on a few ideas that caught my attention. One was savoring, which is the intervention that we just finished doing ourselves, seems to have a positive effect on mental health and happiness. Just thinking of 3 things a day, before bed, that made you happy during that day for a week can alleviate depression for up to a month (I believe is what was said). I do believe this, because just doing the intervention helped me take a look at things in life that cause happiness or joy, but are constantly overlooked in our fast-paced world we live in today. If we just slowed our pace down and learned to take in our surrounds for the beautiful things they are we might enjoy life a little more. We have become so desensitized from the world that little joys have become unnoticed and unappreciated. This also goes with the theory that happiness is like a goal, it is something we need to work toward achieving, it takes thought and feeling and cannot be present when we aren't even noticing our lives as they pass by us.
Christi Ledwith
The idea of writing down three things every day that have gone well is a great way to maintain a positive outlook. Focusing on the good that occurred during the day will lead to more positive memories opposed to looking back at all the bad that has happened.
Happiness is a way of being. I think this is extremely important to understand. In order to maintain happiness in our life, we need to understand our interdependence. Our ability to identify moments of happiness and savior that feeling on a regular basis can change our outlook on life.
Both of these strategies to maintain happiness are simple enough where I think most people would be able to practice this. Although these may not work for everyone, I think most people would benefit greatly from this.
-Nick Randall
I thought the idea of using signature strengths to make doing things you don't normally like more enjoyable was particularly interesting. I know for myself, and likely for most other people, that when I have to do something I dread and don't like doing, especially at work, I usually make the situation less enjoyable by thinking negatively about it; I focus on how much I don't want to do whatever it is, and make the activity even worse for myself. It's a good idea to use a strength you have in order to enjoy the activity more, because if you are good at something else that can be incorporated into what you are doing, you focus on being happy about your strength and being able to use it.
I also had a hard time hearing this video. My volume was turned all the way up and his voice was still too low! I gathered that Ricard was assigning interventions to the audience much like we have been doing in class. He is advising them to immerse themselves in positive experiences and reflect on them at the end of the day.
I agree with Lorraine that dread and anticipation consume our thoughts more then the process of actually doing something and being in the moment. If we are forced to do something we don't want to do, the dread and worry before the activity is more stressful than the activity. This could be eliminated if we could focus on something positive associated with the activity.
Gina Marmanik
I wish I could spend a day with a brain transplant from either one of these guys. I particularly enjoyed the section of the video where Ricard talks about cultivating compassion. He thinks of exercising the mind in the same way as exercising the body which makes a lot of sense to me considering there could never be mind without body or vice versa. He believes we vastly underestimate our capacity for change and that it just takes a little perseverance and compassion. I think that both of these men have brilliant things to say and can’t even write a reaction to it without wanting to just repeat everything. Seligman’s PERMA is very useful to me because the acronym allows me to easily remember the personal practices. I think these two have a lot of ideas in common and my favorite is basically that happiness has no meaning if we are in isolation.
-Jesse Miller
I have to say that I really loved what was said about PERMA and the four interventions he mentioned. The first one he described was a lot like our gratitude intervention, which we know works well. The engagement one was a little more confusing, but I can understand why focusing on one's strengths while do a job they don't enjoy could increase their well being. For instance I hate being a cashier, but I always try to have wonderful interactions with people because when I do it makes me feel better about my job. The gratitude visit was my favorite he talked about because I've considered doing something similar. But I don't think the effects last only a month. I think that if we think about those who have influenced us and helped in a positive way, those memories alone can elicit positive emotions within ourselves. The last one he talked about I thought was really sweet and could work well for any social interaction. Active constructive listening and engagement really helps make sure that what people say doesn't create negative affect within people. I think that if more people used that kind of engagement, there would be less negative affect in the world. It's the little things we can do to make both ourselves and other feel better.
Post a Comment