You didn't hear a champagne cork to signal the opening of the chapter but I may need something stronger than that by the time we reach the end. I will admit to being naturally resistant to much of what the author is saying in it. I'm trying to go down the "Oh yeah, all this positivity is bad for us" road with him. I keep getting detoured by things like the difference between happiness (or the kind of shallow positive thinking that he gives examples of) and things like hope (which those " Abused and battered wives or children, the unemployed, the depressed, the mentally ill, the illiterate, the lonely, those grieving for lost loved ones, those crushed by poverty, the terminally ill, those fighting with addictions, those suffering from trauma, those trapped in menial and poorly paid jobs, those facing foreclosure or bankruptcy because they cannot pay their medical bills" are going to desperately need). While we want people to face reality and wake up from thought numbing distractions and delusions, I'm not sure just how much we want to arouse them with glaring messages of hopelessness. One of the main causes of depression, a rampant condition in our culture, is a feeling of having little or no control over one's circumstances. It is necessary for people to imagine that life can be better, that they can improve, that all is not lost.
The system is stacked against the average person and we do have many harsh realities to face. Those in power benefit from employees and citizens buying into the thinking he lays out. Even when their positive feelings --often whipped up--are counterproductive in ways they may not be aware of, people can be manipulated into specific behaviors. Telling a sales force that their new quotas are reachable if they only work hard enough and focus all their positive energy to that end, when the company knows they are so high that few bonuses will need to be paid out is wrong. Encouraging people to meet their own personal goals, even if you have doubts about whether or not they can do it, is harmless or perhaps helpful. Encouraging a friend in the face of adversity to make changes to improve their lives may be nothing short of speaking "words of life" to that person.
I agree with CH whole heartedly that Positive Psychology can be misused to unfairly place blame on victims of tragic circumstances or who lack genuine opportunity. And yes, it does foster a cultural attitude of dismissive arrogance. I keep getting hung up on the personal responsibility angle. At times he treats us like mindless robots who are incapable of analyzing our own feelings or realities. There are so many recent studies that show that we do have a lot of control over our emotions, and that our thought lives do greatly influence our reality.
The lines are gossamer ones for some of these things. I'll use a paragraph from page 122 as an example:
"Csikszemtmihalyi (yes, Readers, that is someone's name and not the last line of an eye chart ) specializes in 'optimizing' human experience. (Sounds good) The optimal organization man is fitter, more productive (still with him), and less expensive (red flag). The optimal worker complains less (red flag waving). He or she obeys more (...and, he just lost me). The optimal worker costs the employer less in health-care expenditures (If
I'm paying into an insurance program I'm going to want all my
co-workers to stop smoking and hit the gym, so that isn't exactly evil).
So much to agree and disagree with in one paragraph!
The balance is one between fully accepting the realities, believing that things can improve, and working to find solutions to make them better. I also can't help wondering, given the prescription rates for mood altering pharmaceuticals--where are all these happy people? Maybe the illusion isn't quite so easy to pull off and this is one area where the author's concern is excessive.
No comments:
Post a Comment