Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
This paper first describes the growing pains and challenges of the positive psychology (PP) movement and identifies the four pillars of the good life as meaning, virtue, resilience, and well-being, which are all shaped by culture. I then introduce three issues that characterise the second wave of PP (referred to as PP 2.0). The first concerns the need for a comprehensive taxonomy of PP. The second involves the hypothesis that meaning-orientation and happiness-orientation represent two different visions of the good life with profound practical implications. Eudaimonia is viewed as meaning plus virtue. The third issue concerns a dual-systems model as a way to integrate the complex interactions between the negatives and positives to optimise positive outcomes in various situations. I conclude that PP 2.0 is characterised by a balanced, interactive, meaning-centered, and cross-cultural perspective. Keywords: meaning, subjective well-being, resilience, virtue, eudaimonia Positive psychology (PP) has been all the rage since Martin Seligman's APA president address in 1998. In spite of its controversial nature (Carstensen Held, 2002, 2004; Lazarus, 2003), PP has effectively changed the language and landscape of mainstream psychology and it continues to grow exponentially in the teaching, research, and applications of PP. The potential of applying PP to enhance well-being is almost unlimited; it has already opened up new career opportunities for psychologists in coaching, counselling, and consultation (Linley Linley, Joseph, Harrington, Robbins & Friedman, 2008). …
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Paul T. P. Wong
Canadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienne
Trent University
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Paul T. P. Wong (Sun,) studied this question.
synapsesocial.com/papers/69db24e44a1e15904c83714c — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022511
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: