Pannapetar wrote: First, there is no science of well-being or conscious states. People can disagree about what exactly constitutes well-being.
Nibbida wrote:Thomas, I think these people may disagree.
alan wrote:You are assuming an extremely flip tone.
Pannapetar wrote:Yes, there might be people who disagree. However, this book only shows that the topic has been written about, not that there actually exists a science of well-being. The authority on the topic, by the way, appears to be Ed Diener. Upon looking up this book on Amazon it turns out that this book by Eid and Larsen is actually about Diener's research. What does this tell us? It indicates that well-being research is a bit of a fringe science in psychology.
Nibbida wrote:You may disagree with the undertaking and even have legitimate concerns with it. So be it. All the better, in fact. But to dismiss it as fringe or treat it as if it didn't exist is inaccurate.
alan wrote:Do you define everyone who is good at presenting his point of view as a Sophist?
alan wrote:After that maybe you can clarify your understanding of the difference between Morality and Ethics.
Pannapetar wrote: But let me suggest an experiment. We both go to our local university's library, psychology department. There we try to assess the number of books on well-being and compare it to the number of books on a mainstream topic such as cognitive psychology and to the number of books on an esoteric subject such as transpersonal psychology. Where would you expect the numbers to come in? You could also quickly check the Wikipedia list of disciplines in psychology or the index of psychology topics. I don't even find "well-being" or "happiness" in there, but I do find transpersonal psychology. What does this suggest?
Ben wrote:Furthermore, the current peer-reviewed literature generally doesn't appear in monograph form for a number of years. It appears in journals, and increasingly, e-journals.
Pannapetar wrote:Nibbida wrote:You may disagree with the undertaking and even have legitimate concerns with it. So be it. All the better, in fact. But to dismiss it as fringe or treat it as if it didn't exist is inaccurate.
Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 4 guests