In the news of late there has been some discussion in reference to being overweight. The articles suggest that there can be a correlation between our weight and that of our social circle. In essence, we become like those we spend time with whether it be personal time or professional time. Can this be actually be proven? A conclusion can be drawn that athletes who socialize together may have some physical similaries when it comes to weight and build; however, is it because they socialize together or because the demands of their employment is making the impact? What about relationships that are inconsistent with this notion....ei; big/tall person and small/short? I suppose that there will be a margin of error in this theory.
Interestingly enough, people tend to gravitate to others with similar interests, employment, etc........ or to whom they admire. Stereotyping and Social Catagorization are two terms that the text elaborates on. Catagorizing may include gender, sex, national origin and religion to name a few. From our life's experiences and applicable education that we may have received we form a collection/series of points of view of a given class. Whether it be good, bad or indifferent, we will have some form of opinion.
Stereotyping deals more with the thought that we have a given set of characteristics that are based on our membership to a particular group. As a result of our participation in this group our behavior will reflect/imitate that of the "group". In the final analysis what can often happen is that we end up hearing the same message regardless of who is speaking simply because of the fact that "they" are a representation of the group. This reminds me of a comment someone had made with regards to employment with a specific company in town. He stated that a personal has to be "GQ" to get a job there......you have to be an avid golfer because it was part of the social expectation that was placed on the position, your "professional style" had to be inline with that of your co-worker (or counter-parts). Failure to fall within this criteria places the applicant at a great disadvantage in the employment selection process.
Perhaps, to some extent, we do meld in with our surroundings....and then there are those situations where can be drawn in to a group simply because we have been catagorized or stereotyped.
The text brings up another issue in Social Thinking/Influence: The Fundamental Attribution Error. According to the text this refers to the tendency to explain other people's behavior as to the result of personal, rather than situational, factors. It goes on to say that a person's vehavior at a given time may or may not be relective of his or her personality. Nevertheless, the observer may tend to assume that it is fully representative. Immediate, spontaneous evaluation of a person based on minimum knowledge of their character may be an inaccurate assessment. But, on the other hand, we could be right on target if we just so happened to can them at the right moment........this could be either positive or negative in nature.
Prejudice comes in many forms and can come in to play in our social interaction process. Person vs Person, Race vs Race, Gender vs Gender, Group vs Group, Company vs Company, Athletic Team vs Athletic Team.....the list goes on. Social catagorization can place stress on relationships, whether personal or professional. Who is in the group, who is not? If we desire to be in the group our response will be that of obedience to the group's value system. We have to compromise or modify our behavior in order to be a part. This is not to say that conforming is good or bad; but, it is a fact of life.
Friday, July 27, 2007
Friday, July 20, 2007
3.4 Happiness
Thoughts on the family and happiness.
In studying world ethics we find that different philosophers, and civilizations for that matter, have varied viewpoints on what is true happiness. In fact, some belief systems do not place happiness on the "radar". Their focus is in a different area. In the family setting these same dynamics can exist; albeit, not usually to the degree that two different societies may differ. As a family matures together there is sometimes a strengthening of relationships. As a result, happiness may evolve into something that is very simple in nature. Going back to a previous blog on coping with stress, happiness can be impacted either negatively or positively depending upon the family dynamics. If the parents assume their proper role and take responsibility in guiding the family then there can a balance......as a result, everyone has a better chance of defining and achieving happiness..what ever it might be. However, if there is selfishness and disfunctionality then there is the potential for chaos. It is then where our happiness is looked for outside the family at an early age through peer groups, etc.
Happiness...What is really important to us when the day is done. We sense some happiness in a job well done, a hobby that we enjoy participating in and are successful at, seeing the success in others such as our spouse or children (or students if we are a teacher), etc. Oftentimes happiness is defined as having something that we lost and regained or almost lost but didn't. Our health is one example of this......we can be diagnosed with a serious disease and completely lose it all....stressed out and so on. But, if we are fortunate enough to overcome it, we (hopefully) develop a renewed respect and value to our health.......happiness is then defined as having good health.
Indivual happiness in the family unit may be in constant flux due to the fact that we live in close proximity. This has the potential of both giving and taking a measure of happiness. This can be source of strength for us. Imagine what it would be like to always have your way, always satisfied, nothing to challenge you. Didn't spell check or review this posting.
In studying world ethics we find that different philosophers, and civilizations for that matter, have varied viewpoints on what is true happiness. In fact, some belief systems do not place happiness on the "radar". Their focus is in a different area. In the family setting these same dynamics can exist; albeit, not usually to the degree that two different societies may differ. As a family matures together there is sometimes a strengthening of relationships. As a result, happiness may evolve into something that is very simple in nature. Going back to a previous blog on coping with stress, happiness can be impacted either negatively or positively depending upon the family dynamics. If the parents assume their proper role and take responsibility in guiding the family then there can a balance......as a result, everyone has a better chance of defining and achieving happiness..what ever it might be. However, if there is selfishness and disfunctionality then there is the potential for chaos. It is then where our happiness is looked for outside the family at an early age through peer groups, etc.
Happiness...What is really important to us when the day is done. We sense some happiness in a job well done, a hobby that we enjoy participating in and are successful at, seeing the success in others such as our spouse or children (or students if we are a teacher), etc. Oftentimes happiness is defined as having something that we lost and regained or almost lost but didn't. Our health is one example of this......we can be diagnosed with a serious disease and completely lose it all....stressed out and so on. But, if we are fortunate enough to overcome it, we (hopefully) develop a renewed respect and value to our health.......happiness is then defined as having good health.
Indivual happiness in the family unit may be in constant flux due to the fact that we live in close proximity. This has the potential of both giving and taking a measure of happiness. This can be source of strength for us. Imagine what it would be like to always have your way, always satisfied, nothing to challenge you. Didn't spell check or review this posting.
Chapters 1 and 2
Adjusting to modern life....shoot, considering the rate at which today's society is moving, how my parents adjusted, how I am adjusting, how my children are and will adjust, and so on.....definitely varies. There was a time when life moved at a slower pace. This provided us more time to spend on one thing. Sure progress has assisted us in becoming more efficient; however, all that seems to have achieved is that we now have the opportunity to deal with multiple things at the same time.
Over the years many studies have been done on the human being; specifically, the psyche. What makes us tick, what are the trigger points, what is the basis for happiness in a persons life.....the analysis that has been done can come up with "averages" if you will, but are not definitive. Each of us have developed interests that vary from one person to the next. How we learn, how we respond, even what we prefer to eat can vary depending upon where we live, our up-bringing, even the time of day. Yet through all of these variances, we seem to be able to meld with society fairly well.....speaking for the majority. Bandura, Skinner, Pavlov, to name a few, have persued segments of the psychology....specializing in a concentration of the subject. Even with their vast amount of time invested and resulting analysis', they too sometimes reach different conclusions. Maslow's dealing with the hierarchy of needs is a very important issue...society has as a whole has a set of requirements....and then each of us individually has a set of needs. This creates a very dynamic/every-changing world that will continue to be analyzed by psychologists on a continual basis.
Over the years many studies have been done on the human being; specifically, the psyche. What makes us tick, what are the trigger points, what is the basis for happiness in a persons life.....the analysis that has been done can come up with "averages" if you will, but are not definitive. Each of us have developed interests that vary from one person to the next. How we learn, how we respond, even what we prefer to eat can vary depending upon where we live, our up-bringing, even the time of day. Yet through all of these variances, we seem to be able to meld with society fairly well.....speaking for the majority. Bandura, Skinner, Pavlov, to name a few, have persued segments of the psychology....specializing in a concentration of the subject. Even with their vast amount of time invested and resulting analysis', they too sometimes reach different conclusions. Maslow's dealing with the hierarchy of needs is a very important issue...society has as a whole has a set of requirements....and then each of us individually has a set of needs. This creates a very dynamic/every-changing world that will continue to be analyzed by psychologists on a continual basis.
Coping
In reviewing the text on coping with stress there seems to be a very long list of ways that people can, and do, deal with stressful situations. Anywhere from confrontation to avoidance to everything in between we have a box full of tools to draw from. Time to go to class....will be back to finish.
Okay, back from class. The text has about 30 pages on stress and its effects. It is interesting that the text has also dedicated about the same number of pages on coping. On to the subject.....while raising children parents have the power to regulate the stress in their lives to a great degree. This power usually begins to weaken over time as the kids get older and begin "finding their way" through dealing with situations that might bring on stress. At least when the kids are still in their formative years we as parents can, and should, seek ways to maintain stability in our children's lives while at the same time deal with the influences/pressures that we have to deal with in our own lives. By providing for the emotional needs of our children early on in life they will have a better chance of effectively dealing with issues on their own later on in life. Do we as parents fail at this? From time to time. This is not to say that we are going to lead our children down the "easy" road. One way of strengthening their constitution is to show them how to work through a situation as opposed to avoiding all together.
I suppose as to why my short comment here on coping is regarding children is that I believe coping skills should begin to be developed early in our life in order for us to be able to effectively deal with times of stress later on. In order to cope we may use avoidance, become emotional-charges and lash out, internalize and blame ourselves, turn to alcohol or drugs to take the edge off, seek professional council, talk with a friend, exercise, immerse ourselves in to a hobby, etc. There are a lot of good and not-so-good ways of coping. Regardless, the means that we use can be critical to our success in dealing with the issue. Didn't spell check this nor proof read it.
Okay, back from class. The text has about 30 pages on stress and its effects. It is interesting that the text has also dedicated about the same number of pages on coping. On to the subject.....while raising children parents have the power to regulate the stress in their lives to a great degree. This power usually begins to weaken over time as the kids get older and begin "finding their way" through dealing with situations that might bring on stress. At least when the kids are still in their formative years we as parents can, and should, seek ways to maintain stability in our children's lives while at the same time deal with the influences/pressures that we have to deal with in our own lives. By providing for the emotional needs of our children early on in life they will have a better chance of effectively dealing with issues on their own later on in life. Do we as parents fail at this? From time to time. This is not to say that we are going to lead our children down the "easy" road. One way of strengthening their constitution is to show them how to work through a situation as opposed to avoiding all together.
I suppose as to why my short comment here on coping is regarding children is that I believe coping skills should begin to be developed early in our life in order for us to be able to effectively deal with times of stress later on. In order to cope we may use avoidance, become emotional-charges and lash out, internalize and blame ourselves, turn to alcohol or drugs to take the edge off, seek professional council, talk with a friend, exercise, immerse ourselves in to a hobby, etc. There are a lot of good and not-so-good ways of coping. Regardless, the means that we use can be critical to our success in dealing with the issue. Didn't spell check this nor proof read it.
Wednesday, July 4, 2007
Stress
In reviewing Chapter 3 of the text book regarding stress and its effects, there was one section on page 92 was interesting in nature....Posttraumatic stress disorders. Each of us has a capacity to deal with a certain amount of stress before we feel a bit overwhelmed. Some of us may experience the inability to cope with a given situation right in the middle of it all while others have the constitution to get through it all only to "crash" sometime later. Posttraumatic disorders can be a result of a traumatic situation that we experienced. And then we have chronic stress disorders as a result of an ongoing stressful situation a relationship, work, school, medical condition(s), etc. Medication, and its use, appears to be on the rise......well, if the increased amount of tv commercials for prescription drugs is any indication. ADD, Bi-Polar, stress, and all of the side effects that they can have effect on us have pushed us in to a state to medicate. As a result, physical illnesses can become a concern. Stress is commonly associated with negativity. Yet, in some cases if we fully realize and assess a given situation that might be what we are responding to in a way that elevates stress in our life, we can turn it around....in to a positive thing. The stress can be what pushes us to be proactive in doing something beneficial.....maybe create a blog for psychology class.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)