The happiness industry and positive psychology

But, surprise, lately I have found in many media channels, on television, radio and in the written press, many references to a so-called “industry” based on the irrational and unconditional search for happiness.

Like any argument or current reduced to the absurd, it loses its foundation when we forget the real essence or raison d’être of positive psychology, to establish pejorative analogies such as, for example, the fact of making certain posts on social networks . Mr. Wonderful type or how to poke fun at the “need” of having to go to a “motivational trainer” to solve some sort of trivial problem.

After the many episodes of this type of “attack” on a sector of psychotherapy or mental care (Well, let’s not forget that the etymological origin of the word therapy is linked to the concept of care), even coming from “colleague” sectors, who have not finished learning from the old paradigmatic battles between behaviorists and cognitivists or between innate against environmentalists, among others (paradoxically both confronted with the emergence of integrative paradigms).

    Unfair criticisms of positive psychology

    I can understand that out of ignorance or ignorance they can be done a myriad of disqualifications and criticisms, more or less destructive. But what I don’t understand is that there are professionals in psychology who cling to their old paradigms and methodological currents, like shipwrecks in the wreckage, to defend their model or their way of doing things. ‘exercise the profession, as if it were the only one possible.

    On the other hand, they are not so reluctant to adopt concepts such as “Learned Helplessness”, developed by Professor Martin EP Seligman, to justify the development of depression or other psychological disorders, which is one of the norms. of positive psychology.

    I understand that the medical model of PSYCHODIAGNOSIS continues to exert a remarkable influence in the way of understanding psychology for some. But, dear colleagues and curious of all kinds, the psychopathological clinical model does not explain the complete diversity of human behavior, which is why without the need to intervene in the prevention or rehabilitation of psychiatric pathologies, there is a field of psychological action that does not obey its rules.

    A person who feels bad or who is not satisfied with the life they leadShe is obviously not sick. In fact, many people classified as sick or upset raise many doubts about the reliability of the diagnostic system. If they knew the harm it can cause a person to feel labeled for life, as part of a “bag” or collective of pejorative connotations for their own health and the social adjustment that comes with it, they would care more about the time to run depending on what type of classifications.

      The problem of overdiagnosis

      Recently, I had the opportunity to learn more about the opinion of Dr Javier Álvarez. This head of psychiatry at León hospital is a champion of a movement called “New Psychiatry”, which postulates the inconsistencies and suspicions of a medical model probably influenced by another type of industry, but in this case a real industry. Pharmaceuticals. It’s curious the dizzying growth experienced by the main instrument of psychiatric classification and diagnosis (Better known as DSM).

      From its inception to date, the number of mental disorders has increased exponentially and its treatment has been given priority to the use and administration of psychotropic drugs. Certain psychotropic drugs whose mission is mainly to act on the brain neurotransmitters “involved” in the development of the disorder of the shift. The problem lies in the belief and confidence they show in the tiny knowledge that exists about how these neurotransmitters work as sufficient collateral to experiment with these chemical drugs.

      I don’t want any misunderstandings from me, I am not anti-psychotropic drug, nor against any other kind of treatment, but if I consider that we have developed remarkable confidence in something that is still in diapers and that we have neglected and even ridiculed other forms of “understanding the world of psychology and psychiatry, without finding so many daily examples of criticism. Smoke from the “charlatans” in front of the “magic pills”. And it’s not about that, but it’s not the other thing either.

      Each person is a world and in each world some type of intervention or another is necessary.

      My problem is neither bigger nor smaller than yours.

      It may not even be a problem.

      But it’s up to me and I decide how I want or should approach it.

      Leave a Comment