能否提出人类幸福理论?迈向幸福科学

IF 3.6 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Review of General Psychology Pub Date : 2024-01-10 DOI:10.1177/10892680231225223
B. Fowers, Lukas F. Novak, A. J. Calder, Nona C. Kiknadze
{"title":"能否提出人类幸福理论?迈向幸福科学","authors":"B. Fowers, Lukas F. Novak, A. J. Calder, Nona C. Kiknadze","doi":"10.1177/10892680231225223","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Interest in the topic of human flourishing has burgeoned. This article discusses what is required for a general account of flourishing. It builds on three previous critiques of flourishing conceptualization that clarified the lack of systematic theorizing, the overemphasis on psychometric investigations, and the acultural manner of conceptualization. Addressing these difficulties is necessary to move toward a more cohesive, cumulative science of flourishing. The first theme of the article is a vital first step toward providing a systematic theory of flourishing. The article appropriates Aristotle’s conception of eudaimonia (flourishing or good living) to contemporary concerns. The proposed Eudaimonic Theory defines flourishing, specifies its content in terms of human goods, discusses flourishing as a way of life (i.e., not a one-time achievement or subjective experience), and discusses virtue traits in a flourishing life. A second theme reaffirms the Aristotelian commitment to empirical (broadly conceived) verification. Psychometric evaluations of flourishing measures are useful, but insufficient evidence for a flourishing science. Therefore, hypotheses are provided for heuristic research guidance. The third theme is that flourishing must be made sufficiently capacious to accommodate the substantial cultural variation in flourishing conceptions. The article concludes with a promising proposal for formulating a general account of flourishing.","PeriodicalId":48306,"journal":{"name":"Review of General Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Can a Theory of Human Flourishing be Formulated? Toward a Science of Flourishing\",\"authors\":\"B. Fowers, Lukas F. Novak, A. J. Calder, Nona C. Kiknadze\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10892680231225223\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Interest in the topic of human flourishing has burgeoned. This article discusses what is required for a general account of flourishing. It builds on three previous critiques of flourishing conceptualization that clarified the lack of systematic theorizing, the overemphasis on psychometric investigations, and the acultural manner of conceptualization. Addressing these difficulties is necessary to move toward a more cohesive, cumulative science of flourishing. The first theme of the article is a vital first step toward providing a systematic theory of flourishing. The article appropriates Aristotle’s conception of eudaimonia (flourishing or good living) to contemporary concerns. The proposed Eudaimonic Theory defines flourishing, specifies its content in terms of human goods, discusses flourishing as a way of life (i.e., not a one-time achievement or subjective experience), and discusses virtue traits in a flourishing life. A second theme reaffirms the Aristotelian commitment to empirical (broadly conceived) verification. Psychometric evaluations of flourishing measures are useful, but insufficient evidence for a flourishing science. Therefore, hypotheses are provided for heuristic research guidance. The third theme is that flourishing must be made sufficiently capacious to accommodate the substantial cultural variation in flourishing conceptions. The article concludes with a promising proposal for formulating a general account of flourishing.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48306,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Review of General Psychology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Review of General Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10892680231225223\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of General Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10892680231225223","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

人们对 "人类繁荣 "这一主题的兴趣日益高涨。本文讨论了对人类繁盛进行总体阐述所需的条件。这篇文章以之前对繁荣概念化的三点批评为基础,阐明了繁荣概念化缺乏系统理论、过分强调心理测量调查以及概念化的文化方式。要想建立一门更具凝聚力和积累性的蓬勃发展科学,就必须解决这些难题。文章的第一个主题是为繁荣提供系统理论的重要第一步。文章将亚里士多德的 eudaimonia(繁荣或美好生活)概念应用于当代问题。所提出的 "美好生活理论 "对 "美好生活 "进行了定义,从人类福祉的角度明确了其内容,将 "美好生活 "视为一种生活方式(即不是一次性的成就或主观体验),并讨论了 "美好生活 "中的美德特质。第二个主题重申了亚里士多德对经验(广义)验证的承诺。对蓬勃发展措施的心理评估是有用的,但不足以作为蓬勃发展科学的证据。因此,我们提出了一些假设,作为启发式研究的指导。第三个主题是,必须使繁荣具有足够的容量,以适应繁荣概念的巨大文化差异。文章最后提出了一个很有希望的建议,以制定繁荣的一般解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Can a Theory of Human Flourishing be Formulated? Toward a Science of Flourishing
Interest in the topic of human flourishing has burgeoned. This article discusses what is required for a general account of flourishing. It builds on three previous critiques of flourishing conceptualization that clarified the lack of systematic theorizing, the overemphasis on psychometric investigations, and the acultural manner of conceptualization. Addressing these difficulties is necessary to move toward a more cohesive, cumulative science of flourishing. The first theme of the article is a vital first step toward providing a systematic theory of flourishing. The article appropriates Aristotle’s conception of eudaimonia (flourishing or good living) to contemporary concerns. The proposed Eudaimonic Theory defines flourishing, specifies its content in terms of human goods, discusses flourishing as a way of life (i.e., not a one-time achievement or subjective experience), and discusses virtue traits in a flourishing life. A second theme reaffirms the Aristotelian commitment to empirical (broadly conceived) verification. Psychometric evaluations of flourishing measures are useful, but insufficient evidence for a flourishing science. Therefore, hypotheses are provided for heuristic research guidance. The third theme is that flourishing must be made sufficiently capacious to accommodate the substantial cultural variation in flourishing conceptions. The article concludes with a promising proposal for formulating a general account of flourishing.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Review of General Psychology
Review of General Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
4.80%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: Review of General Psychology seeks to publish innovative theoretical, conceptual, or methodological articles that cross-cut the traditional subdisciplines of psychology. The journal contains articles that advance theory, evaluate and integrate research literatures, provide a new historical analysis, or discuss new methodological developments in psychology as a whole. Review of General Psychology is especially interested in articles that bridge gaps between subdisciplines in psychology as well as related fields or that focus on topics that transcend traditional subdisciplinary boundaries.
期刊最新文献
Relational Ontology in the Mapuche Thinking: Possibilities for Indigenous Well-Being Amidst Colonial Settings Education and Training: Professional The 4D Model of American Political Conservatism: Disgust, Disorder Aversion, Deontology, and (Social) Dominance The Kokoro in Japanese Spiritual Care Antiracist Psychology to Advance Equitable Public Policy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1