In general I am extremely satisfied with the basic concept of positive psychology. The idea of focusing on all of the good in people and in life is a concept that I have tried to practice in my life, but it has been the main guiding force in my personal life for the past year.

            I was very interested in chapter 5 and the information on love’s relation to well being. I have experienced increase in my personal well being when I was in a long-term relationship but the statement on page 87 “a number of studies have found that being married is the only really significant bottom-up predictor of life satisfaction” surprised me. In the long run I would believe this to be true but I also know that at least for me I had to develop a firm satisfaction for my life as a single woman before I was able to be truly satisfied within a serious long-term relationship.

            I too believe that positive romantic illusions are a crucial part of healthy relationships but in excess could be responsible for a relatively stable but unhealthy relationship. For instance if a partner in constantly justifying abuse as a result of the other partner being stresses from the day then that would be counterproductive to well-being. I wonder if in that case it would not be considered a positive romantic illusion but instead a negative one.

            In chapter 1 they raise the point that all positive emotions are not the same and sex is classified under a pleasure, which is described as satisfying a need and must be continually renewed. Then enjoyment is said to be going beyond expectations and holds a sense of accomplishment. My question is whether one can classify a pleasure as a deeper enjoyment…depending on the personal experience and evaluation of the experience. An example would be sex with a romantic partner that one is truly in love with. It appears to be true that sex is a basic human need but there are meaningful and casual sexual experiences. There is also sexual healing, which can bring about physical and psychological healing, growth and development, which are factors of deeper enjoyment. I believe that this would explain the desire for sex that is consistently physically un-pleasurable…there is a deeper accomplishment beyond fulfilling the basic need for sex.

            On page 7 it states that the good life is composed of 3 elements: “positive connection to others, positive individual traits, and life regulation qualities”. It also says “the good life must include relationships with other people and with society as a whole”. I suppose that in the western society this would be accurate, but I wouldn’t consider relationships with others to e a universal component of the good life. For example hermits and monks living in complete solitude, in my opinion can achieve the “good life” with the second two components alone.

            I enjoyed reading about the social comparison processes on page 55. It explained that whom one chooses to compare themselves to is a factor in well-being. The use of upward and downward social comparisons was intriguing to me. I understand how comparing yourself to less fortunate people would heighten your opinion about yourself, but I also feel like comparing yourself to those that you think are better (upward social comparison) would motivate one to be better and intern increase well being as well. By focusing on the good in other people it is also uplifting to realize the human potential and aspire to reach a higher level of ones own potential.

In chapter 7 pg. 148-9 Compton talks about the connection between prize poets and the mental illnesses of depression and bipolar disorder. This did not come as a surprise to me coming from a history of personal depression accompanied with an urge to write poetry. Little genetic proof was found to connect the poetry to depression which is understandable, poetry apparently, to me, was a coping strategy to maintain a reasonable acceptance of life despite living a highly depressive life. I also found it very true that “creativity is related to an openness to negative emotions”, because I had extreme difficulty writing when I was experiencing an elevated mood.

            Overall I find it interesting that such a large amount of personal subjective well-being and living the “good life” is centered on others outside of the self, through relationships, interactions and comparisons. I don’t fully understand how a healthy (psychologically, physically and emotionally) being could be achieved when there is an underline of dependence and attachment to others. Yet this is a widely believed concept as stated in ch 8…Adler’s focus on humans strive for self-realization through prosocial interaction (pg158), Rogers' emphasis on fullest psychological potential being reached through “People exist[ing] in environments defined by unconditional love, empathic understanding and genuineness”. Also the above points that I mentioned previously in the paper. There is much proof that people need other people to be satisfied in life but I just wonder if this is a wide spread cultural need or more focused around the needs of those living in western society.