Tuesday, January 18, 2011

Positive Psychology and some other views ;; A-notso-Quick Reply ;; And A Nice Keyboard

In reply to the comment (yes, that's right. I got a comment.) on my post regarding graffiti: I completley forgot about that history of it. I thinking tagging as a form of territory marking may be an easy way to put a claim down on something, however it has moved away from that a bit. There are still gangs putting their symbols and names up on various locations in order to state that it is theirs; there are also many individuals who tag with no intent on the scribing to be relating to organized crime. A tag can be a signature, it can be artistic, it can have a message or a story. It does not have to be related to its history. You still brought up a great point that I should of included.

Tagging has moved from criminal activities, to 'wanna be gangsters', to artists. I wish I had been more inspired to write that post, for I am now thinking of the 'wanna be artists' who will take a pen, pencil, felt, what ever they can get their hands on; and put text on a wall. This is not graffiti. Graffiti is an art. Simply writing on a surface that is not yours is vandalism.

It can be argued that graffiti in a public place (or nonpublic for that matter) is also vandalism. This may depend on the intent and quality of the piece. I am very aware if you are trying to sell a building and a large, unexpected painting shows up over night it will not add value no matter how good it is. Shouldn't adding art to something make it more valuable? Not everyone views graffiti as art, only vandalism.

At the moment I'm in my school's library. I had a Math test last block, which was an exam that was being treated as a test. We've been doing these to prepare us for the optional exam (that I was planning on not taking however if I have had the correct questions answered it appears that even if I do terribly on the exam it will not lower my overall mark) and they are suppose to take around two hours. We can normaly leave an exam after an hour, and that has been the rule for the in-class exams. My first attempt at one of these in-class exams resulted in me finishing with only ten minutes to spare. This time the bell went (1:15 into the exam) as I was finishing the last question.

Now originally I was intending on getting a ride with Sleeping Beauty, who has a class after school that ends around 5-6pm. It varies a bit. I expected to finish after my bus had left so I would have time to do homework (writing for psychology, which I am kind of doing right now) and then get a ride home with her. Her puppy dog face (I am still looking for the legal clause stating that girls may not use this to get what they want) was enough to push my opinion that was already leaning towards me staying to do work over the metaphoric cliff of my choice making process. I am now here. My friend, who will go by the alias.. hmm.. Mohawk (for all of you who know him, and even those who don't can probably figure this out, that this is a very unoriginal name) was gracious enough to allow me to use his amazing headphones to listen to music as I did work. I did not wish to hear those around me, so some gentle trance music would be great to block out the unavoidable 332m/s waves that would strike my ear drum.

So this is why I am here, typing on an amazing keyboard, kind of doing my psychology work by writing as our teacher wants us to do; however not addressing the topic I need to. Onto that now:

Positive psychology is a branch of psychology that is more devoted and tuned to what makes people happy. I'm sure that isn't the best definition, so I found a link. Wikipedia is convenient. Positive psychology has been the most discussed branch of psychology that we have looked at in psychology class and one of the more ignored aspects of psychology in my own occasional casual readings.

This type of psychology focuses on positive aspects in humans, a glance into the bright side of humans. I love the idea of this, I don't know why I was not already familiar with it. In our hand out it shows us a few concepts within this branch such as (my favorite that is mentioned) "problems only come up when other people get in th[e] way." I may not agree with this entirely, but it is accompanied with the thought experiment of a child that is being hindered in natural growth by adult and authoritarian figures.

I can relate this to my own childhood a bit, although I also believe that mature intervention is required in the growing and maturing process. You can leave an apple tree to grow apples by itself, you can leave a fish egg to hatch and know how to get to the ocean, but you cannot leave a child on a rock and expect it to start a fire. There's a high chance the shear number of negative possibilities will be too much for the individual's mind to comprehend and they will break down in a crying fit. Clearly, children lack the intuition of a fish.

Humans have lost their natural instincts in exchange for knowledge (or so I think). It is expected that knowledge will be passed down through memes (better defined for the context I am relating to here) rather than through birth. I think it may be safe to say that each individual human knows more than any individual animal does. I would love to be proved wrong though; just in case there's a chance that I will get a second comment in a week.

Back on topic; the hand out we received also explains psychological perspectives. I think of them more as psychological bias. Depending on your view and style of analyzing an event from a psychological angle, you are going to ask different questions. In the end the same answer may be achieved. I do not think the same answer will always be achieved.

The perspectives and their style of asking a question around an event are as follows: Psychoanalytic, what forces drove an individual to partake in this event; Behaviorist, what have been the previous consequences when this event had taken place; Humanist, was the individual partaking in the event to feel loved and/or respected; Cognitive, What was the individual thinking during the event; Sociocultural, what in society has taught the individual to partake in this action; Biological, was there an undetected medical condition to encourage the event; Evolutionary, was this an example of adaptive behavior not working correctly? The event used an example leads to the individual being harmed, possibly intentional and possibly unintentional, by their own means. I find it amusing how none of these perspectives look to see if the individual is okay, but that is understanding considering what the example is looking at.

These all show different views regarding psychology. It really shows how much psychology has progressed, considering before Sigmand Freud there was a high chance that to learn more about the human mind there was a high chance of a hole being drilled into your head; well there may be a bit of a time gap there but it gave me a good opportunity to link to an article about Sigmund and I'm sure the idea was understood.

I sure do enjoy this keyboard. It has good depth, the keys make pleasant sounds when I press them, and it's all very easy to use in a standard layout.

;; Bugworlds

No comments:

Post a Comment