Hedonia Eudaimonia and WellBeing An Introduction Deci Ryan

Hedonia, Eudaimonia, and Well-Being: An Introduction Deci & Ryan 2008

HEDONIA & EUDAIMONIA Ø Well-being, optimal psychological experience and functioning, can be thought of as falling into two traditions, founded on different views of human nature: 1. Hedonistic tradition – focuses on happiness, defined as the presence of positive affect and the absence of negative affect. Happiness is derived externally. - Considers the human organism initially to be empty and thus malleable, such that it gains meaning in accord with social and cultural teachings. 2. Eudaimonic tradition – focuses on living life in a full and satisfying way. Happiness comes from within. - Ascribes content to human nature and works to uncover content and to understand conditions that facilitate it versus diminish it.

CURRENT RESEARCH Ø Most current research on well-being has been closely aligned with hedonistic tradition. Ø Diener (1984) focused on exploring subjective well-being, defined as experiencing a high level of positive affect, a low level of negative affect and a high degree of satisfaction with one’s life. Ø SWB has frequently been used interchangeable with happiness and therefore has been associated with the HEDONISTIC approach to well-being. Ø HOWEVER there is another way to think about well-being – EUDAIMONIA Ø This approach sees well-being to consist of more than just happiness and is concerned with living well and actualizing one’s human potentials. Ø Can be traced to Aristotle - doesn’t see well-being as an outcome or end state rather it is a process of fulfilling one’s virtuous potentials Ø This paper presents discussions and research reviews from the eudaimonic tradition illustrating how it adds an important perspective to our understanding of well-being.

PSYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING & EUDAIMONIA Ø Psychological well-being: – Part of the eudaimonic tradition • Formulated to challenge the hedonistic view – Derives from Aristotle’s view of the highest human good involving virtue and the realisation of one’s potential – 2 approaches: • Ryff & Singer • Waterman, Schwartz & Conti

PSYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING & EUDAIMONIA Ø ASSESSMENT – Ryff & Singer • A global or individual difference variable • Assesed using 6 (7? ) characteristic subscales: – – – – Self-acceptance Personal growth Autonomy Relationships Environmental mastery Purpose in life and Relatedness? – Waterman, Schwartz & Conti • More narrow assessment • Single scale assessing extent a certain activity leaves one feeling fulfilled & is expressive of who one truly is

PSYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING & EUDAIMONIA Ø SPECIFICATION – Ryff & Singer • Specifies content that represents eudaimonic living – 6 characteristics – Waterman, Schwartz & Conti • Leaves concept content free – Whether an activity leaves one feeling fulfilled

PSYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING & EUDAIMONIA Ø Waterman, Schwartz & Conti – Make distinction between hedonic & eudaimonic happiness • Issue of semantics – Definition of hedonic well-being: • Emphasis on getting material objects and the happiness that accompanies it • Related to Aristotle’s view of hedonia

PSYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING & EUDAIMONIA Ø Ryff & Singer – Shown higher PWB associated with: • Better neuroendocrine regulation • Lower cardiovascular risk • Better immune functioning

AUTONOMY & EUDAIMONIA Ø A concept close to eudaimonia is autonomy. Ryan and Deci (2000) describe autonomy as volition. In other words – free will, having the experience of choice. Ø At a glance this seems desirable. Ø Ryff goes as far as to describe autonomy as one of the 6 aspects of psychological wellness, alongside; environmental mastery, personal growth, positive relations, purpose in life & self acceptance. Ø Although the term ‘autonomy’ is not used in all theories of well being, words to that effect appear in most. Eg. Waterman et al talk frequently of the importance of ‘selfdetermination’ which they define as ‘freely choosing’.

Ø So autonomy seems important… Ø But there is debate over semantics! Ryff describes autonomy as; self-determination, independence and the regulation of behaviour from within. However, Deci & Ryan argue that autonomy is quite different from independence. Ø Cross-cultural perspective…Devine et al – autonomy as the basic human need which they argues] is observable in both western individualist and eastern collectivist societies. Ø So I’ve spoken about how important autonomy seems to be in our lives and some issues that arise, now Dalia…

• Aristotle said: eudaimonia is not only about making the right choices but choosing to act virtuously • What does it mean to act virtuously? • To some extent, what is considered virtuous/good will inevitably vary across time & culture, according to society’s need (Fowers in Lopez 2009 Encyclopedia of Positive Psychology)

• Seligman & Peterson (2004) examined dozens of inventories of strengths and virtues from a wide variety of sources e. g. ) In Plato’s republic Socrates identified 4 virtues (courage, justice, temperance and wisdom) • Identified 6 virtues that held across time/culture/standpoint of author: courage, justice, humanity, temperance, transcendence & wisdom - compiled the Value in Action (VIA) Classification of Strengths based upon vast inventories of moral praise • Virtues will always be reinterpreted according to a society’s need, however some significant commonalities can be found across virtue catalogs Our paper in Conclusion: although Eudaimonia research overlaps with the hedonic perspective, differences are seen where it contributes to an understanding of well being concerning not only the individual, but society at large.