The Happiness Industry and Positive Psychology

To my surprise, in recent times I have been finding many allusions to a so-called "industry" based on the irrational and unconditional pursuit of happiness.

Like any argument or current that is reduced to the absurd, it loses its foundation when we forget the true essence or reason for being of the Positive Psychology, to establish derogatory analogies such as, for example, the fact of making certain publications on the networks of the Mr. Wonderful type or how to make fun of the “need” of having to go to a “motivational coach” to solve some kind of problem. trivial question.

After the numerous episodes of this kind of "attack" on a sector of psychotherapy or mental care (Well, let's not forget that the etymological origin of the word therapy is related to the concept of attention), even coming from from “colleague” sectors, who did not finish learning from the old paradigmatic battles between behaviorists and cognitivists or between natives against environmentalists, among others (paradoxically, both confrontations leading to the emergence of paradigms integrators).

• Related article: "History of Psychology: main authors and theories"

Unfair Criticisms Against Positive Psychology

I can understand that from ignorance or ignorance, they can be made endless disqualifications and criticisms, more or less destructive. But what I cannot understand is that there are psychology professionals who cling to their old paradigms and currents methodological, as castaways to the wreck, to defend their model or way of practicing the profession, as if this were the only possible.

On the other hand, they do not have so many reluctance when it comes to embracing concepts such as "Learned Helplessness", which the teacher developed Martin E.P. Seligman, to justify the development of depressions or other psychological imbalances, this being one of the standards 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 people of a diverse nature, the psychopathological clinical model does not explain the complete diversity of human behavior, and that is why that 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 is dissatisfied with the life they leadobviously she is not ill. In fact, there are many people classified as sick or disturbed who raise many doubts about the reliability of the diagnostic system. If they knew the damage that a person can cause to feel labeled for life, forming part of a "bag" or collective of pejorative connotations for their own health and consequent social adaptation, they would be more careful when performing according to what type of classifications.

• You may be interested: "Humanistic Psychology: history, theory and basic principles"

The problem of overdiagnosis

Recently, I have had the opportunity to learn more about the opinion of Dr. Javier Álvarez. This head of psychiatry at the Hospital de León 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 an industry real. The pharmaceutical. It's curious the rapid growth experienced by the main psychiatric classification and diagnosis instrument (better known as DSM).

From its inception to date, the number of mental disorders has seen an exponential increase in number and their treatment has been entrusted as a priority to the use and administration of psychotropic drugs. Some psychotropic drugs whose mission is mainly to act on the brain neurotransmitters "involved" in the development of the current disorder. The problem lies in the conviction and confidence that they give off about the tiny knowledge that exists about the functioning of the aforementioned neurotransmitters as sufficient guarantee to experiment with these drugs Chemicals.

I do not want misinterpretations on my part, I am not an anti psychotropic drug, or anti any other type of treatment, but yes I consider that we have developed a remarkable confidence in something that is still in its infancy and we have neglected and even ridiculed other ways of understanding the world of psychology and psychiatry, without finding so many everyday examples of criticism with this. Smoke from the "charlatans" versus the "magic pills". And it is not about this, but not about the other.

Each person is a world and in each world one type of intervention or another is required.

My problem is neither bigger nor smaller than yours.

It may not even be a problem.

But it is mine and I decide how I want or need to approach it.