Contact Events

RSA Events

+44 (0)20 7451 6868

lectures@rsa.org.uk

Follow @RSAEvents on Twitter

You are welcome to link to, download, save or distribute our audio/video files electronically. Find out more about our open access licence.

Video file hosting and streaming is provided by GroovyGecko

Comment on this video

Add a comment

Name:

Comment:

Can't read the security key? Click here to get a new key

We welcome your comments. Review our comments policy.

We welcome your comments. Review our comments policy.

• Tom Albertsson - 24 Mar 2013 6:42am

  Here's the (slightly edited) email I sent Dr. Seligman earlier today about the wonderful vision of promoting human flourishing around the world. "Dear Dr. Seligman, Earlier today Sunday, over here on the Gold Coast, Australia, I finished reading the final pages of your book Flourish. Loved it. Love your body of work, in fact, as it has the power to change people's lives for the better. I has already affected mine for the better. What higher meaning in one's work could one possibly pursue than to help improve people's lives? As I read about your "moon shot" goal of increasing global flourishing, a crucial thought hit me. (And I was a 13-year-old kid when my family and I, huddled around a primitive black-and-white TV in my uncle's house in Keflavik, Iceland, witnessed in awe Neil Armstrong's first small step. We were only able to receive the broadcast because it leaked beyond the perimeter of the US Air Force base located just a few miles away.) Qualifiers like "more" and "better" in the formulation of what we can say "Yes" to, imply some form of growth (presumably both qualitative and quantitative). My thought was: this Yes, we can promote global flourishing as long as we are clear-eyed about setting it within the context of a sustainable future, i.e. as long as we are clear-eyed and real about the disastrous consequences of the endless growth imperative that informs the world's economies. Reading such reliable texts as Jared Diamond's books as well as many others has convinced me, as one of many concerned global citizens, of the very real possibility that we are in fact already overloading the planet in terms of the combined consequences of over-population, resource depletion and possible climate change. Here in Australia, iconic and much-loved entrepreneur and adventurer Dick Smith has devoted the rest of his life and his resources to waking up Australian federal politics to the scenarios we are fast moving towards, given current trends in over-population, resource depletion and climate change. Dick Smith felt accountable towards his grand-children. He was a man of wealth and influence, and felt he had to act, now that he had woken up to the stark realities of this enormous challenge we all face. Dick Smith is also the founder of Australian Geographic magazine, and the start of his quest is outlined in this article: http://www.australiangeographic.com.au/journal/dick-smiths-population-puzzle.htm My own conclusion: Increase global flourishing? YES, by all means -- as long as we set it within the clear-eyed context of a long-term future that holds promise for the coming generations. Human flourishing itself, as I interpret it via integral philosophy, could also be outlined as the "positive unfolding of body, mind and spirit in self, culture and nature." In other words, humanity can only flourish long-term if the planet itself including all creatures great and small flourishes long-term. Kind regards, Tom Albertsson"

• Gabriel Bernal - 21 Feb 2013 5:27pm

  The video is very interesting, understanding human psychology is a very complex process but fun at the same time. I think as an educator understanding how a student learns is a benefit. We also need to ask why the student want to learn a certain subject, what motivates a struggling student.

• Bill Lang - 10 Jul 2012 1:28am

  Another positive and evidence based perspective from Dr Seligam. Keep up the great work. http:/www.bill-lang.com

• Elena - 09 Apr 2012 2:28pm

  Very, very positive. Very, very useful. Balance between academic & down to earth / daily basis life. Huge thanks, RSA.

• Brunella Longo - 05 Aug 2011 1:50pm

  Thanks for the video. I really enjoyed it and Martin Seligman is very persuasive. But there is a but I have already discussed with some people last year attending another RSA event and quoting Gramsci! And I am keen on writing this comment because in these days I am promoting my own interdisciplinary research on data project management and information governance, a field in which I have considered how to deal with people behaviours and their expectations of "data happiness" from open data programmes and initiatives. Positive psychology is misused in several diverse social and commercial situations, from mass media communication to political, advertising and industrial relations strategies, not to mention frauds, scams, organised crime and human trafficking cases - all situations in which psychologists are employed as well as lawyers and other professionals to exploit human being instead of increasing their well-being. The main moral justification for professionals to act in this way is that the victims themselves "said that" or "want that" (that being the abuse victims are forced to experience) while they have to concentrate on their own goals, report to their bosses or families, receive a salary or simply enjoy the "fun" of the "mob". There are several other forms of moral justifications for unethical conducts increasingly spread and reinforced through social, professional and scientific networks as well as through "word of mouth" communication. Martin introduced the basic reason why these misuses of positive psychology can happen when he mentioned the correlation existing between fundamentalism and optimism. Any form of fixed, over-attached, absolute, manichean belief or position tend to self-reinforce itself mimicking other more positive as well realistic and critical conducts. This is the weak aspect of many psychological theories of communication. It is perhaps the factor that allows any behaviour to be at the same time potentially authentic and potentially plagiarised or "inconscious". Perhaps it is in between the two categories that even a honest expert (happy enough with his / her assignments?) can honestly conclude that… the "situation is hopeless but not serious" even when there are serious reasons and evidences to be worried. In this direction I believe is an incredible positive advancement in our over-crowded and over-conflictual information landscape the decision of the Supreme Court not to deserve expert witness special treatment anymore. I considered how we can preserve some specific work related contexts from the inflation point Martin mentioned. It seems that one way to save the "positive" belonging to the positive psychology consists in requiring some evidence of human weaknesses and negativity not to be discarded, starting with highlighting, declaring and analysing our conflicts of interests that can create bias for instance. We all have conflicts of interests all the time. We all know we are exposed to others influences and we cannot even control 100% of our own reasoning and feelings. Accepting, declaring and governing conflicts of interests through open democratic rules is one of the basic ingredients we need to introduce in our information diet to prevent …the horrors of the manichean happiness and their legacy in data management, research and information services that can last forever. Brunella Longo August 5 2011 http://www.brunellalongo.co.uk

• Boomer - 03 Aug 2011 12:49am

  You know what, I'm very much incilend to agree.