Abstract
This article is a contribution to the debate about eudaimonism started by Kashdan et al. and Waterman in a previous issue of The Journal of Positive Psychology [Kashdan, T.B., Biswas-Diener, R., & King, L.A. (2008). Reconsidering happiness: The costs of distinguishing between hedonics and eudaimonia. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 3(4), 219-233; Waterman, A.S. (2008). Reconsidering happiness: A eudaimonist's perspective. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 3(4), 234-252]. We point out that one thing that is missing from this debate is an understanding of the problems with subjective theories of well-being that motivate a turn to objective theories. A better understanding of the rationale for objective theories helps us to see what is needed from a theory of well-being. We then argue that a suitably modified subjective theory can provide what is needed and that this is the theory that ought to be favored by psychologists.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 212-225 |
| Number of pages | 14 |
| Journal | Journal of Positive Psychology |
| Volume | 5 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - May 2010 |
Keywords
- Eudaimonia
- Happiness
- Hedonism
- Subjective well-being
- Theory
- Values
- Well-being
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Normative theory and psychological research: Hedonism, eudaimonism, and why it matters'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Standard
- Harvard
- Vancouver
- Author
- BIBTEX
- RIS