Cuci-cuci....Bersih-bersih....!! Yuk Pilih buku mana saja yang kamu suka, dan dapatkan discount special UP TO 40%. Psstt...bisa buat teman ngabuburit juga loh dalam rangka menyambut Ramadhan kali ini.
Bekerjasama dengan Penerbit KOMPAS, mengedepankan buku-buku bertemakan nasionalisme. Mari kita gali lagi pengetahuan tentang INDONESIA!! Supaya kita lebih...CINTA INDONESIA. MERDEKA!
You can change your personal capacity for happiness. Research psychologist Sonja Lyubomirsky's pioneering concept of the 40% solution shows you how
Drawing on her own groundbreaking research with thousands of men and women, research psychologist and University of California professor of psychology Sonja Lyubomirsky has pioneered a detailed yet easy-to-follow plan to increase happiness in our day-to-day lives-in the short term and over the long term. The How of Happiness is a different kind of happiness book, one that offers a comprehensive guide to understanding what happiness is, and isn't, and what can be done to bring us all closer to the happy life we envision for ourselves. Using more than a dozen uniquely formulated happiness-increasing strategies, The How of Happiness offers a new and potentially life- changing way to understand our innate potential for joy and happiness as well as our ability to sustain it in our lives.
Beginning with a short diagnostic quiz that helps readers to first quantify and then to understand what she describes as their "happiness set point," Lyubomirsky reveals that this set point determines just 50 percent of happiness while a mere 10 percent can be attributed to differences in life circumstances or situations. This leaves a startling, and startlingly underdeveloped, 40 percent of our capacity for happiness within our power to change.
Lyubomirsky's "happiness strategies" introduce readers to the concept of intentional activities, mindful actions that they can use to achieve a happier life. These include exercises in practicing optimism when imagining the future, instruction in how best to savor life's pleasures in the here and now, and a thoroughgoing explanation of the importance of staying active to being happy. Helping readers find the right fit between the goals they set and the activities she suggests, Lyubomirsky also helps readers understand the many obstacles to happiness as well as how to harness individual strengths to overcome them. Always emphasizing how much of our happiness is within our control, Lyubomirsky addresses the "scientific how" of her happiness research, demystifying the many myths that unnecessarily complicate its pursuit. Unlike those of many self-help books, all her recommendations are supported by scientific research.
The How of Happiness is both a powerful contribution to the field of positive psychology and a gift to all those who have questioned their own well- being and sought to take their happiness into their own hands.
Hackneyed rehash of pop psychology on a topic better addressed by other writers Oleh: Anonymous - 29 August 2010 Verbose Preface: I'd like to preface my review, which is actually more of a reaction, with saying that I'm not an academic and that my reaction is that of a general reader who is interested in what the relatively new field of Positive Psychology can contribute to my own life. I saw a few minutes of the end of an interview of the author on PBS and was hoping the book would offer the insight afforded by the likes Martin Seligman and Barry Schwartz. My 'unhappiness' with it has to do with the distance between the author's promise and what she delivers. Through what is either incredible stupidity or incredible arrogance on her part, she actually produces the opposite of what she promises. She might consider politics more appropriate for her next venture....
If the author hadn't also had the arrogance to demean the works of other, far superior, writers by implication, I would not have even bothered to write a review. She has attempted to market this mediocre compilation of other persons' work and insights by describing it as the 'first scientific' effort in the field but lacks the basic intelligence to even adequately represent others' original thought--presented beautifully by the original authors. She throws out little tidbits all over the place that are supposed to strengthen her viewpoints but are so irrelevant that I can't believe anyone with a decent mind wouldn't become insulted early on: i.e., she refers to Kant in 'The Variety of Life' mentioning that he varied the course of his daily walks to avoid boredom. For anyone familiar with Kant, he is the antithesis of a role model for the 'variety' she advocates. Kant lived his entire life within the confines of his native city of Konigsberg and was so rigid (or disciplined) in the timing of his walks that it was said that residents would set their watches by them. His very philosophical works have been criticized for their contribution to the inflexible mindset that empowered the Hitlerian regime, despite their undisputed brilliance. I suppose we are all so ignorant we're to be impressed that she's dropped the name of a Great Philosopher, however inappropriately.
I'd like to add that I don't believe there is sufficient rigorous scientific data as yet to 'clip the wings of happiness'* and the lovely lyrical books by such authors as Csikszentmihalyi and wise and humane works by Seligman and Schwartz provide as 'scientific' an approach as currently possible. (reference to Keats for those unfamiliar:
Do not all charms fly At the mere touch of cold philosophy? There was an awful rainbow once in heaven: We know her woof, her texture; she is given In the dull catalogue of common things. *Philosophy will clip an Angel's wings, Conquer all mysteries by rule and line, Empty the haunted air, and gnomed mine - Unweave a rainbow, as it erewhile made The tender-person'd Lamia melt into a shade.)
Anyway, I'm pretty wordy--and caffeinated, so if you are interested in what I mean by the lack of delivery, it's somewhere closer to the bottom of the page.
Review: I have just started this book and don't intend to waste my time reading much more of it. I'm absolutely amazed that this woman made it through two well-respected academic institutions. Since advance praise is not contingent on a reading of the text, I take it those remarks were the result of a general, highly inflated, description being provided with the requests. It is interesting that she provided her own Foreword and that there doesn't appear to be an editor credited who might have challenged its sloppy assertions and shoddy reasoning. (Sorry for the cliche, but it was created for this book.) Amazingly, there is absolutely no acknowledgement of gratitude to anyone else in this book--rare in any work, but especially rare for a book containing ideas generated by others' research. Randomly pick a book from your own bookshelf and you'll see what I mean. Even incredibly respected authors acknowledge the assistance--sometimes in mind-numbing completeness--of those who reviewed, edited, contributed, etc. to the finished product. There are several possible explanations: the one I lean towards is that her effort in producing it equalled a few nights here and there in front of the TV. Another is that no one wanted their name contaminated by it.
What's truly frightening is that so few reviewers here are able to recognize her obvious weakness as a thinker, let alone the 'scientist' she purports to be. (Although a number of 4-star reviews turned out to be an evaluation, in error, of Amazon's shipping practices.) I think the success of this book is a sterling testament to the 'halo effect'(For persons non-acquainted with this concept: "a predisposition to admire all of a person's actions, work, etc., because of an estimable quality or action in the past" per another source: "Thorndike therein defined the halo effect as "a problem that arises in data collection when there is carry-over from one judgment to another.... The effect is to evaluate an individual high on many traits because of a belief that the individual is high on one trait."). In this case, had the author not attended Harvard and Stanford (??)I truly doubt this book would have received so much praise and so little scrutiny. (In one grad class I took the instructor had us critique a number of journal articles relating to a variety of physiological research. As it turned out, he had included one with a number of serious errors that had been authored by some Harvard MDs with impressive credentials--solely to see if we could analyze the information objectively or would be snookered by the halo effect. I felt a little uncomfortable criticizing the errors, wondering if perhaps I was wrong, but in the end was quite happy with my grade :) I suppose the halo effect is the academic equivalent of the Emperor's New Clothes and apparently one more tool in the today's marketing arsenal.)
I'm basing my opinion about the author's inadequacies on just a few pages, but those few pages so undermined her credibility that, while I might skim over more information, I feel I can't trust her reliabilty in basic reporting, let alone analyzing information. The library copy I started reading opened to a page referring to Macy's as a 'high-end' department store. This off the top seemed to me to be odd--Neiman's is high-end, Macy's is mostly a very middle-class store and this is a female writer, hmmm... Well, okay, she's an academic, I thought, just ignore that weirdness. But then, her classmates at Harvard and in Palo Alto must have given her a clue, nah, ignore it... Okay, so I started with the Foreword, where she decides to demonstrate just how scientific her book is going to be. She quotes the Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary (11th ed.--she's precise) and attempts to list the 'first, second, and third definitions of the adverb 'how', but fails to copy even the simplest of the brief online definitions correctly: "1a: in what MATTER or way" she repeats MATTER or way in italics again, as she attempts to breakdown her intentions, clearly not realizing that she has misread the definition. She doesn't seem to get how nonsensical her statement 'for the matter or way to get there' is , as the dictionary actually described 'how' as 'MANNER or way' and there's a fairly substantial difference between 'matter' and 'manner'. The next paragraph mentions the 'many drips and drabs you may have picked up'--I don't know, I picked up 'dribs', not 'drips' (too hard to hold onto) and I think most persons literate enough to make it to Harvard also picked up 'dribs' or their SATs might have been too drab for admission.
Although this may seem picky on my part, I don't see persons with concern for accuracy and sharp intellects making these kinds of errors. On a larger scale, her basic premise for readers to view her book as valuable (and in her opinion the first book of its kind to be supported by science) is 'because empirical research holds multiple advantages over anecdotal or clinical observations' and 'although science is imperfect, we can be much more confident in its conclusions than in those of a single individual proffering advice based on his or her limited experience and assumptions.' Having said this, she offers zilch in the way of scientific investigation and proceeds immediately to anecdotal descriptions of 'Rock Star Neil' and 'Extreme Makeover Denise' who reported, omigod, money and looks hadn't made them happy. She devotes--literally--a couple of pages to rather ancient and/or primitive self-tests similar to those on depression. That's pretty much it, with the bulk of the book referring to 'my own observations' and 'observations of other (unnamed) researchers'--what, those useless clinical observations, duh? Her next offering of 'scientific' studies were well-worn self-report studies on materialism and plastic surgery results--those misrepresented, and her observations on these less revealing than a 'women's magazine' article. (For someone who decries anecdotal evidence, she should realize self-reports are in the same soft-science ballpark.)
Not to worry, she continues on with more anecdotal accounts, as she, 'a single individual proffering advice based on his of her limited experience and assumptions' assumes authority by adding the validation that 'studies have shown'. She herself, the 'scientist', doesn't do 'anecdotal' evidence (sorry Neil, Denise, Angela, Randy, Shannon, and on to infinity) as she offers "How do you pull this off? Psychologists point to real-life examples, like this one of a woman professor diagnosed with metastatic cancer." Read other reviews and you'll find, as I did, that the whole book is one long series of anecdotes, the exact opposite of the superior empirical information she claims to offer.
If this is what her peers also consider 'empiric' evidence, her field is in a lot of trouble. The fact that she has so little self-awareness truly lessens any authority she might hold for me, personally. (The freshness and depth of knowledge, as only a researcher in the field can offer, is evident in the section on "How Do Habits Form?" "Habits form with repetition and practice. Researchers theorize that every time you repeat a behavior...associations develop in your memory between the behavior and the context in which it occurs." This is the extremely elementary--and inaccurate--pop psychology tone of the entire book. If you're virtually illiterate, naive to other superior works in the field, and this works for you, then this may be useful to you, as you may have been among the reviewers who found comments like that earthshaking and illuminating. (Oh, and there's a song--how could I forget the song, mentioned in another review. I'm surprised HSN hasn't gotten ahold of this... I think I'm getting nauseated...)
And Sonja, there is an actual difference between repetition and practice, and for the degree of clarity needed for scientific discussion of habit formation, the distinction needs to be clarified. Actually, habit formation has some really helpful data at present that can be used to streamline the process. This information was not presented, which someone who was knowledgeable of the field and motivated to truly help their readers, rather than enlarge their shallow ego--or high-end purse from Macy's--might have considered. It would take a little work rather than jotting down whatever was floating around, but not all that much...
I did learn something from this book. I learned that even darling Charlie Rose is forced to interview authors whose promoters are able to get them on the circuit and to watch a bit more of an interview before getting my hopes up. Since the quality of the works PBS usually exposes is so high, I was snookered by the 'halo effect' in my old age. I would heartily recommend readers sincerely interested in this topic read the authors I mentioned earlier and perhaps Depaak Chopra and those suggested by other reviewers, whom I haven't yet read. Happiness is yet a subjective area, and I believe those most likely to provide useful insight are those whose minds are willing to work to achieve that insight. Best of all, I learned it doesn't take much to get published :)
(I realize that English was not the author's first language, which makes the oversight she declined even more important. The fact that she could not distinguish the import of the words 'matter' and 'manner' speaks worlds about her misinterpretation of existing research...not to mention her total lack of understanding of the concept of empiricism. She seemed to know just enough to plug her book based on the superiority of empiric tools, and stopped dead beyond that.)
I will return to spell-check this. I really need new glasses.
The "spirtual suggestions" in this book ruined it for me Oleh: Stephanie A. - 20 August 2010 I was really liking this audiobook...until the author started in about people who believe in God are happier, and to improve your life you should commit to go to a worship service once a week or more. At first I was just listening and hoping for this section to be over...but I had to fast-forward because it went on for awhile. So, if you're non-religious, beware.
Obvious and useless Oleh: Arseny - 09 July 2010 Well, for me the book was just a collection of vague female-oriented phrases explaining why you should be happy (no need to convince me, I want to, why'd I bother to buy the book otherwise...) and giving you a lot of "valuable" advices like "Living in the Present" and "Committing to your goals" (titles of the chapters from the book). No practical ideas, just some stories, anecdotes, fresh and original recommendations like "devote more time to your family", "organize yourself", "do what you like" and so on. Sometimes it is not enough to say to yourself "I am going to be happy" twice a day to fix your problems, you know...
For real! Oleh: Michael H. Loomis - 24 June 2010 I really enjoyed reading/studying this book. More important though are the physical and mental activities that you can do right away- hands on not pie in the sky blah, blah, blahing. It works! If you believe in research based answers to problems this is for you.
The How of Happiness by Sonja L. Oleh: P. Little - 07 June 2010 One of the best if not THE BEST self-help books I have ever read and I have been reading these types of books for over 30 years. This book is definitely a keeper. It is written beautifully, very succinctly, and reads so smoothly. It's uplifting spirit makes you not want to put it down. It gives the reader a perspective none like I have ever encountered before. The book is so inviting. I didn't want to put it down...and that's a big compliment for a book of this nature. It is also very easy to read in segments. A true find for me.
How to Shop