Mật Mã UFO tải xuống LIT miễn phí

Rahul Chhabria rahul_chhabria — Just started this highly recommended book

Dealonicha Andini dealonicha858e — So, I was a little late to the party in reading the book that gave birth to real American literature, though I'd read a lot of Twain's other works. Not much I can say that you don't already know, other than if you want to know about America, it's all here. And Hemingway was right, the last few pages are kind of a cheat. A forgivable one, though.

Raymond Caldera _aymond36 — Flow is the state where all mental energies are concentrated on an event which results in the person attaining "optimal experience," which is basically happiness. C(I refuse to spell this authors insane surname), states that to be happy we need to lessen our mental chaos by providing/creating a structure for our mental energies to play in. He identifies certain conditions required to achieve flow: 1. The person must be engaged in an activity that requires skill. 2. There is a convergence of Action and Awareness 3. Clear goals and feedback 4. The activity has structure 5. Focus 6. The loss of self consciousness 7. The loss of the awareness of time To be honest I was disappointed with this book. After reading Haidt's "The Happiness Hypothesis," I had such high expectations for one of the pioneers of the Positive Psychology movement. I can see why some critics claim the movement is merely neo-humanism. A rehashing of what Adler, Maslow, Erickson et al have said. To be fair though, he did write in the preface that he had written this edition in laymen's terms. I think he watered it down too much. It read like a run of the mill self-help book, with the usual "its not the situation, it's your interpretation of it," that determines your feelings, etc. etc. etc. I feel like the book merely points out things that, on some level, we all intuitively know already. The book is content in merely observing and categorizing human behavior, an attribute of popular psychology, which I feel gives psychology demerits in credibility. The book is content with saying aim for this but barely touches the surface of the important thing which is: how? I also have qualms in C's method of data collection. He uses a method he calls the ESM or Experience Sampling Method. The method involves giving subjects a pager that will sound at certain points of the day. The subject is then suppose to write down their feelings at that time. Basically a sporadic interviewing of the subjects. This poses a problem as what people write are not really what they mean. For example, in Cacioppo and Patrick's "Loneliness," they presented a subject who overtly showed and expressed that he was a happy person. But when the subject was asked to answer a questionnaire used to determine if someone is depressed, his answers revealed that he was indeed the opposite of what he was telling people. He was depressed and he agreed to the findings of the questionnaire. Of course in any science, our measurements are only as good as the tools we use to measure with. In psychology, this becomes convoluted. I do however, think of the postulates much. Particularly when I am working with my client who is cognitively impaired, I think, "How can I get this person into flow?" So there is definitely something there. I just wish he hadn't buried the paradigm with glitter.