Is it better to be realistic or optimistic?

 A realistic outlook improves chances to negotiate the environment successfully, whereas an optimistic outlook places priority on feeling good. But are realistic and optimistic outlooks necessarily in conflict? The author suggests that the fuzzy nature of accuracy typically places only loose boundaries on what it means to be realistic. As a result, there are many forms of optimism that do not, in principle, yield unrealistic assessments. Nevertheless, there remain numerous "optimistic biases " that do involve self-deception, or convincing oneself of desired beliefs without appropriate reality checks. The author describes several ways that realistic and unrealistic optimism can be differentiated and explores the impact of this distinction for current views of optimism. This critique reveals how positive psychology may benefit from a focus on personal meaning and knowledge as they relate to making the most of life. Up until recently, the typical hallmark of mental health has included a firm grasp on reality. The mentally healthy person could be identified as one who accurately assessed information available in the environment (Jahoda, 1958). Taylor and Brown (1988) shook the establishment view by suggesting that people were actually healthier mentally if their sense of reality was biased in a positive direction. They bolstered their claim with a review of literature suggesting that healthier people tend to overestimate the degree of control they have on the environment, tend to see themselves in an overly positive light, and tend to be unrealistically optimistic about the future. During the 1980s and 1990s, Seligman, Abramson, Peterson, and their colleagues (e.g., Buchanan & Seligman, 1995) have popularized the notions of optimistic and pessimistic explanatory styles. In their search for the source of...
 FOR MORE INFORMATION ON THIS TOPIC CLICK HERE