品格長處與德行在促成個體幸福／快樂中的角色：評介M. E. P. Seligman著《Authentic Happiness》

The Role which Character Strengths and Virtues Play in Promoting an Individual's Happiness: Book review of M. E. P. Seligman's Authentic Happiness

10.6724/ERR.201411_(115).0010

陳伊琳(Yi-Lin Chen)

正向心理學 ； 品格長處 ； 德行 ； 幸福／快樂 ； 品格教育 ； positive psychology ； character strength ； virtue ； happiness ； character education

教育資料與研究

115期（2014 / 11 / 01）

253 - 278

繁體中文

正向心理學試圖扭轉傳統心理學的疾病模式，協助人追求幸福／快樂與美好生活。這不僅與當代品格教育的哲學奠基者 Aristotle關心的主題幸福相同，Seligman甚至有意為備受爭議的「德福一體說」背書。本文旨在探討根據Seligman的幸福／快樂理論，品格長處與德行在促成個體幸福／快樂中扮演的角色。研究發現，Seligman的幸福／快樂概念包含三個層次／層面，亦即愉悅的、美好的、有意義的生活，而真實的快樂位於後兩者；完整意義的幸福／快樂則應兼容三者。Seligman提出的核心論點真實的快樂有賴施展個人長處與德行，依此德行與幸福／快樂是一體、密不可分的。這對教育的啟示是，要想使學生獲得真實的快樂，過美好與有意義的生活，則有賴慧眼辨識並積極培養學生長處與德行，使之投身正向活動。此論點有助於更詳實闡明「教育幸福」的概念，並與十二年國教「適性揚才」的教育理念若合符節。

Positive psychology attempts to reverse the disease model upon which psychology had traditionally advanced, and to help the general people live a happy life. This very concern of interest is shared with the main philosophical founder of contemporary character education, i.e. Aristotle, whose primary concern is eudaimonia/ happiness. Seligman aims to endorse the age-old controversial doctrine of the unity of virtue and happiness. This paper aims to elucidate the role which character strengths and virtues play in promoting an individual's happiness in the light of Seligman's theory of happiness. It is found that Seligman's concept of happiness is comprised of the pleasant life, the good life, and the meaningful life, and happiness in the full sense is composed of the aforementioned three kinds of life. Among them, authentic happiness is derived from the latter two kinds of life. Seligman puts forth a central thesis to the effect that authentic happiness comes from exercising one's signature strengths and virtues, and it is in this sense that virtue and happiness are said to be unified. An important educational implication is that in order to help the student to obtain authentic happiness and lead a good and meaningful life, an educator has to identify and nurture each student's signature strengths with insight, and to engage him/her in positive activities with strengths and virtues. This thesis helps to illustrate the concept of ＂education well-being＂ and it is also allied with the ideal of ＂adaptive education＂ in the twelve-year basic education programme.

1. 羅婉娥、古明峰、曾文志(2013)。正向情緒課程對國中生生活適應及情感狀態效果之研究。教育心理學報，44(3)，609-628。
   連結：
2. 陳佳雯（2013）。幸福嗎？馬英九：用OECD 標準，八月公布國民幸福指數。取自http://www.ettoday.net/news/20130313/174713.htm〔Chen, C.W. (2013). Are you happy? Ma, Y. C. says: Gross National Happiness will be announced in August in the light of the standard of OECD. Retrieved from http://www.ettoday.net/news/20130313/174713.htm〕
3. Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2003). Values in action (VIA) classifi cation of strengths. Retrieved from http://www.ppc.sas.upenn.edu/viamanualintro.pdf
4. Cawley, M. J.,Martin, J. E.,Johnson, J. A.(2000).A virtue approach to personality.Personality and Individual Differences,28,997-1013.
5. Csikszentmihalyi, M.(1997).Finding flow.Psychology Today,30(4),46-50.
6. Ehrenreich, B.、高紫文譯(2012)。失控的正向思考。新北市=New Taipei City:左岸文化=Rive Gauche Publishing。
7. Haidt, J.(2006).The happiness hypothesis: Finding modern truth in ancient wisdom.New York:Basic Books.
8. Peterson, C.,Seligman, M. E. P.(2004).Character strengths and virtues: A handbook and classification.Oxford, UK:Oxford University Press.
9. Seligman, M. E. P.(1999).The president's address.American Psychologist,54(8),559-562.
10. Seligman, M. E. P.(2002).Authentic happiness: Using the new positive psychology to realise your potential for lasting fulfilment.New York:Free Press.
11. Seligman, M. E. P.、洪蘭譯(2003)。真實的快樂：運用正向心理學在生活中實現個人長處達到生命最大的成功與情緒最深的滿足。臺北市=Taipei City:遠流=Yuan-Liou Publishing。
12. Shafer-Landau, R.(Ed.)(2012).Ethical theory: An anthology.Oxford, UK:Wiley-Blackwell.
13. 吳清山(2012)。教育幸福的理念與實踐策略。教育研究月刊，220，4-15。
14. 黃德祥、邱紹一(2012)。教育幸福感的要素與發展。教育研究月刊，220，44-54。

1. 陳伊琳(2018)。英國品格教育現況評析及其對臺灣品德教育的啟示。中等教育，69(4)，74-89。
2. 陳伊琳(2018)。重訪德與福的關係：正向心理學的新詮釋及其對品德教育的啟示。當代教育研究季刊，26(4)，47-82。