I believe in situational or contextual optimism. Let your goals dictate what form of thinking style you use. I like the term contextual because every environment has its own unique demands that are at times both subtly and profoundly different.

I like Seligman's flexible optimism guidelines. When there is a high probability of risk, then restraint is the order of the day. When risk is low, then optimism is probably a good bet.

One dilemma or question that arises is this: is thinking ever neutral or is there always a pessimism-optimism bias? I'm inclined to believe that valueless thoughts, that is, cognitions about factual and non-emotional subjects are probably close to neutral. For example if I state blandly "there is a desk" probably there isn't a high degree of bias. On the other hand, "we should get out of Iraq" probably there is a stronger degree of bias.

This matters because of there is a bias then when assessing risk can we ever be accurate enough to know which style of optimism to employ?

A pessimistic style might delude us into thinking that there is risk when there, in fact, is not. The optimist might miss the risk because he/she feels bulletproof. Though I have heard that optimists take more precautions in health-protection.

A consolation for Bush is that he probably doesn't feel the pain of the pessimist. From a mental health standpoint, his wellbeing is probably intact. The country, however, is another story.

The truth is no one can accurately predict the future. No one can know 100 percent for sure that smoking will give you cancer, that driving while drunk will get you arrested or smashed up, or that unprotected sex will lead to pregnancy or VD. The world is probabilistic. The Middle East COULD become a paradise of peace and learning again. The blood feuds that have dominated the region COULD just disappear and Kurds, Sunnis and Shiites could embrace and become best of friends.

Its tough to determine whether these events will come to pass. Who can say with any certainty. That's the rub. The optimist would say yes--peace will reign. The pessimist would say no--war will rage. Which factors that you look at can sway your data and your optimistic or pessimistic argument.

I guess it comes down to this: would you bet your money on it or not? I wouldn't bet a dollar that the Middle East will become a peaceful village of many voices. I just don't see it until those who have suffered and felt hatred have died off and the younger generations take over. This happened with the WWII generation's feelings toward the Germans and Japanese. As the passed away they took their war experiences and resultant hatred with them.

This article highlights the wisdom of the Robert Kennedy Jr. saying: “There are those who look at things the way they are, and ask why... I dream of things that never were, and ask why not?”

In other words, the wisdom of Kennedy's saying, formed as a question, is that it also implies that Kennedy remains willing to consider potential answers to the question he poses. Some leaders leave off the question part, divorcing themselves from other perspectives and resulting in blind, arrogant optimism.... BTW, leaving out the question also ruins the poetic symetry of the saying.

J

When the sky is a bright canary yellow...

Dear Mrs Lyubomirsky

Firstly I must say many thanks for a tremendous book - full of deeply interesting research based insights and ideas, and also helped by the many real world examples and by the very human and warm writing style. I think you have undersold it - it is by far the best in the field I have come across. I look forward to seeing where your work takes you from here.

I am very interested in the study you mention above, that 18-year olds scoring above the 90th percentile in happiness do worse than peers - and more generally in any other studies about whether happiness, optimism and confidence levels can be excessive - please could you give any references?

Many thanks, and very best wishes

p.s. have you listened to Richard Davidson's recent conversation with Daniel Goleman, and video speech on http://videos.med.wisc.edu/videoInfo.php?videoid=936 - I would be very interested in your thoughts on where his work is leading, and particularly, given Mr Davidson is perhaps heading off down the compassion route, is there anyone looking more specifically at the implications of his front left-brain work for achieving happiness?
The whole concept of better managing our brains (great tools, but with some faults) I think offers exciting hope for the future.