Bashny.Net
Stress is a word that does not mean anything!
Bashny.Net
Well, it's time to admit that stress is out of date. This term is originally meant something quite different from what everyone thought, and then completely lost any value, becoming a scapegoat for everything. The website published an article by psychologist and journalist Michael Zavalova, who told the amazing story of General ignorance.
Pavlov's dog and the rat In the USSR Selye "stress" was not enough, so I do not remember that in the 1970s and the first half of the 80s we have often declined that word. In the literature (say, psychology) had a lot of Pavlov's dogs. The authors weighed a respectful bow the dog, and then switched from the unconditioned reflex to "higher nervous activity", trying to explain Pavlov (or, more precisely, associated with his name, the canonical version of the domestic behaviorism) everything: neurosis, love or creativity. It turned out not too convincing, but surprisingly sad. When the theory of the physiological laboratories with the cells where the sitting animals, into the human life, they are often of little help to explain what is happening.
However, at the level of the General public Pavlov's dog, seems to have colored the language and consciousness. Instead there was a "nerves", which the people explained, in particular, some of the disease. "All nerves", "it's her nerves", "need to stop wasting nerves."
About the same sound today, the term "stress" — though in contrast to the "nerves", they are willing to use and experts, not only mere mortals. Although the term existed before it became popular largely due to the work of Hans Selye. This canadian scientist has been trained as a doctor, but it seems that after he began studying the theory of stress, Selye has not examined a single patient and in General did not study people under stress. He worked with rats.
In 1936, Selye published his first landmark work on the theory of stress. Its essence was as follows: in the laboratory the poor rats being tortured for scientific purposes by different methods. They inject hormones and formaldehyde, they are suddenly thrown into the water, beat shock, insulate, put in a crowded cage, deprived of food, feed some stuff... And Selye discovered a curious thing: all long enough to torture animals, whatever they tried, it is possible to observe similar non-specific reactions. Any discomfort they have caused "General adaptation syndrome" (CCAS) with the famous triad of change (which is unlikely to remember at least one out of 100 people, often use the term "stress"): a decrease of the thymus, increase of the adrenal cortex and hemorrhage in the mucosa of the gastrointestinal tract.
This was an important hypothesis to explain how it works adverse factors. Moreover, it is possible to conduct a dialogue between different disciplines and, as it seemed, to explain the origin of many diseases: gastric ulcer, heart attack, cancer or low immunity. It began to use in almost all the disciplines associated with biology — from endocrinology to animal husbandry, and social psychology.
What adjective did the non-specific theory Selye revolutionary, since other researchers have tried to discover, as specific stimuli give rise to specific reactions. At first, Selye was not talking about "stress", and only about SLA, and only ten years later began to call this syndrome "stress".
Suffering rat Selye was unjustly forgotten, and "stress" has become very popular. In 1956 he published the book "Stress of life" Selye where he enthusiastically linked his theory with all that concerns us: physiology, disease, selfishness, love, war, and life purpose. In one of the announcements it was said: "we have Before us a revolutionary new concept of mental and physical health, which sets out himself a pioneer. This startling new theory of disease is, perhaps, the most important idea in the history of medicine, for which a great future. It is often compared with the discoveries of Pasteur, Ehrlich and Freud. Hans Selye, brilliantly outlining the theory of stress has been widely accepted by scientists, doctors and psychologists. Here the scientist, who is called the "Einstein of medicine," explains the essence of his concept of language, it is accessible to the comprehension of the average reader."
Obscure term with three whistling consonants of the Familiar everyday terms, it is useful to question. Often these words are inherited from other eras, change their meaning or lose. But language affects how we perceive reality and how we behave (in the case of "stress" the term affects picture of reality professionals, doctors or psychologists, who sometimes take important decisions).
It seems that the popularity of "stress" due to, among other things, the fact that he has a strong scientific background (lab tested) and it seems accurate term. Both causes some skeptics doubt it. There are psychologists who claim that over the last 50 years has not appeared any evidence of the existence of the famous nonspecific reaction described by Selye. There are doctors that tend to not see the connection between stress and disease. Chronic stress, they say, reduces immunity, and also not found evidence that nonspecific factors give rise to cancer (of course, there are lots of reliable data about the relationship of specific interventions with specific diseases).
So the base hypothesis Selye, maybe not as objective as it seems. It was hard for me to judge, but I can safely say that the term "stress" is extremely inaccurate and vague, or, at least, it was.
Imagine a hypothetical Mr. Ivanov. Let's say he lives in the same house with the mother, which speaks about a hundred words a minute, without closing the mouth. He's a polite man and sometimes only in the bathroom crying and quietly curses. Most people will unanimously say that he has "stress" or that he suffers from "stress." But then you can hear a thousand different answers to the question, what is this "stress" or where is he then? This mother-in-law or her speech behavior? Too soft character Ivanova? Or, on the contrary, his intolerance towards the manners of an elderly person? Poor housing conditions? "Unfair" situation in a society where salary is Ivanov can't buy a separate apartment? The reaction of the hormonal system Ivanova? The inability to relax?
And this happens not only on the popular level, the term "stress" there is no definition that is accepted by at least a majority of specialists. Different professionals — a doctor, psychologist, sociologist, etc. — give the different definitions, one sees this phenomenon from their point of view.
Partly this confusion is to blame Selye. First, he (evil tongues say that from-for bad knowledge of English) has chosen not the most successful term. In his theory, of course, stress is only a reaction in the body Ivanov, but he used the English word stress for the external pressure. Selye tried to fix it, calling external stimuli "stressors", but it did not stick. Most often, these external stimuli are called "stress". And secondly, he gave Selye "stress" a very broad definition. In the book "Stress of life" it reads, "Stress is the nonspecific response of the body to any submission requirements" (as with some clumsiness it transmits Russian translation).
Thus, this term is not very objective and radicallyvague. Rather, it is an intuitive metaphor, which seems to be a reality. Moreover, a metaphor from the world of mechanics. Such Sciences about the person a lot, but it is a heavy legacy of faith in science of the last centuries (like, say, the notorious "energy" in psychology, although this is a separate conversation).
With the same success it was possible to say that Ivanova is acting "bad". Or instead of "stress" to speak of "hex removal" — although "evil" is perhaps a much more specific term.
We are tired of the "stress" Terms that we use, build our picture of the world and affect things. Vague "stress", had "nerves" and the mysterious "neurasthenia", helps us to speak and think about our problems and our lives. Or more often, in my humble opinion, to talk and think about stopping. In any case, in its popular sense.
Here it is, rather, something that comes from outside, as evidenced by stable expression "to relieve stress". The responsibility is on the poor world, poor conditions and environment, poor body. Usually people also believe that stress is inevitable, that he is the source of nearly all problems and the less stress the better (though Selye wrote about good stress and the need for any voltage level for a full life).
Added to this is another common and absurd discourse "Ah, our modern life is full of stress" say: blame the pace of life, mobile phones, social networking and traffic of big cities, etc. a Bold statement: can you imagine yourself free from the stress of the farmer in the absence of, say, medicine, toilet paper, water and washing machine or living amid fear of starvation.
All this makes a person a victim of medical metaphors, that is, a passive sufferer, who acts evil force "stress". For example, the poor and our Ivanov (on a par with laboratory dog and a rat) decides that he has "stress". Most likely, he will treat him like a disease and will learn to breathe deeply to the sounds of the mother or start to run in the morning. That's my main gripe with the term. If "stress" is almost the main evil, then this concept significantly restricts our horizons and our range of body movements.
Need some other working hypotheses. If Ivanov says: "I Have a problem..." (with the mother, or wife, or property) — this will force it to analyze specific aspects of the situation and make decisions. Nothing contributes to the vagueness of the "stress".
Or, even better, Ivanov may recognize: "I'm angry at mother in law", "I deep loser who cannot even be myself". Don't know what he will do next: cry, talk with my wife, I look for another apartment. But then the language of emotions, which seems inaccurate and unscientific, where the exact language of the "stress" and far richer as a tool for decision-making. And much more, in my opinion, adequate person.
via snob.ru/selected/entry/115255
Pavlov's dog and the rat In the USSR Selye "stress" was not enough, so I do not remember that in the 1970s and the first half of the 80s we have often declined that word. In the literature (say, psychology) had a lot of Pavlov's dogs. The authors weighed a respectful bow the dog, and then switched from the unconditioned reflex to "higher nervous activity", trying to explain Pavlov (or, more precisely, associated with his name, the canonical version of the domestic behaviorism) everything: neurosis, love or creativity. It turned out not too convincing, but surprisingly sad. When the theory of the physiological laboratories with the cells where the sitting animals, into the human life, they are often of little help to explain what is happening.
However, at the level of the General public Pavlov's dog, seems to have colored the language and consciousness. Instead there was a "nerves", which the people explained, in particular, some of the disease. "All nerves", "it's her nerves", "need to stop wasting nerves."
About the same sound today, the term "stress" — though in contrast to the "nerves", they are willing to use and experts, not only mere mortals. Although the term existed before it became popular largely due to the work of Hans Selye. This canadian scientist has been trained as a doctor, but it seems that after he began studying the theory of stress, Selye has not examined a single patient and in General did not study people under stress. He worked with rats.
In 1936, Selye published his first landmark work on the theory of stress. Its essence was as follows: in the laboratory the poor rats being tortured for scientific purposes by different methods. They inject hormones and formaldehyde, they are suddenly thrown into the water, beat shock, insulate, put in a crowded cage, deprived of food, feed some stuff... And Selye discovered a curious thing: all long enough to torture animals, whatever they tried, it is possible to observe similar non-specific reactions. Any discomfort they have caused "General adaptation syndrome" (CCAS) with the famous triad of change (which is unlikely to remember at least one out of 100 people, often use the term "stress"): a decrease of the thymus, increase of the adrenal cortex and hemorrhage in the mucosa of the gastrointestinal tract.
This was an important hypothesis to explain how it works adverse factors. Moreover, it is possible to conduct a dialogue between different disciplines and, as it seemed, to explain the origin of many diseases: gastric ulcer, heart attack, cancer or low immunity. It began to use in almost all the disciplines associated with biology — from endocrinology to animal husbandry, and social psychology.
What adjective did the non-specific theory Selye revolutionary, since other researchers have tried to discover, as specific stimuli give rise to specific reactions. At first, Selye was not talking about "stress", and only about SLA, and only ten years later began to call this syndrome "stress".
Suffering rat Selye was unjustly forgotten, and "stress" has become very popular. In 1956 he published the book "Stress of life" Selye where he enthusiastically linked his theory with all that concerns us: physiology, disease, selfishness, love, war, and life purpose. In one of the announcements it was said: "we have Before us a revolutionary new concept of mental and physical health, which sets out himself a pioneer. This startling new theory of disease is, perhaps, the most important idea in the history of medicine, for which a great future. It is often compared with the discoveries of Pasteur, Ehrlich and Freud. Hans Selye, brilliantly outlining the theory of stress has been widely accepted by scientists, doctors and psychologists. Here the scientist, who is called the "Einstein of medicine," explains the essence of his concept of language, it is accessible to the comprehension of the average reader."
Obscure term with three whistling consonants of the Familiar everyday terms, it is useful to question. Often these words are inherited from other eras, change their meaning or lose. But language affects how we perceive reality and how we behave (in the case of "stress" the term affects picture of reality professionals, doctors or psychologists, who sometimes take important decisions).
It seems that the popularity of "stress" due to, among other things, the fact that he has a strong scientific background (lab tested) and it seems accurate term. Both causes some skeptics doubt it. There are psychologists who claim that over the last 50 years has not appeared any evidence of the existence of the famous nonspecific reaction described by Selye. There are doctors that tend to not see the connection between stress and disease. Chronic stress, they say, reduces immunity, and also not found evidence that nonspecific factors give rise to cancer (of course, there are lots of reliable data about the relationship of specific interventions with specific diseases).
So the base hypothesis Selye, maybe not as objective as it seems. It was hard for me to judge, but I can safely say that the term "stress" is extremely inaccurate and vague, or, at least, it was.
Imagine a hypothetical Mr. Ivanov. Let's say he lives in the same house with the mother, which speaks about a hundred words a minute, without closing the mouth. He's a polite man and sometimes only in the bathroom crying and quietly curses. Most people will unanimously say that he has "stress" or that he suffers from "stress." But then you can hear a thousand different answers to the question, what is this "stress" or where is he then? This mother-in-law or her speech behavior? Too soft character Ivanova? Or, on the contrary, his intolerance towards the manners of an elderly person? Poor housing conditions? "Unfair" situation in a society where salary is Ivanov can't buy a separate apartment? The reaction of the hormonal system Ivanova? The inability to relax?
And this happens not only on the popular level, the term "stress" there is no definition that is accepted by at least a majority of specialists. Different professionals — a doctor, psychologist, sociologist, etc. — give the different definitions, one sees this phenomenon from their point of view.
Partly this confusion is to blame Selye. First, he (evil tongues say that from-for bad knowledge of English) has chosen not the most successful term. In his theory, of course, stress is only a reaction in the body Ivanov, but he used the English word stress for the external pressure. Selye tried to fix it, calling external stimuli "stressors", but it did not stick. Most often, these external stimuli are called "stress". And secondly, he gave Selye "stress" a very broad definition. In the book "Stress of life" it reads, "Stress is the nonspecific response of the body to any submission requirements" (as with some clumsiness it transmits Russian translation).
Thus, this term is not very objective and radicallyvague. Rather, it is an intuitive metaphor, which seems to be a reality. Moreover, a metaphor from the world of mechanics. Such Sciences about the person a lot, but it is a heavy legacy of faith in science of the last centuries (like, say, the notorious "energy" in psychology, although this is a separate conversation).
With the same success it was possible to say that Ivanova is acting "bad". Or instead of "stress" to speak of "hex removal" — although "evil" is perhaps a much more specific term.
We are tired of the "stress" Terms that we use, build our picture of the world and affect things. Vague "stress", had "nerves" and the mysterious "neurasthenia", helps us to speak and think about our problems and our lives. Or more often, in my humble opinion, to talk and think about stopping. In any case, in its popular sense.
Here it is, rather, something that comes from outside, as evidenced by stable expression "to relieve stress". The responsibility is on the poor world, poor conditions and environment, poor body. Usually people also believe that stress is inevitable, that he is the source of nearly all problems and the less stress the better (though Selye wrote about good stress and the need for any voltage level for a full life).
Added to this is another common and absurd discourse "Ah, our modern life is full of stress" say: blame the pace of life, mobile phones, social networking and traffic of big cities, etc. a Bold statement: can you imagine yourself free from the stress of the farmer in the absence of, say, medicine, toilet paper, water and washing machine or living amid fear of starvation.
All this makes a person a victim of medical metaphors, that is, a passive sufferer, who acts evil force "stress". For example, the poor and our Ivanov (on a par with laboratory dog and a rat) decides that he has "stress". Most likely, he will treat him like a disease and will learn to breathe deeply to the sounds of the mother or start to run in the morning. That's my main gripe with the term. If "stress" is almost the main evil, then this concept significantly restricts our horizons and our range of body movements.
Need some other working hypotheses. If Ivanov says: "I Have a problem..." (with the mother, or wife, or property) — this will force it to analyze specific aspects of the situation and make decisions. Nothing contributes to the vagueness of the "stress".
Or, even better, Ivanov may recognize: "I'm angry at mother in law", "I deep loser who cannot even be myself". Don't know what he will do next: cry, talk with my wife, I look for another apartment. But then the language of emotions, which seems inaccurate and unscientific, where the exact language of the "stress" and far richer as a tool for decision-making. And much more, in my opinion, adequate person.
via snob.ru/selected/entry/115255
Tags
See also
11 golden rules for dialogue with difficult people
3 decision that will change your attitude to Life
There are words that stun...
Words that should be afraid of any man.
16 tips to turn you into a MASTER OF LIFE
Words that help stop overeating
"You just do not like him" 12 cruel facts that will have to take
Bernard Lown: words that heal
96 rules that will fundamentally change your life
