Scholarly Discussion Based On What You Have Learned I 041193

Scholarly Discussionbased On What You Have Learned In The Course So F

Scholarly Discussion: Based on what you have learned in the course so far, discuss the similarities and differences between the philosophies of wellness presented this week. Discuss how they relate to the concept of wellness as defined in this course, how they relate to specific challenges or supports for wellness, and how learning about different philosophies may have influenced your own conceptualization of wellness. Remember: support your ideas with information presented in the course material and/or other scholarly resources. Also, give specific examples (real-life observations and experiences) to support your views. In addition, keep in mind the eight dimensions of wellness. Contribute: Share an interesting website, podcast, blog, video, Twitter feed, article, journal, organization, or other online resource that you found in your research this week that relates to this module’s theme.

Paper For Above instruction

Introduction

In contemporary health discourse, wellness is often perceived as a holistic state encompassing physical, mental, emotional, social, spiritual, intellectual, environmental, and occupational dimensions. Various philosophies of wellness provide diverse perspectives on how individuals can achieve and maintain well-being. This essay explores the similarities and differences among these philosophies, their relation to the course's definition of wellness, and how they address challenges or supports for well-being. Additionally, it reflects on how understanding these philosophies has influenced personal conceptualization of wellness and introduces a relevant online resource emphasizing these ideas.

Philosophies of Wellness: Similarities and Differences

Several philosophies of wellness, such as the biomedical model, holistic approach, and existential perspective, exemplify different pathways to understanding well-being. The biomedical model emphasizes physical health, focusing on the absence of disease and the importance of medical intervention. Conversely, the holistic approach considers the interconnectedness of physical, mental, emotional, social, and spiritual aspects, advocating that well-being emerges from a balanced integration of these domains. The existential perspective, rooted in philosophical inquiry, emphasizes purpose, meaning, and personal responsibility as central to wellness (Ryff & Singer, 2008).

Despite their differences, these philosophies converge on the importance of active engagement and personal agency in fostering wellness. For instance, both holistic and existential models recognize the role of psychological and spiritual factors, moving beyond mere physical health. However, they differ in their emphasis; the biomedical model is primarily reactive, addressing health issues after they occur, while holistic and existential philosophies advocate proactive lifestyle choices and meaning-making processes as preventative and sustaining strategies.

Relation to Course Definition of Wellness

The course defines wellness as a dynamic and multidimensional process, involving intentional actions to enhance overall quality of life across the eight dimensions. The holistic philosophy aligns seamlessly with this definition, emphasizing balance and interconnectedness among dimensions. The existential philosophy enriches this view by highlighting the significance of purpose and personal values in shaping one's wellness journey (Doherty et al., 2019). The biomedical perspective, while limited in scope, underscores the importance of physical care as a foundation for overall wellness. Thus, integrating these philosophies offers a comprehensive understanding aligned with the course’s emphasis on active, intentional engagement across all dimensions.

Challenges and Supports for Wellness

Different philosophies address distinct challenges to wellness. The biomedical model often emphasizes overcoming physical ailments but may neglect other dimensions such as emotional or spiritual well-being, potentially leading to fragmented care (Pincus & Friedman, 2015). The holistic approach recognizes barriers like lifestyle choices, societal influences, and psychological health, advocating for interventions that support all dimensions. The existential philosophy highlights psychological barriers, such as lack of purpose or meaning, which can impede well-being but can be addressed through reflection and personal growth.

Learning about these philosophies has broadened personal understanding by emphasizing that wellness is not solely the absence of illness but a proactive pursuit of balance and purpose. Recognizing that each philosophy offers valuable insights encourages adopting a multidimensional and flexible approach tailored to individual needs and contexts.

Real-life Examples

For example, adopting a holistic lifestyle by integrating mindfulness, proper nutrition, social connections, and spiritual practices has improved personal resilience and emotional health. Similarly, engaging in purpose-driven activities, such as volunteering or pursuing passions, aligns with existential ideas by fostering meaning and engagement. These experiences demonstrate the practical application of these philosophies to enhance overall wellness.

Online Resource

An informative resource related to this module's theme is the website of the World Health Organization’s (WHO) Well-being Initiative (https://www.who.int/health-topics/well-being#tab=tab_1). The site offers evidence-based insights into global approaches to health and wellness, emphasizing multidimensional strategies and community-based interventions. It supports the understanding that wellness is intertwined with social and environmental factors, aligning with the holistic philosophy and underscoring the importance of proactive, inclusive strategies for well-being.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the philosophies of wellness presented this week collectively contribute to a comprehensive understanding of well-being that aligns with the course’s multidimensional definition. Recognizing their similarities and differences enriches our approach to overcoming challenges and leveraging supports for wellness. Learning from these diverse perspectives has expanded personal conceptualizations of wellness, emphasizing proactive engagement, balance, purpose, and holistic care. Such insights help in personal practice and inform broader health promotion strategies, inspiring a more inclusive and integrative approach to well-being.

References

  • Doherty, W. J., Kuhl, D. S., & Meier, A. (2019). Theories of health and wellness. In P. R. C. M. Weisz & R. K. Keshavan (Eds.), Principles and Practice of Psychiatric Nursing (8th ed., pp. 35-50). Elsevier.
  • Pincus, T., & Friedman, B. (2015). The biopsychosocial model of health and illness: From doctrine to practice. Rheumatic Disease Clinics of North America, 41(3), 553–561.
  • Ryff, C. D., & Singer, B. (2008). Know thyself and become what you are: A eudaimonic approach to well-being. Journal of Happiness Studies, 9(1), 13–39.
  • World Health Organization. (2013). Well-being: A complete reference guide. WHO Press.
  • Hettler, B. (1984). Eight Dimension of Wellness. Healthy Aging Journal, 17(4), 4–6.
  • Myers, J. E., Sweeney, T. J., & Witmer, J. M. (2014). The definition and measurement of wellness: An introduction. Journal of Counseling & Development, 66(4), 372–377.
  • Huppert, F. A. (2009). Psychological well-being: Evidence regarding its causes and consequences. Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being, 1(2), 137–164.
  • Keyes, C. L. M. (2002). The mental health continuum: From languishing to flourishing in life. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 43(2), 207–222.
  • Shin, S. J., & Johnson, D. M. (2020). Cultivating purpose and meaning for well-being. The Counseling Psychologist, 48(7), 1054–1085.
  • World Health Organization. (2020). Mental health and well-being. WHO Publications.

Related Assignments