


This monographic issue, unlike many issues of the journal, focuses on health rather than on pathology, on protective factors rather than on risk factors and broadly outlines a historical excursus of the “positive” perspective in the medicine-psychology interface. It is known that since the Second World War, the WHO has defined the concept of health […]
The man-nature relationship has been construed in different ways in different cultures but over time there has been a progressive accentuation of the anthropocentric vision. The possible causes of this cultural process are considered, with particular reference to technological capabilities, as well as its implications.
A brief review of the theoretical models and of the measures used to study the man-nature relationship leads to the conclusion that the very division between man and nature is a limit to an ecosystemic vision, more functional both on a theoretical level (models) and at a operational (interventions to maintain environmental balance).
The consideration that health is a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being, and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity (WHO) makes it appropriate to consider mental health and mental illness as two related but distinct factors. Therefore the absence of mental illness does not imply the presence of mental health understood as a condition of completely mentally healthy functioning (flourishing), just as the absence of mental health does not imply the presence of mental illness but could lead to the condition of languishing (Keyes).
In diagnostic terms, the usefulness of operationalizing and adopting the diagnosis of mental health can be underlined. If you want to promote well-being, you must be able to document the degree of well-being before and after the intervention.
In clinical and applicative settings, two relevant examples in line with the repercussions of the WHO definition of mental health are represented by Well-being Therapy and Subjective Well-Being Training. The first proposal, elaborated by Fava, is based on the idea of inserting a phase of well-being promotion in place of relapse prevention to complete the therapeutic process. The second proposal, elaborated by Goldwurm starting from the Fordyce model, is based on the idea that it is important to promote complete well-being in the general population.
Positive psychology can help to understand the role of a person’s strengths and well-being in counteracting the development of mental illness, improving both the understanding of aetiological mechanisms and the treatment of treatment-resistant disorders. Scientific and applied research need an integrated perspective that overcomes the positive/negative opposition.