Positive Thinking: One Word, One Effect?

Transcription

1 組別 : 英文組 類別 : 論文類 Positive Thinking: One Word, One Effect? 0

2 Abstract Nowadays, there are many comments, books or the Internets alike, on positive thinking. Gradually, researchers bring up some studies about it. Some indicate that being positive would bring good responses on humans, such as Li, Fung ( 李豐 ) and Seligman. Others suggest that giving positive input on non-human objects would have good effect, such as Emoto Massaru. However, some people have different viewpoints. For instance, a professor Ching-Han Hu ( 胡景翰 ) believes that the positive verbal input has nothing to do with the development of non-human objects. First of all, we took three pieces of the same apple, mung beans and three bowls of rice as our experimental objects. Then, each of members respectively said good words, said bad words, and ignored them. After two weeks, the result showed that their appearance, condition of growth and color had no significant difference. So, in our standpoint, we think that there is no such a close relationship between the positive thinking and non-human objects. Keywords: Positive thinking i

3 Table of Contents Abstract i Table of Contents ii I. Introduction 1 I.1. Background of study 1 I.2. Motivation and research questions 1 I.3. Value 1 II. Thesis 2 II.1. Literature review 2 II.1.1 Positive thinking on humans 2 II.1.2. Positive thinking on non-human objects 3 II Supportive 3 II Opposed 4 II.2. Methodology 4 II.2.1. Objects and instruments 4 II.2.2. Experimental time and place 5 III. Results 6 III.1. The discussion about experimental objects 6 III.2. The Summary of the experiment 9 IV. Conclusion 9 V. References 10 ii

4 I. Introduction I.1. Background of study The issue of positive thinking has become very popular over the decade. Many people believe that being positive would most likely bring positive responses or feedbacks in life. A psychological scholar named Seligman developed a brand-new branch of psychology named Positive Psychology in 2000 (Long, 2009). He suggested that people with positive thinking would very likely lead to a good result on themselves. Later, quite a few studies regarding this issue have been booming and expanding to other fields. For instance, a Japanese researcher, Emoto Masaru, did an experiment in his book entitled The Hidden Messages in Water, where he indicated a close relationship between positive verbal input and the development of water crystals. However, some researchers have different viewpoints. For example, Ching-Han Hu ( 胡景瀚 ), a chemical professor of National Changhua University of Education ( 彰化師範大學 ) and his fellow students did the similar experiment, but they found that there existed no such a close relationship between the positive input and the development of non-human objects. I.2. Motivation and research questions So far the researchers in the current study have collected some related information concerning two different results of the experiments, one of which supporting that positive wording might have a good effect on the development of non-human objects, such as water, beans or rice (Pan, 2003; Zheng, 2003). On the contrary, Hu (1999) refuted the previous results and suggested that there existed no related bounds according to his precise and careful experiments. In order to have a more in-dept understanding on the above issue, we would like to conduct an experiment ourselves. We are trying to find out whether there is any connection between verbal input and the development of non-human materials. I.3. Value This research has some values. The previous studies were not conducted in a carefully-controlled environment. For instance, two elementary school teachers 1

5 Shu-Yun, Zheng ( 鄭舒云 ), Jia-Lin, Pan ( 潘嘉琳 ) along with their students in Taiwan did the experiments in their classrooms where they took lessons every day, so we found that the teachers could hardly control the students verbal input to the objects in class. Hence, our experiment is conducted in an empty classroom, so our experimental result would be more accurate because the verbal inputs are strictly controlled. II. Thesis II.1. Literature review We collected a lot of literature about positive thinking before starting doing the experiment. In the following, we are going to discuss the previous literature concerning positive thinking on humans and non-human objects. II.1.1 Positive thinking on humans In this part, we are going to discuss Li, Fung ( 李豐 ) and Seligman s opinion on positive thinking, and both of them have the same opinion because they believe that positive thinking on humans is helpful. We found that the former attending physician of pathology Li, Fung ( 李豐 ) in National Taiwan University Hospital ( 國立臺灣大學醫學院附設醫院 ) showed that the mood had certain influence on the formation of cancer cells. She said, When we are happy, the cells are round, like the eighteen-year-old humans; when we are angry, cells are as wrinkled as an eighty-year-old man. Therefore, she always laughed, not to be angry, and had a positive attitude to face all the encounters, which was one of her reasons to successfully fight against cancer. On the contrary, if we used negative thinking, it would very likely affect the therapeutic effect. Similar to positive thinking, Seligman, a psychological professor of University of Pennsylvania ( 賓州大學 ) in America, proposed the idea of positive psychology in his book Authentic Happiness (Hong, 2009) where he developed a formula: H (Happiness) = S (Set range) + C (Circumstance) + V (Voluntary control). He created this formula suggesting that having positive thinking or attitude, people would bring positive responses or feedbacks in their life. For example, Seligman indicated that when the children encountered the frustration if we could see children s advantage, praise them, and make them desire to develop their advantage, they could perk up again. Therefore, he thought that there was a close relationship between positive input 2

6 and happiness. II.1.2. Positive thinking on non-human objects Some people have different standpoints about positive thinking on non-human objects, one of which supported that positive wording might have good effects, such as Shu-Yun, Zheng ( 鄭舒云 ), Jia-Lin, Pan ( 潘嘉琳 ), and Emoto Masaru. On the contrary, Hu opposed that there existed no such a relationship according to his precise and careful experiments. Therefore, these few standpoints, supportive and opposed, are elaborated accordingly. II Supportive There were two elementary school teachers who conducted the experiments about positive thinking. The one named Shu-Yun, Zheng ( 鄭舒云 ) and her students in Taiwan did an experiment on three bowls of rice marked A, B, and C. To begin with, they made positive verbal input to Bowl A, negative to Bowl B, and ignored Bowl C. A few weeks later, the result showed that Bowl A had better colors and better smells than the others; the condition of Bowl B was the worst. The other teacher named Jia-Lin, Pan ( 潘嘉琳 ) in Taiwan along with her students did a similar to the former experiment. Their procedure and method were as same as Zheng s, but mung beans were their experimental objects. A few days later, the one with praise was better than the others; the neglected one was the worst (please see Table 1). In their opinion above, positive words and thoughts were powerful: the good thoughts and verbal words would bring good effects; contrarily, the bad thoughts and words would lead to bad results. 3

7 Apart from the teachers experiment, a Japanese scientist Emoto Masaru wrote a book about positive thinking entitled The Hidden Messages in Water where he conducted the experiment on water. He made many bowls of water listen to music, and even spoke many languages to them. After a long time, he photographed each sample with a microscope. He found that the one with praise and positive verbal input had the most beautiful and intact molecules; another one praised in different languages all got similar positive results. On the other hand, the one with criticism was ugly, contorted and scattered. Consequently, it proved that positive thinking verbal inputs could change the water crystal into different shapes. When received bad words, the shape of the water crystals was distorted; conversely, when obtained good words, the shape of the water crystals was complete. II Opposed Ching-Han Hu ( 胡景瀚 ), the chemical professor of National Changhua University of Education ( 彰化師範大學 ) had a different point of view. He pointed out that there was no relationship between being positive and the development of non-human objects. It was the photographer s psychology, he believed, that made the difference. In other words, the photographers paid heed to what they hoped for. Hence, he carried out experiments on mung beans with his students. In his study, they praised mung bean (A) and criticized mung bean (B). A few days later, the result showed that the development of these two showed no significant difference. According to the above studies, our main purpose of this paper is to know what the influence of positive thinking on non-human objects would be. II.2. Methodology In this section, we first describe the objects and instruments of the experiment, and state the experimental time and place. The procedure is shown in the last part of this section. II.2.1. Objects and instruments Our experimental objects were three pieces of the same apple (A 1, A 2 and A 3 ), mung beans (B 1, B 2 and B 3 ), and three bowls of rice (C 1, C 2 and C 3 ). Furthermore, a little of cotton, six Petri dishes, three bowls, three paper boxes and a camera are needed in order to carry out the experiment (please see Table 2). 4

8 II.2.2. Experimental time and place We scheduled to conduct this experiment from April 21 st to May 4 th, Furthermore, we chose an empty classroom to prevent non-relevant people from talking to the objects. Next, we spoke to them in three different periods: 9:10 a.m., 12:20 p.m. and 16:20 p.m. respectively. Furthermore, we placed them beside the windows to ensure them to get sufficient sunshine. II.2.3. Procedure First of all, in order to conduct a more precise experiment, we sliced the same apple into three pieces; then, we marked each Petri dish with an apple slice A 1, A 2 and A 3. Second, we put three mung beans in each Petri dish; then, we marked each Petri dish B 1, B 2 and B 3. Third, we marked the three bowls with rice C 1, C 2 and C 3. In order to observe the changes of our objects to be more clearly, we allotted A 1, B 1 and C 1 to the paper box Good ; A 2, B 2 and C 2 to the paper box Bad ; and A 3, B 3 and C 3 to the paper box Nothing During the experimental period, each of the group members said, I love you respectively to A 1, B 1 and C 1 in English; I hate you. to A 2, B 2 and C 2 in English; and ignored A 3, B 3 and C 3. Each sentence would be repeated three times (please see Table 3). Besides, we gave sufficient and same amount of water to mung beans every day. At last, we observed their variation, and kept track of their condition by the camera. 5

9 III. Results III.1. The discussion about experimental objects In the following, we chose the first, seventh and fourteenth day to describe their conditions and compared their states. The first experimental day: April 21 st, The rinds of A 1, A 2 and A 3 looked smooth and shiny, and their fruit flesh was fresh with no any spot. The mung beans had not sprouted yet. Three bowls of rice was white and elastic (Please see Figure 1.). 6

10 The seventh experimental day: April 27 th, The rinds of A 1, A 2 and A 3 were shrunk, and there were some little blackish green fungus on the fruit flesh. The mung beans all grew a centimeter tall, but the sprout of B 3 was the highest than all the others. The range of fungus in three bowls of rice began to expand; C 1 and C 3 had some red little fungus inside, but C 1 s fungus was more widely (please see Figure 2). The fourteenth experimental day: May 4th, Our apples were eaten by rats, so we did not provide the condition of A 1, A 2 and A 3. The heights of the beans are depicted as follows. B 1 s average height was nine centimeters tall, B 2 eight point five centimeters, and B 3 nine point five centimeters tall. One of B 3 was eleven centimeters tall. As for the color of the rice, C 1 was darker than C 3 in the interior and bottom part. C 2 was gray in the bottom and its inside was with red fungus (please see Figure 3). 7

11 Although we lost A 1, A 2 and A 3, we still kept track on other objects, and we used the remaining information of the A 1, A 2 and A3 to compare with the mung beans and three bowls of rice (please see Figure 4 and Table 4). 8

12 III.2. The Summary of the experiment We carried out the experiment with positive thinking for fourteen days. During the experimental period, each of the group members said, I love you. respectively to A 1, B 1 and C 1 in English; I hate you. to A 2, B 2 and C 2 in English; and ignored A 3, B3 and C3. Each sentence would be repeated three times. On the first experimental day, three slices of apple and three bowls of rice looked fresh, and mung beens had not sprouted yet. After seven days, there were some fungus on apple slices and three bowls of rice. The rinds of A 1, A 2 and A 3 shrank. The mung beans grew approximately a centimeter tall. On the last day, mung beans were averagely nine centimeters tall, and the three bowls of rice had many fungus. Based on the above result, our experiment showed that there was no significant difference among A 1, A 2 and A 3. As for the mung beans, one of the B3 s mung beans grew better than others, but there was no prominent distinction between the other eight mung beans. Though the fungus of C 1, C 2 and C 3 showed different color, we could not determine the colors which were good or bad. Therefore, we tended to conclude that there seemed no significant difference about the positive verbal input and the development of non-human objects in our experiment. IV. Conclusion In sum, our experiment proved that being positive would not lead to a good result on non-human objects, like professor Hu s contention. However, Positive 9

13 thinking is not just an experiment on objects or on humans, but an active attitude in our life. Many people believe that being active would bring positive outcome in life, and therefore there were many scholars doing experiments to prove the positive thinking. According to our result, though there is no obvious tendency in our experiment, this current study cannot claim that the positive thinking does not work on human-beings. Because there are a lot of scholars publishing the dissertation about positive thinking on human beings and their results show positive. Therefore, we still believe that positive thinking will bring some influence on humans, so we tend to confine a further study on humans in the future. V. References 1. 鄭舒云 ( 民 92) 校園善念實驗特輯( 六 )- 飯飯聽得懂我的話! 台灣大紀元時報 民 92 年 3 月 24 日, 取自 : 2. 潘嘉琳 ( 民 92) 校園善念實驗特輯( 四 )- 善的力量竟讓豆芽 起死回生! 台灣大紀元時報 民 92 年 3 月 19 日, 取自 : 3. 江本勝 ( 民 91) 生命的答案, 水知道 ( 長安靜美譯 ) 台北市: 如何出版社有限公司 4. 李豐 ( 民 85) 健康靠自己 台北市: 自立晚報設文化出版部 5. 洪蘭 ( 譯 )(2009) Martin E. P. Seligman 著 真實的快樂 (Authentic happiness) 台北 : 遠流 6. 胡景翰 ( 民 88) 水的科學與偽科學 民 100 年 5 月 16 日, 取自 : 10