![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 10 September 2012 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
It seems that this quote is not from an RS, especially when Pasteur's biography didn't mention it, and it only appeared about 100 years after the event. Not only that, it appears only in references attempting to debunk germ theory in some manner. This is a popular meme not dissimilar to Darwin's "deathbed confession". Besides, as it's written, it's synthesis anyway. Shot info ( talk) 00:34, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
This is what the source actually is
The sense of coherence, then, can formally be defined as: a global orientation that expresses the extent to which one has a pervasive, enduring though dynamic feeling of confidence that (1) the stimuli deriving from one's internal and external environments in the course of living are structured, predictable and explicable; (2) the resources are available to one to meet the demands posed by these stimuli; and (3) these demands are challenges, worthy of investment and engagement.
Which is a little bit different from what the "quote" says. So either the source isn't the source. Or the quote needs altering. Shot info ( talk) 01:18, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
Whoever wrote this criticism is wrong. This is a direct qute from Antonovsky 1987, page 19. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greenmanarch ( talk • contribs) 00:14, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
I have taken a misleading statement:
and replaced it with this one, but it is still somewhat misleading:
Medicine has always sought to understand both the origins of illness and health, so this statement needs better phrasing that doesn't seem to imply that Antonovsky invented the concept, while allowing that he placed emphasis on it, something which is by no means unique to him. Many notable physicians have done the same. Please suggest better wording. -- Fyslee ( talk) 15:55, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
I have re-written this so that it focuses on the salutogenic model proposed by Antonovsky. The term may be used in other ways ... but it is a formal theory that is specifically concerned with the health-stress-coping paradigm. It's not about eating vegetables will make you healthy. I have also clarified the theoretical formulation for the introduction of the sense of coherence.
Most all of this comes from the preface to his 1987 book. I have summarized his summary of the model.
When I get a chance, I will go back and edit the sense of coherence section ... it needs work.
The primary quotation is correct. The explanation of how it develops is not how Antonovsky described it (see page 186 in his 1979 book). The definitions of the three components are all essentially wrong.
Pgm8693 ( talk) 19:40, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
I took out the following text. It really doesn't fit, in my opinion. None of this has anything to do with Antonovsky's theories or his salutogenic model.
Pgm8693 ( talk) 19:56, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
I have largely and extensively rewritten this article so that it accurately reflects the use of the term salutogenesis as formulated by Antonovsky. The term has been adopted in fields other than psychology and medical sociology to describe almost any general focus on health. That seems fine, but the term was in fact coined by Antonovsky (he described it as a neologism) for the purpose of clarifying theoretical and empirical relationships between health, stress and coping.
Given that he coined the term to describe his theories (and not for the purpose of talking about how eating vegetables or whatever else will make you healthy), the entry here should focus on the term as a label for his theories.
In editing this article, I have also clarified how the sense of coherence fits in to the salutogenic model. I think that these edits accurately reflect the major elements of his writing. Pgm8693 ( talk) 23:12, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
I removed these two links after reviewing them. Both of these further readings distort, confuse and misrepresent the theoretical formulation for the sense of coherence. The problem is that they are poorly written, simply incorrect and don't get it right. They would be ok if they claimed to offer an alternative viewpoint on the theory. Instead, they simply mis-state the theory, as if they hardly bothered at all to read the original work. My suspicion is that they are based on secondary sources that were of dubious quality and that these two readings are part of an incestuous relationship (i.e., somebody got it wrong, and then people copied among themselves). Pgm8693 ( talk) 23:24, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
This concept is now used widely outside of Antonovsky's work; the article should reflect this wider usage. hgilbert ( talk) 00:31, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
When reading this I was struck by the connections between this and The Peckham Experiment.
Searching on Google, I find that others have made this link -- e.g.
What's a good way of making this link explicit in the article? Simon Grant ( talk) 10:46, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
Given no response to this suggestion, I'll add a link under "See also". Hope that's OK with everyone. Simon Grant ( talk) 10:13, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
I find it odd that the multiple issues tag is still there, ostensibly from 2009 but actually from 2015. Do people feel the issues have been resolved? Certainly there are plenty of references now. Does it still read like a personal essay, as it may have done in 2009? Simon Grant ( talk) 09:42, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
The last paragraph in the "Sense of Coherence" section still feels essay-like and could probably be replaced with quotes from Antonovsky's work. I've however removed the "essay-like" template after edits to the more recently added "Salutogenesis Moving Forward" section. Deltasct ( talk) 13:15, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
Isn't this a variant of the bogus allopathic medicine claims, used to promote altmed? — Paleo Neonate – 01:00, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
I've shortened the essay-like section and incorporated it into the existing section on medicine. I hope my formulation is suitably chosen to be neutral and value-free, at least with respect to the motivation or suitability for changes to health practices. Deltasct ( talk) 13:35, 2 January 2023 (UTC)