Let’s face it; every person faces the problem of stress at some point of time or the other. It is inevitable and normal. Yet, inevitable does in no way mean that it is healthy, or it is something that can blindly be ruled out. No amount of stress is anything close to being healthy. It is indeed an understatement when said that much research has been conducted into stress over the years that man and his dearth for knowledge have expanded. Through all the research, there have also been various theories that have been laid off, and there are a few other theories that are being researched and debated about till date. The remaining ones, of course are the ones that are settled, accepted and implemented.
Coming to point, the basic motive of this article is to understand stress. So, what exactly is stress? Is it just a state of being or a force of habit; or is it something as complex as rocket science? Over the years, there have been as many definitions of stress as there exist the number of people researching on the same. The perfect definition of stress would be one that comes out of experience from all fields; which is in a way impractical to even think of. While a psychiatrist might look into just the psychological aspects of stress and the like, a linguist might look into the precise literary aspects.
Likewise, a commoner might find it apt to consider personal experiences seen over time and a professional, something arising at his workplace; and so on and so forth. Hans Selye, one of the founding fathers of stress research, recognized the differences in definitions and owed it to variations in the expanse of knowledge that each person had. Selye’s view on stress was that stress is not necessarily something bad – it all depends on how you take it.
The stress of exhilarating, creative successful work is beneficial, while that of failure, humiliation or infection is detrimental.” He believed that the biochemical effects of stress would be experienced irrespective of whether the situation was positive or negative.