[DisruptiveDave]

> dealing with things sensibly and realistically in a way that is based on practical rather than theoretical considerations.

That's the definition. What I outlined - granted, without the specific action steps - is sensible and realistic. And it distinctly is not about happiness. Romantic would be "just be happy." Would you consider behavioral therapy romantic?

Edit: I'm really hoping you guys aren't saying that anything involving a person managing their mind/emotions is romantic and impractical.

[bilbo0s]

Well, for my part, I kind of fell on the side of your posts representing more "idealism" than anything else. But, yes, I think "romanticism" works as well. Since romanticism is marked by the imaginative or emotional appeal of what is heroic, adventurous, remote, mysterious, or idealized. Romanticism is not all about being happy. There are romantic heroes in comedies as well as tragedies. The history of literature for instance is replete with many examples of both. Your idea is to make the heroic effort to fix one's mind. Which can easily become a tragedy.

I think pragmatism fits least because of your clarification. Managing one's mind, or ridding oneself of desire, and especially dealing with reality without bias or judgement, are just not terribly realistic in nature. We should certainly strive to deal with reality without bias or judgement for instance, but, I mean, we obviously don't do that in practice. None of us do. Despite the protestations of the number among us who would claim to be completely non-judgemental. Especially not when we find ourselves at a pragmatic extreme. In combat for instance, there is a whole lot of bias and judgement because people start to become almost too pragmatic.

But we can just agree to disagree. No worries man. Just wanted to explain my thinking.