h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I passed a sign today which was advertising a centre for "Health, Fitness and Wellbeing"

So, they're three different things. Can anyone tell me the precise differences between the three? I think I understand one context in which 'fitness' can be different, but it still seems a bit superfluous to list them all.

Anyone?

"Wellbeing" seems to be largely a marketing word - it's what they take care of when you go to an expensive spa retreat, for instance. It's a vague thing somewhere around the nexus of healthy mind, healthy body, being relaxed and being in a good mood, I think.

As for why they list all three? That's a marketing thing, too. Things just sound better in threes, and a bit of tautology, if it arises, doesnn't matter too much.

Of course it's just a bunch of marketing words, although we could try to differentiate at least the first two of them;
"Health" is a lack of disease, while
"Fitness" is the state of tone your muscles are in.

Think it's a bit harsh dismissing 'wellbeing' as just a marketing word - although of course it is used in that way. I'd say wellbeing is broader than health, and includes psychological and social elements, and for some, spiritual elements too. There comes a point at which a mental state becomes a 'health' issue rather than a 'wellbeing' issue, but before we get to depression there are milder versions, stress, unhappiness, sleep problems, that kind of thing.

Being pampered for a day at a health spa clearly helps some people relax and boosts their wellbeing, but no doubt it's not everyone's idea of a good time.

What Otto said.

~jwf~

As an aid to communication, I'm afraid it's just to vague to convey anything other than "that which isn't bad". I can't think of any usage which couldn't be more clearly put. It's a bit like saying utilize every time you mean use.

That isn't to say that things which go under the "wellbeing" banner are a load of old crock and charlatanism, of course, they can be very important indeed. It's just not a great word if you want to convey what you mean to somebody.

But it sound nice! So it does its job.

On the subject of spas and the like, can anyone tell me what the etiquette is in a sauna? There's one by the pool I swim in, but I've never been in for fear of committing an embarrassing or possibly legally dubious faux pas.

If you pour water on the heating element in the sauna, go sit on the top bench.

It depends partly on what country you're in/ I usually wrap the towel rounf my bottom until I'm sure what everyone else is doing.
Conversation beyond a simple greeting is usally frowned on. I used to enjoy reading but most safety elves won'u allow that any more in case you set fire to the paper.

I think of wellbeing as an umbrella term that could include peace of mind, adequate income, happiness, positive relationships with others, etc. Your health might not be perfect, but you problems [whatever they are] are being treated. You might or might not be physically fit.

Fitness is a measure of physical health. When you're fit, you can walk a mile or two at a brisk pace and not get out of breath.

Good health may or may not involve a peak level of fitness. Maybe there's a good reason why you can't exercise, but nevertheless you aren't ill.

I always thought that a well-being is a life-form that dwells in wells.

Y.

"Health, Fitness and Wellbeing"

How does the cynic translate this "sign".

Y'all boillux namby pamby boilship?

But what would they have instead ... "army recruitment centre" ?

>> "Health, Fitness and Wellbeing" <<

If it had said Health, Fitness, Wellbeing and
Spiritual Harmony there mighta been a problem.

paulh has defined Wellbeing nicely as a necessary
and separate consideration from health and fitness.


~jwf~

So, what you're telling me is wellbeing is not the same as being well.

I suffer from relapsing-remitting MS, trochanteric bursitis and I'm currently anaemic. So it could be argued that I'm not healthy, although I feel fine most of the time. I have trouble walking at more than about 2.5mph and I get out of breath when I go up long flights of stairs, so I'm not fit. However, my lack of fitness is caused by my not being healthy. So, yes, I can see that the two are different.

As for wellbeing, I regard that as multi-faceted. There's my physical wellbeing, but also emotional and mental wellbeing. All three could, potentially, be regarded as separate things from my health, although they could equally be regarded as being affected by (or affecting) my general health.

This may sound weird but hopefully this analogy will give
a new way to think about Health, Fitness and Wellbeing.

Our body/mind system is a lot like the weather. On a
microscopic level the systems in your body are very
much like the weather systems that circle the globe.

If you live in a temperate climate with few extremes
of temperature, precipitation, wind, storms, lightning
you likely have a sense of what well-being is.

Think of good health as a sunny day. Fitness as a sweet
balance of sun and rain. And well-being as your overall
climate situation.

They say that into every life a little rain must fall, but
one can even enjoy the storms of life if you can go on
'singing in the rain'.


~jwf~

I think Otto and Paulh have defined the three to dictionary standard, and cheerful dragon and jwf have added further insight to these terms.

Can I ask a separate question about "words":

What is the difference between "to say" and "to tell" or are they equivalent in meaning?

Similarly is there a difference between "to come" and "to arrive" or are they too equivalent in meaning?

One of the wonderful things about the English language
is its flexibility. We have choices, multiple ways to say the
same things with subtle distinctions being attached to these
various ways so that if a word or phrase gets misused or
misappropriated we can usually make ourselves understood
in other ways. Cool, sick, bad, pwned, groovy, uncouth.

"The opposite of irony is wrinkley."

I make personal distinctions between say and tell and come
and arrive but I'll wait to see what others have to say on
those particulars.


~jwf~

Say means to vocalise, tell means to inform (very roughly: there are many nuances to those).

Say and tell appear to have slightly different syntax, e.g.:

a) I tell them the truth.
b) I say to them the truth.

In both sentences "truth" is the direct object, and "them" is the indirect object.
However with "say", the indirect object takes a preposition, but doesn't with "tell".

Hence it seems that "tell" has a much cosier relationship with its indirect object than "say".

In other words for "tell" the indirect object takes more significance than for "say".

This seems to fit in with Icy Norths above comment. The focus of "say" is in the action (the vocalisation), whereas the focus of tell is shifted away from the action towards the receiver (the indirect object). Hence (and furthermore) it seems to me "say" is closer to the "subject" than "tell".