ABSTRACT
The last decade has witnessed a shift in the way researchers and policy makers treat the process of aging: striving for functioning at the level of “successful aging” has become the aspired goal advocated by writers (e.g., Baltes & Baltes, 1990; Rowe & Kahn, 1998 ). This new view contrasts with most earlier writings on aging, which focused on the crises of growing old, and on ways to overcome the problems that accompany them. With that earlier approach, the attainment of the “normal state” (i.e., the “average” or the “common” state) was the aspired goal. States of crisis (biological, psychological, sociological) in aged individuals were the focus of attention and the objective for remedy. Yet, the crisis-solving approach seeks at most to bring the crisis-affected individuals to the level of functioning of “normal” individuals. It does not lead “normal” aged individuals to a more successful experience with aging, that is, to achieving the goal of “supernormal aging” in the way the successful minority experiences aging. This remedial approach is analogous to the medical approach of treating the sick rather than elevating the whole population to the status of the most healthy.
