Are Psychology'S Main Methods Biased against the Worldview of Many Religious People?
This article examines some of the more problematic aspects of recent efforts to integrate psychology and religion. Specifically, many religious people—psychology's main consumer and client—make different assumptions than many psychologists about human nature and the world. This article attempts...
| Authors: | ; |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Sage Publishing
2006
|
| In: |
Journal of psychology and theology
Year: 2006, Volume: 34, Issue: 3, Pages: 217-231 |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Parallel Edition: | Non-electronic
|
| Summary: | This article examines some of the more problematic aspects of recent efforts to integrate psychology and religion. Specifically, many religious people—psychology's main consumer and client—make different assumptions than many psychologists about human nature and the world. This article attempts to explicate many of these conflicting assumptions, particularly as they affect psychological methods. Therapeutic and experimental methods are frequently viewed as theologically, if not philosophically, neutral to the subject matter they are investigating. This article aims to dispel this common myth. To discover or highlight these “hidden” assumptions of traditional methods, they are first contrasted to the assumptions of interpretive practices. However, interpretive practices are themselves often viewed as theologically neutral. Consequently, psychological methods are also compared to a theistic mode of inquiry that assumes that an active God is necessary to proper investigation. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2328-1162 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Journal of psychology and theology
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1177/009164710603400304 |