Response to Helminiak's 'A Scientific Spirituality: The Interface of Psychology and Theology'
Helminiak's argument is summarized and substantial agreement is indicated. Two terminological changes are recommended: the substitution of intentiona ity analysis for spirituality and a refinement of the use of the term conscious ness to include specifically nonintentional states as well as int...
| 1. VerfasserIn: | |
|---|---|
| Medienart: | Elektronisch Aufsatz |
| Sprache: | Englisch |
| Verfügbarkeit prüfen: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Lade...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Veröffentlicht: |
Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group
1996
|
| In: |
The international journal for the psychology of religion
Jahr: 1996, Band: 6, Heft: 1, Seiten: 21-25 |
| Online Zugang: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Zusammenfassung: | Helminiak's argument is summarized and substantial agreement is indicated. Two terminological changes are recommended: the substitution of intentiona ity analysis for spirituality and a refinement of the use of the term conscious ness to include specifically nonintentional states as well as intentional operations and to include psychic as well as spiritual dimensions. A more substantive difficulty is expressed with Helminiak's schema of the human sciences. It is argued that Bernard Lonergan's work would place intentionality analysis not between purely descriptive human science and theology but at the foundations of all other human science and that this foundational intentionality analysis will in the long run include a theological dimension. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1532-7582 |
| Enthält: | Enthalten in: The international journal for the psychology of religion
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1207/s15327582ijpr0601_2 |