Secondly, the creation of an academic discipline called `psychology', which is purportedly autonomous from philosophy and theology, and which endorses a very particular set of methodological and metaphysical commitments largely derived from the physical sciences, has reinforced the tendency for fewer avowedly philosophical. metaphysical, or theological psychologies to be produced or to be taken seriously in an academic context. This could be summed up by saying that cultural and academic authority on psychological (and other) questions has shifted from ecclesiastical and theological texts and institutions to more secular ones.
Well, yes. We no longer look to the Bible for inerrant answer about biology; Darwin and those who have expanded on Darwin give us a better framework for figuring out how life on this planet is interconnected. Why would we look to the Bible for ways to think about how our mental lives are constructed? Why should I posit a `soul', and then claim that all my internal states are results of `disorders' within this soul, which, in its most ordered and desired state, is attuned to the Will of God?
In any case, there does seem (to me) to be a bit of a pushback from Christians who want their theories about God to be included within academic pursuits, like history of science and psychology and biology. I wonder when historians will start writing about history revealing the Hand of God again?
No comments:
Post a Comment