10 Sep 2021 at 14:36
Manage discussion entry
Models of Integration and Personal Affinity
I disagree that “psychology is just sinful human beings sinfully
thinking about other sinful human beings” (Entwistle, 2015, p. 13). The
injection of the word “just” transforms the statement, which I deem as
accurate, into a dismissive reductionism on the development and
contributions of psychology. As humanity is corrupted by sin, all
theoretical constructs inherit the limitations and flaws of human
rationality. Yet for centuries, people have turned these ideas into reality,
to which societies have embraced and thrived off of through engineering,
medicine, technology, and more. Psychology is no exception to this, so
despite its roots from “sinful human beings”, it is nonetheless useful. In
practice, it has provided systematic methods to effectively counsel and
care for people as a demonstration of love and service.
I hold an integrative worldview that closely aligns to the
“Colonialist” paradigm (Liberty University, 2021). There is a hierarchy to
the sources of my presuppositions as they are prioritized according to my
perception of their veracity and reliability. I give full authority to the truth
of the Bible because it is from God who possesses perfect knowledge and
is unchanging. Keeping in mind the effects of sin on human thinking and
the constant changes to current scientific theories, I cautiously augment
theoretical understanding with psychology’s discoveries and conclusions,
given that the findings have been carefully tested, well reasoned, honestly
interpreted, and noncontradictory to the revelation of the Bible.
One of the criticisms of the “Colonialist” perspective is its
propensity to “cherry pick” ideas from psychology. There is neither
complete agreement nor uniformity of assumptions across leading ideas
in this field, so one must make a subjective selection within the study
itself. As it is acceptable to adopt subsets of concepts within the field, the
same liberty should be extended to do so across fields as long as the
logical consistency remains intact after the incorporation of these
concepts. Thus, I do not see much validity to this criticism.
In conclusion, there is much to gain when supplementing theology
with knowledge from psychology in the “Colonialist” manner since the
small overlap between them is addressed by yielding authority to the
Bible. As C.S. Lewis comments, “psychoanalysis itself, apart from all the
philosophical additions… is not in the least contradictory to Christianity.
Its technique overlaps with Christian morality at some points…but it does
not run the same course all the way, for the two techniques are doing
rather different things” (1952, p. 89). My integration is not about one
versus the other but rather focused on enrichment of understanding in my
journey for truth and meaning.
References
Entwistle, D. N. (2015).Integrative approaches to psychology and
Christianity: An introduction to worldview issues, philosophical
foundations, and models of integration(3rd ed.). Wipf and Stock
Publishers.
Lewis, C. S. (1952).Mere Christianity (Rev. ed.).HarperSanFrancisco.
Liberty University. (2021, August).Watch: Models for Interdisciplinary
Integration[Video].
Kaltura.https://canvas.liberty.edu/courses/117651/pages/watch-models-
for-interdisciplinary-integration?module_item_id=13237353
