HtmlToText
a propos ( 25 september, 2012 ) psycholy of religion hi everybody i hope you’ll enjoy that. waiting for your comments psychology of religion consists of the application of psychological methods and interpretive frameworks to religious traditions, as well as to both religious and irreligious individuals. the science attempts to accurately describe the details, origins, and uses of religious beliefs and behaviours. although the psychology of religion first arose as a self-conscious discipline as recently as the late 19th century, all three of these tasks have a history going back many centuries before that. many areas of religion remain unexplored by psychology. while religion and spirituality play a role in many people’s lives, it is uncertain how they lead to outcomes that are at times positive, and at other times negative. thus, the pathways and outcomes that underlie these associations (and sometimes causations) need additional research. continued dialogue between psychology and theology may foster greater understanding and benefit both fields. contents 1 overview 2 history o2.1 william james o2.2 other early theorists julian jaynes • 3 hypotheses on the role of religion o 3.1 secularization o 3.2 religious transformation o 3.3 cultural divide • 4 psychometric approaches to religion o 4.1 religious orientations and religious dimensions o 4.2 questionnaires to assess religious experience • 5 developmental approaches to religion • 6 religion and prayer • 7 religion and ritual • 8 religion and health o 8.1 religion and physical health o 8.2 religion and mental health • 9 evolutionary psychology of religion • 10 religion and drugs o 10.1 james h. leuba o 10.2 drug-induced religious experiences • 11 religion and meditation • 12 controversy • 13 religion and psychotherapy • 14 pastoral psychology • overview the challenge for the psychology of religion is essentially threefold: (1) to provide a thoroughgoing description of the objects of investigation, whether they be shared religious content (e.g., a tradition’s ritual observances) or individual experiences, attitudes, or conduct; (2) to account in psychological terms for the rise of such phenomena; and (3) to clarify the outcomes—the fruits, as william james put it—of these phenomena, for individuals and for the larger society. the first, descriptive task naturally requires a clarification of one’s terms, above all, the word religion. historians of religion have long underscored the problematic character of this term, noting that its usage over the centuries has changed in significant ways, generally in the direction of reification. the early psychologists of religion were fully aware of these difficulties, typically acknowledging that the definitions they were choosing to use were to some degree arbitrary. with the rise of positivistic trends in psychology over the course of the 20th century, especially the demand that all phenomena be measured, psychologists of religion developed a multitude of scales, most of them developed for use with protestant christians. factor analysis was also brought into play by both psychologists and sociologists of religion, in an effort to establish a fixed core of dimensions and a corresponding set of scales. the justification and adequacy of these efforts, especially in the light of constructivist and other postmodern viewpoints, remains a matter of debate. in the last several decades, especially among clinical psychologists, a preference for the terms “spirituality” and “spiritual” has emerged, along with efforts to distinguish them from “religion” and “religious.” especially in the united states, “religion” has for many become associated with sectarian institutions and their obligatory creeds and rituals, thus giving the word a negative cast; “spirituality,” in contrast, is positively constructed as deeply individual and subjective, as a universal capacity to apprehend and accord one’s life with higher realities. in fact, “spirituality” has likewise undergone an evolution in the west, from a time when it was essentially a synonym for religion in its original, subjective meaning. today, efforts are ongoing to “operationalize” these terms, with little regard for their history in their western context and with the apparent realist assumption that underlying them are fixed qualities identifiable by means of empirical procedures. history this article includes a list of references, but its sources remain unclear because it has insufficient inline citations. please help to improve this article by introducing more precise citations. (january 2012) william james u.s. psychologist and philosopher william james (1842–1910) is regarded by most psychologists of religion as the founder of the field.( put a citation of him if you know ) he served as president of the american psychological association, and wrote one of the first psychology textbooks. in the psychology of religion, james’ influence endures. his varieties of religious experience is considered to be the classic work in the field, and references to james’ ideas are common at professional conferences. james distinguished between institutional religion and personal religion. institutional religion refers to the religious group or organization, and plays an important part in a society’s culture. personal religion, in which the individual has mystical experience, can be experienced regardless of the culture. james was most interested in understanding personal religious experience. in studying personal religious experiences, james made a distinction between healthy-minded and sick-souled religiousness. individuals predisposed to healthy-mindedness tend to ignore the evil in the world and focus on the positive and the good. james used examples of walt whitman and the “mind-cure” religious movement to illustrate healthy-mindedness in the varieties of religious experience. in contrast, individuals predisposed to having a sick-souled religion are unable to ignore evil and suffering, and need a unifying experience, religious or otherwise, to reconcile good and evil. james included quotations from leo tolstoy and john bunyan to illustrate the sick soul. william james’ hypothesis of pragmatism stems from the efficacy of religion. if an individual believes in and performs religious activities, and those actions happen to work, then that practice appears the proper choice for the individual. however, if the processes of religion have little efficacy, then there is no rationality for continuing the practice. other early theorists g.w.f. hegel hegel (1770-1831) described all systems of religion, philosophy, and social science as expressions of the basic urge of consciousness to learn about itself and its surroundings, and record its findings and hypotheses. thus, religion is only a form of that search for knowledge, within which humans record various experiences and reflections. others, compiling and categorizing these writings in various ways, form the consolidated worldview as articulated by that religion, philosophy, social science, etc. his work the phenomenology of spirit was a study of how various types of writing and thinking draw from and re-combine with the individual and group experiences of various places and times, influencing the current forms of knowledge and worldviews that are operative in a population. this activity is the functioning of an incomplete group mind, where each individual is accessing the recorded wisdom of others. his works often include detailed descriptions of the psychological motivations involved in thought and behavior, e.g., the struggle of a community or nation to know itself and thus correctly govern itself. in hegel’s system, religion is one of the major repositories of wisdom to be used in these struggles, representing a huge body of recollections from humanity’s past in various stages of its development. sigmund freud sigmund freud (1856–1939) gave explanations of the genesis of religion in hi
paizo2.unblog.fr rapport :
Visitez le site