Psychology vs. Christianity

[Qoeleth]

It seems as if there are certain ‘value judgments’ in modern psychology (or at least ‘pop psychology’) which fundamentally conflict with Christianity, a few of which are identified below:

1. “The word ‘should’ should never be used”- This revolting cliche is thrown around, as if simply by saying it, it establishes its truth. Clearly, fundamentally contradictory to Christianity (or any ethical position).
2. “Don’t be a martyr.”- Why not? As a Christian, it is a good thing to sacrifice self interest to others.
3. “Don’t feel guilt or shame”. Again, Christianity teaches all human are guilty, not even by actions, but by our very being.

Psychology may be OK as a science- but as a tool for forming people, it cannot be separated from a particular set of values. And those values do not accord with Christianity.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

It seems as if there are certain ‘value judgments’ in modern psychology (or at least ‘pop psychology’) which fundamentally conflict with Christianity, a few of which are identified below:

1. “The word ‘should’ should never be used”- This revolting cliche is thrown around, as if simply by saying it, it establishes its truth. Clearly, fundamentally contradictory to Christianity (or any ethical position).
2. “Don’t be a martyr.”- Why not? As a Christian, it is a good thing to sacrifice self interest to others.
3. “Don’t feel guilt or shame”. Again, Christianity teaches all human are guilty, not even by actions, but by our very being.

Psychology may be OK as a science- but as a tool for forming people, it cannot be separated from a particular set of values. And those values do not accord with Christianity.

Psychology is a ten letter word which means " meaningless. "

 

[Razanir]

It seems as if there are certain ‘value judgments’ in modern psychology (or at least ‘pop psychology’) which fundamentally conflict with Christianity, a few of which are identified below:

1. “The word ‘should’ should never be used”- This revolting cliche is thrown around, as if simply by saying it, it establishes its truth. Clearly, fundamentally contradictory to Christianity (or any ethical position).
2. “Don’t be a martyr.”- Why not? As a Christian, it is a good thing to sacrifice self interest to others.
3. “Don’t feel guilt or shame”. Again, Christianity teaches all human are guilty, not even by actions, but by our very being.

Psychology may be OK as a science- but as a tool for forming people, it cannot be separated from a particular set of values. And those values do not accord with Christianity.

1. Its users do realize it’s a contradiction, right? It sounds as valid as “Ain’t ain’t a word so you ain’t gonna use it”
2. Don’t get me started on this. For school a few years ago, I read Johnny Got His Gun by Dalton Trumbo. Worst book I’ve ever read. The first half was disjoint memories followed by a rant on just this. The second half was his failing at reentering the world, followed by an anti-government rant.
3. Guilt and shame are fundamental human emotions. Even with moral relativism, they are still necessary.

 

[thewanderer]

It seems as if there are certain ‘value judgments’ in modern psychology (or at least ‘pop psychology’) which fundamentally conflict with Christianity, a few of which are identified below:

1. “The word ‘should’ should never be used”- This revolting cliche is thrown around, as if simply by saying it, it establishes its truth. Clearly, fundamentally contradictory to Christianity (or any ethical position).
2. “Don’t be a martyr.”- Why not? As a Christian, it is a good thing to sacrifice self interest to others.
3. “Don’t feel guilt or shame”. Again, Christianity teaches all human are guilty, not even by actions, but by our very being.

Psychology may be OK as a science- but as a tool for forming people, it cannot be separated from a particular set of values. And those values do not accord with Christianity.

The thing is that when applied to the right person and situation, these can actually be true.

1. Okay, well not this one, but there are times when people are falsely pressured into thinking something is immoral and so a “should not” when it actually is morally nuetral for them.
2. Sometimes people martyr themselves when it is actually harmful, both to themselves and others to do so, in these cases this is excellent advice
3. Again, if this is a situation where they are feeling guilt or shame for something that was not wrong, not their fault etc then this is excellent advice.

Yes, poppsychology gives this advice out way to frequently, but it does so because there is a kernel of truth in it. Also, there are many very good psychologists out there, Psychology is not at odds with Christianity.

 

[stanczyk]

Psychology is a ten letter word which means " meaningless. "

Hear, hear:thumbsup: It’s a shame the scientific establishment cannot see how unscientific psychology is.

 

[stanczyk]

It seems as if there are certain ‘value judgments’ in modern psychology (or at least ‘pop psychology’) which fundamentally conflict with Christianity, a few of which are identified below:

1. “The word ‘should’ should never be used”- This revolting cliche is thrown around, as if simply by saying it, it establishes its truth. Clearly, fundamentally contradictory to Christianity (or any ethical position).
2. “Don’t be a martyr.”- Why not? As a Christian, it is a good thing to sacrifice self interest to others.
3. “Don’t feel guilt or shame”. Again, Christianity teaches all human are guilty, not even by actions, but by our very being.

Psychology may be OK as a science- but as a tool for forming people, it cannot be separated from a particular set of values. And those values do not accord with Christianity.

These are the fruits of moral relativism. Pretty despicable stuff, if you ask me.

 

[mommy_k]

Not feeling guilty and shame for actions are the sign of a psychopath.
The word should imparts judgement and psychologists are trained to be completely non judgemental.

 

[Cliff_Jumper]

It seems as if there are certain ‘value judgments’ in modern psychology (or at least ‘pop psychology’) which fundamentally conflict with Christianity, a few of which are identified below:

1. “The word ‘should’ should never be used”- This revolting cliche is thrown around, as if simply by saying it, it establishes its truth. Clearly, fundamentally contradictory to Christianity (or any ethical position).
2. “Don’t be a martyr.”- Why not? As a Christian, it is a good thing to sacrifice self interest to others.
3. “Don’t feel guilt or shame”. Again, Christianity teaches all human are guilty, not even by actions, but by our very being.

Psychology may be OK as a science- but as a tool for forming people, it cannot be separated from a particular set of values. And those values do not accord with Christianity.

These statements, if made by psychologists, have really nothing to do with psychology. They are born from moral relativism. Psychology is the study of the thought processes of the human mind through the scientific method. I am Catholic and will soon have a Master’s degree in Cognitive Experimental Psychology. None of these statements fit the scientific evidence being researched now.
Science has no values. It is simply a tool like a hammer or wrench, and as such it must be used with proper values. Unfortunately, post-modernism is the value system many scientists have.

 

[stanczyk]

These statements made by psychologists have really nothing to do with psychology. They are born from moral relativism. Psychology is the study of the thought processes of the human mind through the scientific method. I am Catholic and will soon have a Master’s degree in Cognitive Experimental Psychology. None of these statements fit the scientific evidence being researched now.

You seem to be pretty biased. You certainly can’t deny that moral relativism plays a critical role in therapy.

 

[Richard320]

And how do you feel about that?

A buddy of mine has a saying. “There ain’t no problem so big that a shrink can’t make it worse.”

 

[Cliff_Jumper]

You seem to be pretty biased. You certainly can’t deny that moral relativism plays a critical role in therapy.

In some forms of therapy yes. However other forms of therapy stress personal responsibility, immutable natural laws, and correct ways to behave and act in life. Now I will say clinical psychology is not may area of expertise. I study brain functioning particularly how the brain processes, stores, retrieves, and uses new and old information. This is a science.
When any scientist, psychologist, biologist, or other begins to make value statements or statements about immaterial functions/items they step beyond the bounds of science and cease being scientific. We have seen biologists like Richard Dawkins do this. This does not make biology any less of a science.

 

[JDaniel]

Hear, hear:thumbsup: It’s a shame the scientific establishment cannot see how unscientific psychology is.

Stanczyk:

But wait, they have the ability to write prescriptions . . . for drugs . . . for psychotropic drugs. They have to be “scientists.”

God bless,
jd

 

[edwest2]

It seems as if there are certain ‘value judgments’ in modern psychology (or at least ‘pop psychology’) which fundamentally conflict with Christianity, a few of which are identified below:

1. “The word ‘should’ should never be used”- This revolting cliche is thrown around, as if simply by saying it, it establishes its truth. Clearly, fundamentally contradictory to Christianity (or any ethical position).
2. “Don’t be a martyr.”- Why not? As a Christian, it is a good thing to sacrifice self interest to others.
3. “Don’t feel guilt or shame”. Again, Christianity teaches all human are guilty, not even by actions, but by our very being.

Psychology may be OK as a science- but as a tool for forming people, it cannot be separated from a particular set of values. And those values do not accord with Christianity.

Can you provide some references for this?

Peace,
Ed

 

[edwest2]

Stanczyk:

But wait, they have the ability to write prescriptions . . . for drugs . . . for psychotropic drugs. They have to be “scientists.”

God bless,
jd

A psychiatrist is a doctor and he has to understand how various drugs work and interact.

Peace,
Ed

 

[jimmy]

It seems as if there are certain ‘value judgments’ in modern psychology (or at least ‘pop psychology’) which fundamentally conflict with Christianity, a few of which are identified below:

1. “The word ‘should’ should never be used”- This revolting cliche is thrown around, as if simply by saying it, it establishes its truth. Clearly, fundamentally contradictory to Christianity (or any ethical position).
2. “Don’t be a martyr.”- Why not? As a Christian, it is a good thing to sacrifice self interest to others.
3. “Don’t feel guilt or shame”. Again, Christianity teaches all human are guilty, not even by actions, but by our very being.

Psychology may be OK as a science- but as a tool for forming people, it cannot be separated from a particular set of values. And those values do not accord with Christianity.

I agree that there are many psychologists who are trying to supplant religion, but to make that an essential part of the definition is wrong. Psychology isn’t a single entity that works as a unity. They disagree on many things, and their values are different. There may be some that hold to the values you mention, but that isn’t all. I have a book written by a psychologist that talks about the seven deadly sins.

Psychology is useful, but it isn’t going to solve all our problems.

 

[Cliff_Jumper]

I agree that there are many psychologists who are trying to supplant religion, but to make that an essential part of the definition is wrong. Psychology isn’t a single entity that works as a unity. They disagree on many things, and their values are different. There may be some that hold to the values you mention, but that isn’t all. I have a book written by a psychologist that talks about the seven deadly sins.

Psychology is useful, but it isn’t going to solve all our problems.

Exactly. Like any science it is helpful for understandings certain facets of the natural world but not all the natural world.

 

[jimmy]

You seem to be pretty biased. You certainly can’t deny that moral relativism plays a critical role in therapy.

And clearly you don’t know anything about psychological therapy if this is your response. As I said above, psychology isn’t monolithic. They don’t all follow the same methods. There are of course Rogerian psychologists who emphasize empathy with the patient. There are also gestault psychologists who emphasize beauty and the arts. There are the Fruedians. There isn’t one way in which therapy is done.

 

[Cliff_Jumper]

Every person on this earth is not exactly the same–in needs, quirks, childhood impact, personality, thought process. We are not robots. People’s minds and hearts differ, it’s called being an individual.
So of course, what is a right move for one person may not be the right move for another.

If you want to call that “moral relativism” go ahead…but in the medical world, that’s called being a good therapist.

I think that by moral relativism stanczyk is referring to the idea of multiple truths or lack of objective truths not personality differences.

 

[RPRPsych]

It seems as if there are certain ‘value judgments’ in modern psychology (or at least ‘pop psychology’) which fundamentally conflict with Christianity, a few of which are identified below:

1. “The word ‘should’ should never be used”- This revolting cliche is thrown around, as if simply by saying it, it establishes its truth. Clearly, fundamentally contradictory to Christianity (or any ethical position).
2. “Don’t be a martyr.”- Why not? As a Christian, it is a good thing to sacrifice self interest to others.
3. “Don’t feel guilt or shame”. Again, Christianity teaches all human are guilty, not even by actions, but by our very being.

Psychology may be OK as a science- but as a tool for forming people, it cannot be separated from a particular set of values. And those values do not accord with Christianity.

Just as there is bad theology (Calvinism, Universalism, and so forth), there is also plenty of bad psychology out there.

Think of a simple question like “what is 2+2?” There is only one correct answer (4), many ways of expressing it (4.0, 8/2, square root of 16, 2 squared, etc…), and an infinite number of wrong answers (1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9… ad infinitum)

Now if that’s possible in simple arithmetic, imagine how it must be for the human mind, which we are only beginning to understand.

For a long time, psychology was driven by theories and speculations, which belonged more to the realm of philosophy than of science. Freudianism. Neo-Freudianism. Behaviorism. And so forth.

Because all these theories had serious flaws, the “advice” and “suggestions” derived from them are equally flawed.

Not all psychology is bad, however. Cognitive-behavioural theories, if interpreted correctly (see, for example, Beck’s book Love is Never Enough on marital problems), do emphasize a sense of personal responsibility, free will, and the possibility of change. The work of Conrad Baars has used Thomistic philosophy to understand the effects of emotional deprivation on people.

To focus on your three specific statements:

1. This is the fruit of moral relativism and postmodernism, not psychology. Even “secular” textbooks on, say, the treatment of alcoholism say that abstinence from alcohol is the ultimate goal - and that sounds like a “should” to me all right. (Of course, sometimes a person may not be ready to hear a “should” yet; things have to be explained to him in small steps.)
2. I think this refers to being a doormat or a victim of abuse rather than a “martyr for the faith”. (Of course, many psychologists are anti-religious, and may misuse the statement to have an anti-religious meaning. But in the context I’ve often heard it - in family therapy, for example - it’s a metaphor. It means, “Stand up for yourself without being offensive or aggressive”. And if we grant that self-defence is legitimate, there’s nothing too wrong with this.)
3. This statement is, sadly, often used by “liberal” psychologists to justify anything under the sun. However, when used to a person with a condition like depression (where inordinate guilt is a symptom) or OCD (where a person can literally feel like he’s damned because of the nature of some of his thoughts), it can be used with caution.

As with everything in life, discernment is the key. The Church rejects nothing of what is true in science, but has always cautioned against excesses.

 

[Qoeleth]

Maybe it is just something trendy in my part of the world- I have heard priests, ‘personal development experts’, even religious formators, say we should never say “should”. (I am aware of the contradiction, of course).

In fact, I have no problem with psychiatrists, and scientific psychologists. Yes, they tend to adopt a stance of relativism- but that would seem to be necessary for the scientific approach. Even believing that there are moral absolutes, it would seem necessary that they vary from one system to another.

My problem is with people who use psychology to develop a model of ‘personal integration’, which does not allow things like self-sacrificing charity, acting out of moral ideals, self-effacement, sexual ‘repression’, placing ideals over ‘reality’, etc. But such things seem to be an essential part of Christianity.