Author Topic: Religion and the APA  (Read 793 times)

Offline doorknob (OP)

Religion and the APA
« on: February 14, 2017, 08:56:51 AM »
APA= Appointed psychology assholes.

Just kidding.

APA=American Psychological association.

I've always wondered about how psychologist view religion. They accept it as a part of psychology. Apparently humans have the inherent need for religion. They view religion as needed coping skill.

I'm like what? Really? Religion is a coping skill?

Sure People use religion as a coping skill but I'd say that, that's not actually a healthy coping skill!

They also skirt around the subject of atheism and how that is viewed by psychologists. 

Basically the chickens don't want to create waves. As a branch of science I think they should take this issue a bit more seriously. But I can understand why they don't. The public isn't ready to hear that religion is unhealthy psychologically. Can you imagine the uproar.

Of course right now they view it as a much needed coping skill, I am the one declaring that to be none sense! But it'll be interesting if a group of psychologists grow some balls and prove that religion is unhealthy. I'm still waiting.

Offline Sorginak

Re: Religion and the APA
« Reply #1 on: February 14, 2017, 09:29:37 AM »
As a branch of science I think they should take this issue a bit more seriously.

Except that most scientists view psychology as a pseudoscience. 
When I feel weak, I prefer to make myself stronger through introspection rather than resort to religion.

Offline SGOS

Re: Religion and the APA
« Reply #2 on: February 14, 2017, 09:46:59 AM »
Hey wait a minute!  APA is one of my favorite posters here.

Offline SGOS

Re: Religion and the APA
« Reply #3 on: February 14, 2017, 10:04:29 AM »
APA= Appointed psychology assholes.

Just kidding.

APA=American Psychological association.

I've always wondered about how psychologist view religion. They accept it as a part of psychology. Apparently humans have the inherent need for religion. They view religion as needed coping skill.

I'm like what? Really? Religion is a coping skill?

Sure People use religion as a coping skill but I'd say that, that's not actually a healthy coping skill!

They also skirt around the subject of atheism and how that is viewed by psychologists. 

Basically the chickens don't want to create waves. As a branch of science I think they should take this issue a bit more seriously. But I can understand why they don't. The public isn't ready to hear that religion is unhealthy psychologically. Can you imagine the uproar.

Of course right now they view it as a much needed coping skill, I am the one declaring that to be none sense! But it'll be interesting if a group of psychologists grow some balls and prove that religion is unhealthy. I'm still waiting.

You are right.  Most all neurosis and psychological disorders, from mild to the debilitating in my Abnormal Psychology text, are coping skills, and they almost always involve some sort of fear or misperception of reality.  Possibly they all do.  At least I can't think of an exception right now.  And one would think that a primary focus of psychologists would be to help clients clear up misperceptions of reality.  Psychosis and chemical imbalance is something else.  I wouldn't consider religion a psychosis, although it can show up in the chaos of psychosis.

But religion is just off limits because it's so widespread.  Like the rest of the coping skills, it may or may not be harmful.  It might be helpful if the client is simply incapable of accepting reality.  But avoiding reality is not something I would ever advocate as a first choice.  There just isn't much upside in that.

Offline doorknob (OP)

Re: Religion and the APA
« Reply #4 on: February 14, 2017, 10:06:18 AM »
Except that most scientists view psychology as a pseudoscience.

Where are you getting your information from?

Psychologist even write peer reviewed journals. Experiments are done whether you agree with their accuracy or not. It is a branch of science.

What scientists aren't taking this seriously. Can you site and sources supporting this?

I'm just asking because this is news to me.
« Last Edit: February 14, 2017, 10:09:04 AM by doorknob »

Offline Sorginak

Re: Religion and the APA
« Reply #5 on: February 14, 2017, 10:08:07 AM »
But religion is just off limits because it's so widespread.

Smoking cigarettes, drinking alcohol, are also coping mechanisms that are worldly widespread.  Yet, we recognize the potential dangers of both, especially in relation to the connection of alcoholism to alcohol and cancer to smoking.
When I feel weak, I prefer to make myself stronger through introspection rather than resort to religion.

Offline Sorginak

Re: Religion and the APA
« Reply #6 on: February 14, 2017, 10:17:39 AM »
Where are you getting your information from?

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/the-curious-wavefunction/is-psychology-a-e2809creale2809d-science-does-it-really-matter/

Quote
Criticism of psychology's lack of rigor is not new; people have been arguing about wishy-washy speculations in fields like evolutionary psychology and the limitations of fMRI scans for years.

The same criticism has also been leveled at other social sciences including economics and sociology and yet the debate in economics does not seem to be as rancorous as that in psychology. At the heart of Berezow's argument is psychology's lack of quantifiability and dearth of accurate terminology. He points out research in fields like happiness where definitions are neither rigid nor objective and data is not quantifiable.

Happiness research is a great example of why psychology isn't science. How exactly should "happiness" be defined? The meaning of that word differs from person to person and especially between cultures. What makes Americans happy doesn't necessarily make Chinese people happy. How does one measure happiness? Psychologists can't use a ruler or a microscope, so they invent an arbitrary scale. Today, personally, I'm feeling about a 3.7 out of 5. How about you?

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/under-the-influence/201308/the-psychology-the-psychology-isnt-science-argument

Quote
Psychologists do unscientific things
Psychology doesn't define its terminology well enough to be considered a science
Psychology relies too heavily on subjective experience
Psychology isn't falsifiable
When I feel weak, I prefer to make myself stronger through introspection rather than resort to religion.

Offline doorknob (OP)

Re: Religion and the APA
« Reply #7 on: February 14, 2017, 10:27:04 AM »
Yes there are always a few that don't take psychology seriously how ever, as it stands now psychology IS a branch of science.

Offline doorknob (OP)

Re: Religion and the APA
« Reply #8 on: February 14, 2017, 10:37:55 AM »


I'm just posting this for people who are interested in why I bring this up.

Online Mr.Obvious

Re: Religion and the APA
« Reply #9 on: February 14, 2017, 10:41:33 AM »
Religion isn't only a psychological experience. It's also a sociological phenomenon.
Which is The main reason Why I personally wouldn't lump it in with psychological disorders, delusions and coping mechanisms. At least not automatically.
E = Mc²

In the end, we are all standing in the dark,
trying to figure out why we are here.
But let us not choose one direction
without proof of where it is headed.

Check your pocket for matches
so we can observe and learn together
as fast friends and relative idiots.

Offline SGOS

Re: Religion and the APA
« Reply #10 on: February 14, 2017, 10:42:44 AM »
I had a psychology professor mention, but only in passing (it wasn't a rant), that psychology tries to be a science, and indeed observations in formal texts were always supported by some study, sometimes even from rat behavior.  So there is an attempt to make it science, and it is, but not to the extent of physics.  The prof's opinion was that it would have been more productive to approach psychology from a philosophical perspective, rather than a scientific one.

Although, the area of philosophy and ideology are risky areas in which to seek for truth.  Perhaps the human mind and all of its idiosyncrasies simply doesn't gravitate to truth.  Who knows?

But in fact, I could list renowned practitioners in the field who flowered back in the days when I was studying this stuff, and they all built their methodologies on philosophical underpinnings.  However, they didn't reject science, and there was a thread of continuity that ran through all their methods.  Not that the shamans and faith healers didn't try to invade the field, but they were never taken seriously.

Philosophy can be useful, but it takes prudence and care, perhaps some scientific like constraints, less we end up putting our mental health in the hands of Deepak Chopra.

Offline doorknob (OP)

Re: Religion and the APA
« Reply #11 on: February 14, 2017, 10:55:49 AM »
Psychological research is done using the scientific method. It may not have started out as science as much of what sigman freud said turns out to be false but today it is very much a science. Just as serious as physics or any other branch of science. Any one claiming it is not is ignorant as to what goes on in the field. It is the study of human behavior. If they have a discrepancy with it they can read peer reviewed journals and do their own experiments proving it's not accurate. 

But to claim it isn't science is some one's ignorance. Just like creationists.

Offline doorknob (OP)

Re: Religion and the APA
« Reply #12 on: February 14, 2017, 11:15:02 AM »
I apologize as there are some arguments going on in the scientific community that I was unaware of. But as of now it is officially a branch of social science and as serious as any other branch of science.

And I apologize for arguing that fact.

Offline Baruch

Re: Religion and the APA
« Reply #13 on: February 14, 2017, 01:29:43 PM »
APA= Appointed psychology assholes.

Just kidding.

APA=American Psychological association.

I've always wondered about how psychologist view religion. They accept it as a part of psychology. Apparently humans have the inherent need for religion. They view religion as needed coping skill.

I'm like what? Really? Religion is a coping skill?

Sure People use religion as a coping skill but I'd say that, that's not actually a healthy coping skill!

They also skirt around the subject of atheism and how that is viewed by psychologists. 

Basically the chickens don't want to create waves. As a branch of science I think they should take this issue a bit more seriously. But I can understand why they don't. The public isn't ready to hear that religion is unhealthy psychologically. Can you imagine the uproar.

Of course right now they view it as a much needed coping skill, I am the one declaring that to be none sense! But it'll be interesting if a group of psychologists grow some balls and prove that religion is unhealthy. I'm still waiting.

The Varieties of Religious Experience ... by William James .. a founding daddy of American academic psychology.  The elderly William James was impressed by Freud, at least as a new approach.  There has probably been much research since then, but not advertised (the church would disapprove).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychology_of_religion ... you could also try this new Google thing ;-)

http://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2013/03/religion-spirituality.aspx - for APA view specifically
« Last Edit: February 14, 2017, 01:38:36 PM by Baruch »
שלום

Offline Baruch

Re: Religion and the APA
« Reply #14 on: February 14, 2017, 01:31:58 PM »
Except that most scientists view psychology as a pseudoscience.

Most of psychology (not neuro science) deals with psychosomatic things.  Materialists don't believe in anything psychosomatic.  Most scientists are materialists .. hence most view psychology as a pseudoscience.  But most scientists are wrong.  For example most scientists probably consider economics to be a science, when it is clearly water witching ;-)
שלום