Download Suffering and Posttraumatic Growth

Processing reality through
our personal cultural programming
1. “Mandela is a terrorist”
2. Dr. Nkosozana Zuma after Uganda visit: it’s
condoms!
3. UFO abductions
4. “Obama is the anti-christ”
5. God called me to be a missionary to Cape Town, SA
6. Gay men are child molesters
…how can we “know”?
Epistemology
 Gr. To know, remember or comprehend
 Core word: to cause to stand + upon
 The study of the ground and nature of knowledge
 Can your knowledge claim stand the test of scrutiny?
 How do you justify your belief?
 What is the evidentiary basis of your belief, beyond
mere opinion?
“All observation is theory-laden”
 Determined by bias, assumptions, our history
 We assume that our perception mirrors reality
 Naïve realists: perception is reality
 Anti-realists: no necessary correlation between
perception and reality
 Critical realists: middle ground, reality imposes some
limitations on interpretation, even when assumptions
and bias tend to color these interpretations. But
assumptions and biases can be evaluated, judged.
“All observation is theory-laden”
 We must learn to evaluate the accuracy of our




assumptions
We must illuminate our Blind Spot (JOHARI)
Sin (lack of virtues such as honesty, humility,
diligence, respectfulness, compassion) affects our
thinking…we can NEVER eliminate all error from our
thinking
“Our finitude and fallenness ought to increase our
epistemic humility”
Phillip Yancey, “Only one thing haunts me more than
the sins of my past: What sins am I blind to today?”
Defining Social Research
“A collection of methods and methodologies that
researchers apply systematically to produce
scientifically based knowledge about the social
world” (Neuman, 2006, p. 2)
 A way of going about finding answers
 A systematic process of discovery
 Cannot be seen as a threat to the faith
 One of many ways to “know”
 More structured, organized, and systematic than
alternatives
Alternatives to Social Research
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Authority
Tradition
Common Sense
Media Myths
Personal Experience
Alternatives to Social Research
Authority
2. Tradition Knowledge from:
3. Common Sense Parents
Teachers
It’s
true
4. Mediadon’t
Myths
•Some authorities
use research
Ministers
because
an
•The authority
could also
be wrong
5. Personal
Experience
Books
1.
authority
•Quick,Isimple and cheap TV, media
trust says
it it’s
is limitations
•Has
Professors
true
•We all use it but it’s easy to Government officials
overestimate the expertise
Alternatives to Social Research
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Authority
Tradition
Common Sense
Media Myths
Personal Experience
Alternatives to Social Research
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Authority
•A special case of authority
Tradition
•“this is the way it has always
been”
Common Sense
Media Myths•Church traditions:
communion, appeals to
Personal Experience
accept Jesus “at the altar”,
role of the pastor
•Tradition can hide real
understanding
Alternatives to Social Research
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Authority
Tradition
Common Sense
Media Myths
Personal Experience
•“it just makes sense”
•Beliefs such as “opposites
attract” or “birds of a feather
flock together”
Alternatives to Social Research
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Authority
Tradition
Common Sense
Media Myths
Personal Experience
Alternatives to Social Research
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Authority
Tradition
Common Sense
Media Myths
Personal Experience
•Media has become an important
source of information
•Tend to perpetuate the myths of a
culture
•Image of evangelists, Bible-believing
Authority
Christians, welfare recipients as Black,
mentally ill are violent and dangerous,
Tradition
most elderly
Common
Sense are senile and in nursing
homes
Alternatives to Social Research
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Media Myths
Personal Experience
Alternatives to Social Research
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Authority
Tradition
Common Sense
Media Myths
Personal Experience
Alternatives to Social Research
Authority
2. Tradition
•“Seeing is believing”
•Optical illusions 3.
or Common Sense
mirages
4. Media Myths
•Four mistakes…
5. Personal Experience
1.
1. Overgeneralization:
making claims beyond
what can be justified by
the data
2. Selective observation:
noticing only special data
to reinforce preexisting
thinking
Alternatives to Social Research
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Authority
Tradition
Common Sense
Media Myths
Personal Experience
3. Premature closure:
you have all the answers
and do not need any
more data
4. Halo effect: allowing
prior prestige or
reputation to be overgeneralized onto other
non-related issues
Alternatives to Social Research
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Authority
Tradition
Common Sense
Media Myths
Personal Experience
Social Research
 A way of producing knowledge about people
 Began with Age of Reason or Enlightenment (between
1600s and early 1800s)
 Automatically in conflict with traditional religious
authority
Social Research
 Based on social theory: a system of interconnected
ideas that condenses/ organizes knowledge of social
world; explains how it works
 Built on data: evidences that have been gathered
according to certain rules or procedures
 Empirical: what we can gather through our senses
Social Research
 Based on scientific method
 Promotes skepticism and intersubjectivity (an
agreement about reality that results from comparing
observations from one observer with another)
 Extensive use of communication
 Allows scrutiny by the scientific community
 Invites interaction to question or replicate
Types of Research
Basic research: adding to our fundamental
understanding and knowledge (regardless of
practical or immediate implications)
2. Applied research: program evaluation, or actionoriented research
3. Descriptive research: describe groups, activities,
situations or events; normally using quantitative data
analysis
1.
Types of Research
4. Explanatory research:
 looking for causes and reasons;
 normally based on existing theories
 ground-breaking; normally using qualitative data
analysis
“At best, we can humbly try to evaluate our beliefs
carefully enough to arrive at a contingent certainty;
that is, if our assumptions are correct, and if we
discern an accurate epistemology, and if we apply
our epistemic methodologies accurately, then we
can be tentatively certain about our conclusions.
To hope for (or worse, to claim) more than that is to
assert a god-like quality to which frail, fallen, and
infinite creatures cannot attain.”
Entwistle (2004, p. 90)
“Hard-headed men…are
generally very precise
about what they are
doing; that is why
they are so often quite
wrong about what
they do.”
G.K. Chesterton
Three Methodologies
Three methodologies to help us be
less foolish
Logic
2. Empiricism
3. Revelation and interpretation
1.
Three Methodologies
Three methodologies to help us be
less foolish
Logic
2. Empiricism
3. Revelation and interpretation
1.
Logic
 Imago dei: capacity for rational thought
 To think
 To remember
 To deduce
 To come to a conclusion
 To build a logical argument
 Trusting on the rational consistency of our reasoning
 To refute foolishness, challenge incorrect assumptions,
correct biases, challenge perceptions
Logic
Deductive logic
1.
Establishing truth by combining and evaluating
premises based on certain rules and axioms
“If the sum of the angles of a triangle add up to 180
degrees, and one angle of a triangle is 90 degrees then
the other two angles must together be 90 degrees”
Three elements of a deductive argument



1.
2.
3.
Premise: either true or false
Inference: a proposition that is created after you agree on the
premise
Conclusion: a new statement that is logically connected to
the first two
Logic
Deductive logic
1.



For it to be sound, the argument must start with a true
premise and include a valid inference
A sound argument will lead to true conclusion
Critical to experimental psychopathology (classical
experimental design)
2. Inductive logic
 Developing a generalization from specific instances
 “Probabilistic”, “correlational”
 But correlation does not imply causation
Logic
Examples of Paul using logic?
2. “If all truth is God’s truth, and truth is one, then God
does not contradict himself, and in the final analysis
there will be no conflict between the truth taught in
scripture and truth available from other sources”
(Holmes, 1987, p. 18)
3. E.g.: Logic in the condom distribution debate
1.
Does increased condom distribution
lead to decreases in HIV prevalence?
Three Methodologies
Three methodologies to help us be
less foolish
Logic
2. Empiricism
3. Revelation and interpretation
1.
Three Methodologies
Three methodologies to help us be
less foolish
Logic
2. Empiricism
3. Revelation and interpretation
1.
Empiricism
Gr. “relying on experience”
2. Luke 1: 1-4 “Inasmuch as many have undertaken to
compile an account of the things accomplished
among us, just as they were handed down to us by
those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and
servants of the word, it seemed fitting for me as well,
having investigated everything carefully from the
beginning, to write it out for you in consecutive order,
most excellent Theophilus; so that you may know the
exact truth about the things you have been taught”
3. This is not speculation: I investigated the sources!
1.
Empiricism
4. Based on the scientific method
 Create a theory or hypothesis
 Test the hypothesis
 Observe the results of the test
 Support or refute the theory or hypothesis (never
“prove”)
5. Science also uses testimony of past witnesses,
authorities

“literature review”
Three Methodologies
Three methodologies to help us be
less foolish
Logic
2. Empiricism
3. Revelation and interpretation
1.
Three Methodologies
Three methodologies to help us be
less foolish
Logic
2. Empiricism
3. Revelation and interpretation
1.
Revelation
1. General Revelation:
“For since the creation of the world His invisible
attributes, His eternal power and divine nature,
have been clearly seen, being understood through
what has been made, so that they are without
excuse” (Romans 1:20)
2. Special Revelation: Old and New Testaments as
well as theophanies, miracles, dreams, visions.
Hermeneutics
God’s word is without fault but human
understanding of that word is not infallible
2. Rules of interpretation
3. Science and art of making sure that the
message is accurately understood
1.
Shakespeare’s Romeo & Juliet
Act 2 Scene 2: O Romeo, Romeo! Wherefore art
thou Romeo?
 Meaning must be determined by immediate
context, overall context, specific meanings of
the word that may be unclear (“wherefore”)
 Romeo is a Montague and Juliet a Capulet
Hermeneutics
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
What does the passage say?
Who wrote the book and to whom?
Why was it written?
What was the cultural and historic context of the
author and his audience?
What genre is being used?
Are there unclear words?
What is the immediate and overall context?
How does it relate to other scriptures?
How has it been understood historically by other
credible sources?
A Unified Model of Knowing
There is a real world out there and it can be
perceived by human beings
2. God is the transcendent creator: He upholds and
sustains it
3. We are limited by our objectivity because we are
situated in context of time, culture, locale
4. Human beings are rational, relational, spiritual
and biological
1.
A Unified Model of Knowing
5. A Christian worldview recognizes
 All truth is God’s truth and can be known through
rational, experimental or revelational means
 Our creative and intellectual abilities are God-given
 Reality is both physical and spiritual
 Our ability to know is limited
 Various means of epistemic inquiry can be used to
evaluate truth claims (such as rational discourse,
experimentation, and hermeneutics)
A Unified Model of Knowing
6. Historical events can be explored through
archeology, geology, written records, oral
traditions, etc.
7. The future is not completely determined but a
limited degree of predictive accuracy is possible
“There are two books laid before us to study,
to prevent our falling into error; the book of
God’s word, which reveals the will of God;
and the book of God’s works, which express
His power”
Francis Bacon
“An approach informed by both psychology and
theology is desirable if we seek a fuller picture of
human nature and functioning than we could gain
from either discipline alone”
Entwistle (2004, p. 105)
Conclusions
“It is therefore not just our right to freely pursue truth,
but our religious duty. It is indeed, part of what it
means to worship God not only with our hearts but
with our minds”
Myers & Jeeves, 2003, p. 214-215
Conclusions
1.
God is the source of all truth
His word: Bible (exegesis)
b. His works: Creation (scientific method)
a.
2. We must become competent readers of both books;
develop competent methodological skills to evaluate
adequacy
of exegesis and merits of theological systems
b. of social theory and merits of social research
a.
Conclusions
3. Scripture is clear on
a. God as the source of all
b. The nature and sinfulness of man
c. The redemptive act of Jesus on the cross
d. The purpose and future of humanity
e. What we should believe and how we should conduct
ourselves
f. How we should understand His works
Conclusions
4. Science is clear on
a. How we exist as biological, social, cognitive, and
psychological beings
b. How universal scientific laws operate (gravity,
aerodynamics, chemistry, electronics, etc)
c. How our world system functions (plant life, animal life,
astronomy, health science, etc)
d. How growth and decline take place (in our bodies, in
ecosystems, in agriculture)
Conclusions
5. It is only in reading BOTH books that we have the
most comprehensive picture of human nature and
functioning
6. Conflicts occur at the interpretive level of human
understanding
Our interpretation of either source of knowledge is
fallible
b. Our allegiance is not to theology or social science IT IS
TO GOD AS THE AUTHOR OF BOTH
a.
Conclusions
7. The integrative paradigm implies that there is no valid
distinction between the “sacred” and the “secular”
“You say grace before meals…But I say grace before the
concert and the opera, and grace before the play and the
pantomime, and grace before I open a book, and grace
before sketching, painting, and swimming, fencing, boxing,
walking, playing, dancing, and grace before I dip the pen in
ink”
G.K. Chesterton from his journals
Theology
Science
Reveals
God’s word
God’s works
Epistemology
Revelational
Empirical
Methodology
Hermeneutics
Scientific method
Locus of
explanation
Generally historical
and sociocultural
Descriptive,
developmental and
experimental
Level of
explanation
Metaphysical
Scientific
Frame of
reference
Broad, global,
panoramic
Circumscribed,
close-up
“Then I think, since in relation to the book of
nature, we astronomers are priests of Almighty
God, we should not consider the glory of our
intellects, but the glory of God….I am content
with the honour of standing guard with my
discovery at the door of the shrine at whose high
altar Copernicus performs divine service”
Johannes Kepler in a letter to a friend
March 26th, 1598