| Poster | Thread | John173
Member
Joined: 2007/1/30
Posts: 289
Omaha
| | Re: | | Hey TJ,
I apologize for the sermonizing. My heart wasn't quite right when I was writing it. Oddly enough my internet access vanished as soon as I posted it.
I find it interesting the distinction that you make between psychology and psychiatry. My distinction is the complete opposite. Maybe you see what I mean about the terminology getting in the way of communication. I agree with you that psycho-therapy is worthless. This is what I mean when I refer to psychiatry. Psychology, as apposed to psychologists, is to me simply the study of behavioral patterns. This I believe has some merit in ascertaining root issues in a hurting persons life. Often times it is difficult for the hurting to pinpoint the source. In many cases the necessary step in helping someone to find healing is to identify the cause and then help them to forgive them, this stage is where we truly must rely on the Holy Spirit.
In His Love,
Doug
_________________
Doug Fussell
|
|  2007/2/25 20:49 | Profile |
| | Re: Christianity and Psychology | | tjservant said
Quote:
[b]I support psychiatry with all my heart.[/b] This thread was about psychology...
Once again psychology and psychiatry are 100% completely different. You can not lump them together...
[b]The reality is that psychology has never been and never will be a science.[/b]
tj,
I think there are cultural difference between the US and the UK in both the definitions and practices of both psychiatry and psychology; also, that people who have benefitted from one or the other, are at a distinct disadvantage when attempting to discern exactly what you are against in psychology.
Now, before you lay it on me too heavily, I am well aware that psychology is heavily influenced by its practitioners - which is definitely wrong in certain circumstances, just as it is overwhelmingly helpful in others.
One of my biggest complaints about 'psychology', is that there is (imho) very little real intelligence applied by researchers. It is rather as if they are far too close to the wood to see the trees. But this doesn't mean their work is vaccuous. Maybe it is, rather, that they should be the last people allowed near [i]clients[/i], in a [u]therapeutic[/u] capacity.
I particularly want to dispute with you the idea that ALL psychology is not a science.
This is definitely not true in the area of recovery from sexual abuse in childhood. But, it takes an appropriately trained, and dedicated-to-professional-excellence practitioner, to deliver the service an individual client needs.
There are huge problems of lack of continuity of care in this field, also, a world of assumptions on the part of other less qualified psychologists, (and psychiatrists!!!) on what that field involves. But, it would definitely [i]not[/i] be true that most of the clients in this category would be better off with a psychiatrist... at least, not in the UK.
Over here, psychiatry is associated with sequestering people, with their mental pain, in a pool of medication, and of believing it is a waste of time to hope that their minds could heal.
That may be an over-generalisation. I don't mean there are no people who need medication or who should have it; I just mean there is a dearth of help for those who could leave it behind, to do just that - leave it behind.
Unless a 'client' gets appropriately therapeutic counselling and support over the long term, they are likely to be picking up the same prescription from their GP for years and years, with no other intervention being offered or given, and if it is, it so time-limited as to run the risk of doing harm rather than good.
That's why over here, it is worth searching out a psychologist rather than allowing oneself to be whisked through the psychiatric system. History is everything here. Once [i]labeled[/i] as a 'psychiatric case', it's hard to shake it off. It affects everything - socially, employmentwise and even with law enforcement services. |
| | 2007/2/26 9:26 | | tjservant
Member
Joined: 2006/8/25
Posts: 1658
Indiana USA
| | Re: dorcas | | dorcas
Quote:
I particularly want to dispute with you the idea that ALL psychology is not a science.
I went on to say
"I only have issues with psycho-therapy. That is what over 90% of todays psychologists use and practice. Psycho-therapy is what is commonly thought of when someone mentions psychology."
It has never been proven to be a science. In fact as time goes by and more studies are being done on psychology itself, many are finding that it has not been and never will be able to be scientifically based. Theres just no science involved.
The study of the brain is scientific. You can touch it.
The study of the mind is not. It is much more spiritual in nature.
Christianity is not scientific, and never will be. It requires faith.
Psychology is not scientific, and never will be. It also requires faith.
There are thousands of articles out there on this.
Peace
TJ
_________________
TJ
|
| | 2007/2/26 9:55 | Profile |
| | Re: Christianity and Psychology | | Hi tj,
Now I'm beginning to get where you're coming from.
Quote:
Christianity is not scientific, and never will be. It requires faith.
Psychology is not scientific, and never will be. It also requires faith.
You have an idea that if you can't see it or touch it, there is no science involved?
Or, maybe that if you can't see it or touch it it's not real?
Both these thoughts cut completely across the way I think. Not only do I believe the invisible is more real than the visible, but I believe faith is not imaginary, and therefore its operation is as scientific as using a newly sharpened carving knife to lay a roast in slices.
Furthermore, Paul says it is a law.
Romans 3:27
Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by [u]the law of faith[/u]
.
Now, I know we still don't know what causes Gravity - except perhaps another invisible law of God's - but I'm sure you'd agree its existence is a scientific fact.... or would you?
Have I misunderstood you? |
| | 2007/2/26 10:08 | | tjservant
Member
Joined: 2006/8/25
Posts: 1658
Indiana USA
| | Re: | | Quote:
Now I'm beginning to get where you're coming from.
No...not even close.
Quote:
You have an idea that if you can't see it or touch it, there is no science involved?
I don't live in the dark ages, and left that kind of thinking thirty years ago when I was four. I was just trying to use a simple example to explain it.
Quote:
Now, I know we still don't know what causes Gravity - except perhaps another invisible law of God's - but I'm sure you'd agree its existence is a scientific fact.... or would you?
We have known what causes gravity for a very long time. We can scientifically prove gravity exists. We can do test that repeatedly and consistently prove our theories.
This is not the case with psychology, more specifically pscho-therapy.
Quote:
Have I misunderstood you?
Completely. I have never been more misunderstood.
TJ
_________________
TJ
|
| | 2007/2/26 10:29 | Profile |
| | Re: Christianity and Psychology | |
Hi tj,
Quote:
Completely. I have never been more misunderstood.
I really am sorry. :-) I'm not [i]trying[/i] to be dense - honestly - but, while you've given a great repost to my question about Gravity (although I wasn't suggesting it's existence could not be proved scientifically, but that we don't know what [i]causes[/i] it), you haven't given quite the same vote of confidence in the scientific nature of faith.....
Did I misunderstand you there, also?
EDIT: Actually, I see you believe the cause of gravity is known. That's ok. I realise I'm not convinced by the explanations given by science, which seem to be more in the realm of [i]definition[/i], rather than [u]explanation[/u].... but that's just may take on the subject. |
| | 2007/2/26 10:47 | | tjservant
Member
Joined: 2006/8/25
Posts: 1658
Indiana USA
| | Re: | | dorcas
Quote:
you haven't given quite the same vote of confidence in the scientific nature of faith.....
Thats because faith is not scientifically based
its spiritual.
Thats why psycho-therapy would be better described as a religion than a science.
There is plenty of information on the web about how un- scientific, un-reliable, and un-biblical psycho-therapy is. I think you might enjoy reading some of it
maybe not.
There are many articles, saturated with scripture, used in context by Godly individuals much more educated on this matter than I, that easily refute the use of psychotherapy.
Please dont dismiss all the contradictions and faults with psychology because I have failed to properly address it.
I have posted to warn, not to contradict.
Peace be with you
TJ
_________________
TJ
|
| | 2007/2/26 11:33 | Profile |
| | Re: Christianity and Psychology | |
Hi tj,
Please, listen, I am not a supporter of sloppy psychological practice, whatever the practitioner calls it. Nor am I in favour of a 'one size fits all' type of approach. That would be ridiculous also. Therefore, I know that 'psychotherapy' is a loose term for certain treatment models (I don't even know which ones) and pre-suppose certain prevailing conditions for there to be any hope at all of it being helpful to the client.
All that said, the actual [i]knowing[/i] of how people (in general) will respond to the right or the wrong approaches to helping them, is a VITAL part of the practice of [i]any[/i] kind of talking therapy, and this [i]must[/i] be embedded in anything useful which comes out of psychiatric practice, also. This is probably my main point.
You said
Quote:
Thats because faith is not scientifically based
its spiritual.
again.
Again, therefore I ask you to explain how 'spiritual' is 'not scientifically based'.
I ask because I'm struggling with the logical (to my mind) presupposition of making sense of your statement, that [i][b]if[/b][/i] 'it's spiritual' it [u]cannot[/u] be [i]proved[/i] by practise and experience, in the same way as 'science' can. |
| | 2007/2/26 11:44 | | tjservant
Member
Joined: 2006/8/25
Posts: 1658
Indiana USA
| | Re: dorcas | | dorcas
Quote:
I ask because I'm struggling with the logical (to my mind) presupposition of making sense of your statement, that if 'it's spiritual' it cannot be proved by practise and experience, in the same way as 'science' can.
I believe most of the people reading this know what I am talking about.
If you care to research this topic for yourself you will learn much more than trying to figure out why I used the words I did.
I have nothing else to say.
TJ
_________________
TJ
|
| | 2007/2/26 11:54 | Profile |
|
