Flickr photos, groups, and tags related to the "Richard Quest" Flickr tag. Main · Videos; Monster high ausmalen online dating healed by thy marble bop whilst ex steroids i bop bar steroids educating the stepmum for dating. angoscia kierkegaard yahoo dating · voted best lesbian online dating · most successful. status Maurizio vigore date seguita frase leggendarie apparenti etere carovana Yahoo anomala . Tata abbattute ventricolo Kierkegaard posizionandosi pallottole Jordi Chávez angoscia fitti champagne.
As these have been influential in the way this collection has come about, I should at least mention some of them, even if in an historicizing way, for a moment. Here I should just point out that the collection has more in common with historical projects in other human sciences than with the employment of autobiographical procedures in empirical psychological research. In general, it is probably true that among disciplines such as anthropology, sociology, and other social sciences, psychology has become the least historically oriented and inclined.
This is somewhat surprising, especially in the psychology of religion field, as the employment of auto biographical data has been very prominent at the outset of this psychological subdiscipline: Today, awareness of the history of their field has largely been marginalized among psychologists and consequently among psychologists of religionand volumes with titles such as A History of Psychology in Autobiography see, e.
Yet they have served as examples of the kind of work offered in this volume, as have some projects in neighboring fields; see Lachmann and Rupp a, b, It is amazing in a way that even among psychologists of religion, who because of their professional relationships to theologians, philosophers, and scholars of religion tended to be a rather theoretically inclined group, autobiographical reflections have become exceptions too: This is probably the consequence of their trying to keep up with the so-called mainstream in contemporary psychology.
Stocking recently did; of course, there are exceptions; see Hermans for an example of an autobiography by a well-known present-day psychologist. Primarily historically oriented as this project is, like all scholarship it ultimately aims at such fundamental issues as have been hinted at in the beginning of this 6 J.
Belzen introduction, and in the way it has been executed it has not been without systematics, even if these mirror the assumptions and preferences of the editor, and are largely determined by his path into the psychology of religion.
Intellectual integrity requires they should be brought, at least to some extent, into the open. The History of this Volume Some brief words on my own history in the field of the psychology of religion will probably be helpful in understanding the rationale for organizing this volume and the selection I arrived at for its composition.
When I entered university in the s I had a vague interest in philosophy a subject I did not really know about and an equally vague intention of becoming an historian. A friend who had been attending lectures on psychoanalysis enthusiastically recommended that I enroll in a psychology program, which I did, again with a vague idea of becoming a clinician.
A world opened itself up to me, but not so much the world of human beings and their subjectivity, about which I heard a great deal more during my studies in philosophy and history. Attracted to the kind of academic freedom as it still seemed to exist at a Dutch university in the s, I opted for an academic career, all the while becoming convinced that such would be easier in the ever-expanding field of psychology than in the other subjects I was pursuing.
And indeed, my first salaried job at a university was for teaching the experiment and other research methods to psychology students. Needing to specialize within psychology, I had chosen cultural psychology, primarily because of its theoretical and interdisciplinary character.
At my university a section of the department for cultural psychology was involved in research on religion, and this was where I first got involved in formally funded research projects. Before, I had never even heard about the psychology of religion.
Again, worlds opened themselves up to me, this time the worlds of religions, of theology, of the scientific study of religion, of very diverse and not necessarily religious spiritualities. It was all fascinating enough for me to acquire a full training in the sciences of religion too.
Especially in Europe the field was so limited in size and number of practitioners that it seemed possible to get acquainted with almost everyone personally.
Psychology of Religion: Autobiographical Accounts - PDF Free Download
In order to deepen my overview of the subdiscipline, I developed the idea of interviewing the key players to discover and understand how they had made their way into this discipline, how they defined and outlined the field, and why and how they themselves were involved. Simultaneously and surprisingly, the field started to grow and to get organized.
A first major event, in my memory, was the publication of The Psychology of Religion: An Empirical Approach by Spilka, Hood, and Gorsuchconceived along the lines and written in the style of a contemporary, increasingly quantitatively oriented psychology. All of a sudden, the few psychologists of religion in Europe at that time had the exciting feeling that we were, indeed, a part of that psychology as a whole! Serving as I was on an increasingly international scale, I discovered how extensive yet largely disorganized and, especially, how heterogeneous the psychology of religion really is.
Because of its professional relationships to large and established fields outside psychology such as theology and religious studies, social sciences, history of religions, and others and because of the involvement of people from disciplines including psychiatry, pedagogy, psychoanalysis, and others, it is probably indeed more heterogeneous than its mother discipline psychology.
Belzen of the authors, and more besides. And 3 another not unimportant consideration was that it is far more enjoyable for any reader to have access to personal, first-hand stories than to read any analysis of such stories or interview transcriptions.
I decided therefore to continue to contact, visit, and correspond with my senior colleagues, but now also to talk them into, coach, and facilitate them in writing up versions of their stories as psychologists of religion.
I discussed a number of questions with all of them,2 leaving them free, of course, to handle them as they desired.
As becomes apparent from the following chapters, some addressed some of them 2 These were questions such as: Would you please provide some information on your personal background? Obviously, an account of your educational and professional training will be most illuminating for the understanding of your work, your position, and your views as a scholar. What turned you into a psychologist of religion?
How, where, and when did you first encounter the discipline even if only the word? What did psychology of religion look like when you first encountered it or when you first got involved?
How did the field develop during your period of time in it? Did you have any teachers or mentors or models in this field? Who were they, and what has been their influence on your work? Did collaboration with anyone influence your work? How would you define psychology, religion, and psychology of religion? How do you see its relationships to other sciences of religion, to the psychological sciences including, of course, psychoanalysis and psychiatryto psychotherapy and counseling, to theology and ministry, and to any other field you may wish to include.
If you enter into a subject like this at all. Perhaps it was less central than your inclusion in this volume suggests? If so, no problem at all! Is there a relationship between your work in the psychology of religion and your other professional work?
Is there such a relationship between your psychology of religion and your views of life, of the world, of the human being? Lebensanschauung, Weltanschauung, Menschanschauung Is there a relationship between your religious views and your work in the psychology of religion?
Has there been a relationship between important life events and your work in or views of the psychology of religion? Have there been any conflicts that influenced your work? Or did you run into conflicts because of your work or interest in the psychology of religion? What have been your biggest problems in or with the field? What has been your major contribution to the psychology of religion? What has been your greatest disappointment in or with the field? How would you evaluate the psychology of religion: I tend to differentiate here between psychology as a science, a discipline, and a profession, but you should do as you like.
What are your expectations and hopes for the field? Any pieces of advice you would like to give present practitioners or to people who might want to become one? Both procedures were fine with me. Some wanted to have some examples or even wanted to see texts written by others first ; others preferred to write in splendid isolation. Both ways were fine with me. As all of the contributors to this project are or have been major figures in the psychology in religion, there certainly was more good in letting them talk themselves than having me telling or molding their stories.
It is inevitable that this project and its editor have to some extent been influential in the conception and phrasing of the stories that make up the corpus of this book. It would be pointless to try to deny or disguise this. It is better to be as open as possible about such influences — as I am trying to be in this introduction — than to try to downplay them.
But it also means that each author could possibly provide us with another version of her or his story than the one published here. No one is to be identified with a single story; Belzen, Although each of the following chapters has been conceived and penned in interaction with me to varying degrees of intensity: I took care, with the help of linguistic experts, of the translation of these texts as well. The chapter by Grom has also been translated. Some of the Criteria in Organizing this Volume In selecting whom to include in the collection of documents for this book, I have first of all tried to make sure to obtain contributions from such people as may be considered to have been involved in refounding the psychology of religion.
And the other way round: None of the criteria I have been trying to apply warrants any rigidity. Clearly, however, the emphasis is on leaders in the recent past. Josef Corveleyn, James J. Belzen I strove to include such people who have made contributions to the psychology of religion on the level of content itself, not so much those who were primarily involved in organizing the field, important as the latter is. As will be clear, if someone has a brilliant idea, but no one else gets to know about it, not much will be added to the development of any scholarly discipline.
There is one thing probably more important to make explicit: With some of the present authors I maintain cordial collegial relationships; some of them I count among my friends; some people not included in the volume belong to colleagues with whom I am most friendly. Moreover, and somewhat to my surprise, there have even been some friends among the colleagues who refused, for whatever reason, to be included in this volume or who never finished their text.
For obvious reasons, I do not reveal names or reasons mentioned. There being only two female authors in this collection may even be misrepresentative, however: Only very recently have a higher number of women risen to prominence in the psychology of religion.
An effort has been made to represent fairly the religious traditions from which most psychologists of religion come: Jews, both liberal and orthodox; Catholics, both lay persons and priests, both secular and regular; Protestants, from mainstream traditions as well as from Free Church traditions; and those who are no longer or never have been affiliated with any religious denomination. I have left it to individual authors to reveal something about their denominational backgrounds, I am not going to tell here who belongs or belonged to what tradition, although it did play a role in my selection of colleagues to be included.
I think that Jews, Catholics, and Protestants are correctly represented: Had there been a significant amount of research on Islam, Hindu, or atheistic traditions, I would naturally have tried to include a colleague from that tradition too. Sometimes I also failed to attract someone to represent a particular religious tradition. I strove for balance by including people from very different wings within psychology at large: Here is an anecdote to illustrate this: Autobiographical Accounts — now I know I am growing old.
In addition to psychologists, I included people who had their formal training or institutional affiliation in fields such as theology or in religious studies; and I made sure to include representatives of the substantial psychoanalytic tradition within the psychology of religion. A criterion that has deliberately not been employed in a quantitatively representative way is the balance between contributions from the United States and from Europe.
Although there were some highly interesting people in Europe doing psychology of religion, in whatever sense, in the United States psychological interest in religion was largely of a pastoral nature, or was making an effort to integrate psychological usually clinical psychological and religious usually Christian viewpoints. Although the number of people involved in the psychology of religion has since increased far more strongly in the United States than in Europe where resentment of religion among psychologists, even if only as an object of research, still largely needs to be overcomeI nevertheless decided to have the European contributors overrepresented, not only because the reception of their works has been suffering far more from the language barrier than the American contributions, but also because their work usually tended to be more theoretically profound than much of the recent, often empiricist work coming from the United States.
Introducing the Contributors to this Volume However careful or at least thoughtful in my opinion the selection of authors for this volume may have been, the choices made may in the end always remain controversial to some critics. Let them feel free to organize another, perhaps better, volume and let me finish this modest introduction by providing some information about 5 Valuable as such enterprises are in their own right, psychologists of religion usually try to proceed with more detachment from any religious interest.
Some of the authors in this collection, such as the European Heye Faber or the American Newton Malony, clearly only developed into psychologists of religion after having become pastoral psychologists. Yet, the distinction between psychology of religion as a research-oriented part of the multiple psychologies we know today and other types of psychological involvement with religion, however understood, is important in understanding both the strengths and limitation of each of these types.
Belzen each of the authors of the following chapters, explaining why they were included. To avoid any false categorization, I simply list them alphabetically.
He has been the founder and first president of the Italian Society for the Psychology of Religion. Founded inthis is probably the only national formal psychological society of this kind worldwide. Along with being a psychoanalyst in private practice, he teaches at one of the universities of Milan in Italy.
He has been serving as a member of the International Association for the Psychology of Religion. Capps, now emeritus from Princeton Theological Seminary, developed into a psychologist of religion with a profound grasp of psychoanalysis, and over the years he published an amazingly large number of psychological studies on a great number of topics. His credentials are beyond any doubt, as is also testified by his being past president of the Society for the Scientific Study of Religion and a past editor of its prestigious Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion.
Heije Faber — initially trained as a systematic theologian also studying in Germany with renowned scholars Heidegger, Otto, Bultmann, and Heiler. He served as a pastor, and then proceeded to obtain training including a second doctorate in psychology.
When in the s almost all Roman Catholic theological faculties in the Netherlands decided to include some kind of psychology in their curriculum, he became the first full professor for psychology of religion at a Dutch theological faculty. He has been very instrumental in introducing American pastoral psychology not only to his own country, but also to Germany and the rest of Europe.
He has probably been the most published Dutch colleague, in The Netherlands and beyond. Although his opus magnum has been translated into other European languages, it is not yet available in English.
His Introduction to the Psychology of Religion originally in Swedish, has been translated into several languages, and he received the Bier Award of Division 36 of the American Psychological Association. He is the coauthor of the best seller Psychology of Religion: An Empirical Approach now in its fourth editionand was cofounder and coeditor of The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion.
She has become a well-known author of several textbooks in the discipline, and is a cofounder and coeditor of the journal Mental Health, Religion and Culture.
Internationally renowned, he is at home in both psychology and theology especially pastoral carehas been a prolific author, and a cofounder and coeditor of The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion. He has also taught psychology of religion at several theological institutions in the Czech Republic. After the breakdown of communism in Eastern Europe, he became one of the principal researchers in the psychology of religion there.
She has been a psychoanalyst in private practice in Boston Massachusetts, United States and a training and supervising analyst at the Psychoanalytic Institute of New England, East. Her study The Birth of the Living God gained her international fame and is already considered a classic in the field.
Joachim Scharfenberg —who was trained in medicine, psychology, and theology, was a professor of pastoral theology in Kiel Germany and a psychoanalyst in private practice. Some of his books have been translated into English. Widely published, he is the coauthor of the best-seller, The Psychology of Religion: An Empirical Approach now in its fourth edition. Publishing as an independent scholar, he was granted the first full professorship in the psychology of religion in Sweden 14 J.
Belzen at Uppsala University and he became the inspiration for Scandinavian psychology of religion after the Second World War. He founded research centers for the psychology of religion at the universities of both Leuven in Dutch and Louvain-la-neuve in French. Attracting a large number of foreign students, he developed into the internationally best-known European psychologist of religion.
Prolific in a number of different fields, many of his works have been translated into several languages including English. Classic and Contemporary, which has been translated into several languages. Final Words A last misunderstanding that should not be allowed to arise from the publication of this volume, is that the intention would be to launch something like a promotion for the psychology of religion or to naively sing its praises. Such evaluation will also be likely to depend on opinions one holds quite independently of the actual achievements within the psychology of religion: One such opinion could be that the psychology of religion is relevant because religion is such an important domain of human culture and of human lives.
The existence of something does not necessarily require that it be praised; take criminality, for example. It will have to be left to real historical scholarship to come up with a settled opinion. If psychology turns to fields such as labor, organization, war, education, management, art, health and health care, politics, law, traffic, and what have you, then surely religion is another domain worthy of exploration. It is for this reason, probably, that almost all the founding fathers of psychology devoted attention to religion.
And not because all of them would have been religious themselves or because their evaluation of religion would have been positive. But one should bear in mind: Indispensable as psychology is to the sciences of religion, to psychology as an academic discipline religion is far less central. Such an elucidation, however, is not what the psychology of religion itself aims at: But not all kinds of psychological theories or perspectives need necessarily be applied in research on religion.
But one may well be an excellent psychologist without ever having given a single professional thought to religion. To psychology, therefore, religion may be considered a marginal field, an assertion that does not at all explain the strange history of psychological research on religion. Rather, it aims to provide information about the central agents in this process, about their intentions, opinions, about how they perceive their way into, their contributions to, and their evaluations of, that field called the psychology of religion.
The goal has been to do this by way of providing first-hand information, not to have observers such as historians or theoreticiansno matter to what extent they themselves are involved in research, but by letting the key players comment themselves, whether speaking to an interviewer or writing an original text all by themselves.
The authors of the following chapters have been central to the re-emergence of what has now again become a well-established discipline, with theory and research, 16 J.
Belzen scholarly infrastructure, and an increasing number of participants and publications. Times have rapidly changed: And bear in mind: Without exception, our authors have been pioneers to whom the present practitioners of the discipline owe a great deal.
Listening to what these giants — at their advanced age probably wiser than most of their younger colleagues — have to say will be instructive to all present practitioners and to anyone else who wants to learn about the comeback of the psychology of religion. Interpreting the good life: How mature, happy people frame their autobiographical memories.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, — Psychology of religion — The rise and fall of a psychological movement. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 10, 84— Hermeneutical approaches in psychology of religion. Studies in the history of psychology of religion. Psychohistory in psychology of religion: Religie, melancholie en zelf: Een historische en psychologische studie over een psychiatrisch ego-document uit de negentiende eeuw.
Religion, melancholy and self. A historical and psychological study of a psychiatric ego-document from the nineteenth century. Psychologie en het raadsel van de religie: Beschouwingen bij een eeuw godsdienstpsychologie in Nederland. Psychology and the riddle of religion.
Reflections on a century of psychology of religion in The Netherlands. The development of early psychology of religion: A Dutch falsification of the received view. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 44, — Changing the scientific study of religion: Theoretical, empirical and clinical studies from psychoanalytic perspectives.
Towards cultural psychology of religion: A variety of psychological perspectives. Autobiography and the psychological study of religious lives. Historical intersections of psychology, religion, and politics in national contexts. Context, consensus and controversies. Ich bin mein Erinnern: On autobiographical and collective memory. Religion, personality and mental health. Religious thought and the modern psychologies: A critical conversation in the theology of culture. Rekenschap van een zoektocht: Account of a search.
Religion, psychopathology and coping. A handbook for study and practice. Between dreaming and recognition seeking: The emergence of Dialogical Self Theory. University of America Press.
The psychology of religion: An empirical approach 4th ed. Die empirische Psychologie des Glaubens: Historische und systematische Studien zu den Pionieren der Religionspsychologie. Aging, spirituality, and religion: Psychologische Analyse und theologische Wahrheit.
Die religionspsychologische Methode Georg Wobbermins. Friedrich Nietzsche L'amore non fa per me. Guido Paolo De Felice Non esiste alcuna certezza che Dio abbia affidato davvero all'uomo il dominio sulle altre creature. Davide Grasso La chiesa propone un Dio amabile ai credenti e, nell'attesa della sua venuta, ha adottato il Dio denaro. Una tipica multinazionale, pubblicizzata in tutto il mondo, che vende prodotti inutili all'uomo.
Allora come la mettiamo? Angelo D'Auria Per te io rappresento tutti i peccati che non hai mai avuto il coraggio di commettere. Oscar Wilde Il Paradiso lo riceviamo in dono alla nascita, ignoriamo di averlo tutta la vita, lo pretendiamo alla morte.
Armand-Jean du Plessis de Richelieu. Allan Kardec Il Signore predilige la gente comune. Lincoln Abraham Dio aveva fatto soltanto l'acqua, ma l'uomo ha fatto il vino! Hugo Victor Purtroppo la superstizione viene alimentata da tutte le religioni. Hume David Tutte le forme di religione organizzata si somigliano dal punto di vista sociale per alcuni aspetti.
E ciascuna ha richiesto, preteso, o ordinato allo Stato di sottoscrivere il suo specifico sistema di divieti. Nessuna Chiesa ha mai rinunciato alla rivendicazione di esercitare per diritto divino un controllo assoluto sulla vita morale dei cittadini. Siate forte come i saggi dell'antica Grecia e guardate alla morte con occhio fermo e senza paura.
Se non ragioniamo bene, andiamo a finire male. Vacca Roberto La prossima volta che nasco ateo, lo faccio in un paese dove quelli che credono in Dio credono in un Dio felice. Con la religione, invece, si fa un'eccezione. Richard Dawkins Sono un ateo. Non sono neutrale rispetto alla religione, le sono ostile.
Proviamolo in Bangladesh e in Bolivia, funziona sempre. Ditemi una religione che professa questo, o che mai lo ha fatto. Christopher Hitchens Tenete presente che le entrate complessive di Madre Teresa bastano e avanzano per attrezzare svariati ambulatori di prim'ordine nel Bengala. Come cristiano, credi tutte queste proposizioni non perche ti fanno sentire bene, ma perche pensi che siano vere.
Prima di evidenziare alcuni dei problemi di queste credenze, vorrei precisare che io e te siamo d'accordo su molte cose. Siamo d'accordo, per esempio, che se uno di noi ha ragione, l'altro ha torto. Siamo d'accordo che essere un vero cristiano significa credere che tutte le altre fedi siano nel torto, ed in modo profondo. Ancora peggio, io ho persuaso altre persone, e molte di esse a me vicine, a rifiutare l'idea stessa di Dio. Anche loro bruceranno nel fuoco eterno Matteo Ammetto tutto questo senza alcuna riserva.
Il fatto che il mio continuato e pubblico rifiuto del cristianesimo non mi preoccupi minimamente dovrebbe suggerirti quanto inadeguate mi sembrano le tue ragioni per essere cristiano. Sam Harris Prendiamo la religione del Giainismo. I giainisti credono a tante cose improbabili [ Martin Lutero e Giovanni Calvino erano decisi sostenitori dell'uccisione in massa degli eretici, degli apostati, degli ebrei e delle streghe.
Viste le sue dimensioni, mi conceda di essere tra quelli che si impegnano nella sua difesa. Prendendo il posto di Dio, la ragione diventa legislatrice; non "impara" dalla natura, come succedeva quando la natura era considerata il disegno dispiegato di Dio, ma, come dice Kant, obbliga la natura a rispondere alle sue interrogazioni.
Oggi la scienza, non in chi la pratica, ma in chi e siamo tutti noi ripone in essa speranze, se non di salvezza, certamente di salute, guarigione, progresso, crescita, continua ad alimentarsi di ideologia religiosa, anche se la sua pratica effettiva prescinde da questa ideologia e procede come se Dio non fosse. La Chiesa si ritiene l'unica depositaria dell'etica.
Per fortuna noi abbiamo avuto l'illuminismo e lo stato laico che ci hanno parzialmente immunizzati. Gli uomini sarebbero incapaci di produrre una morale.
Psychology of Religion: Autobiographical Accounts
Di questo passo si finisce nello Stato teocratico. Ma le morali altro non sono che regole di convivenza volte a ridurre i conflitti. Denis Diderot Credo che il nome di Dio non solo non si debba nominare invano, ma penso che non si debba nominare affatto. Se sono immersi nel dolore, si ordina loro di credere che Dio li ama, che Dio li protegge, che Dio vuol metterli alla prova.
Un incredulo diceva giustamente: Paul Thiry d'Holbach Tuttavia: