I wanted to second Paul Smith's distillation of the advice. I would
add to it that there are a variety of people doing interesting work
in the psychology of religion. A useful set of web pages has been
compiled by Michael Nielsen of Georgia Southern University at
http://www.psywww.com/psyrelig/index.htm
It is also useful for the student to recognize that many
psychologists are quite hostile to investigations in this area. If
you look at the attitudes of academia, it appears that social
scientists (and psychologists in particular) are the least religious
academics. Natural science faculty are among the most religious.
The student will need to persevere in the face of this, if their
interest is strong.
As some evidence of the culture of psychology in this regard, there
have been numerous heated exchanges on this list regarding the
validity or interest value of work in the area. By and large, we
have managed to stay above calling each other names, but occasionally
make unflattering attributions and implications.
So, encourage your student to look into the area mentioned, and let
her or him know that goos work in these areas will require the
difficult process of making concrete operationalizations of complex
matters.
-Chuck
- Chuck Huff Psychology Department
- Associate Professor St.Olaf College
- Tutor in the Paracollege 1520 St. Olaf Avenue
- 507.646.3169 Fax: 646.3774 Northfield, MN 55057-1098
- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.stolaf.edu/people/huff/
At 10:20 AM -0600 1/26/01, Paul Smith wrote:
>Kitty -
>
>> Considering the not-so-helpful replies I've received, I'm
>> just going to do what most of you imply - manipulate the student into
>believing their
>> interests are not valid nor respected by academics thereby
>> forcing them to do something that is NOT their passion. Me thinks maybe
>some
>> of your were victims of this rigid philosophy. Pity.
>
> It appears to me that you actually got some pretty useful advice
>here. If the student is a serious student with the kind of curiosity we
>value, the psychoimmunology direction that Pam Shapiro suggested is probably
>the best line of research, and offers the best chance at a well-rounded and
>well-respected graduate education. The pastoral programs that Gary Peterson
>suggested also offer opportunities for students who are motivated by
>religious belief for that area of psychology - I've got a reasonably strong
>senior with interests in that direction who has already chosen a "pastoral
>counseling" program, and it seems a good fit.
> John Kulig's suggestion that the student be explicit about her
>definitions is also an excellent one. The terms "mind" and "spirit" are
>often used as shorthand for "everything that I don't understand and am not
>willing to try to understand". If your student suffers that problem, she's
>going to be mighty frustrated when her graduate advisor requires her to
>think through her claims and measures. That particular "rigid philosophy"
>has caused a lot of problems for students I've worked with (as instructor,
>advisor, and peer during my own graduate work), who clearly believed that
>their interest in "the mind-body connection" or "spirituality" meant that
>they didn't have to define their terms concretely.
>
>Paul Smith
>Alverno College
>Milwaukee
