------------------------------------------
Christopher P. Hahn, Ph.D.
Constructive Agreement, LLC
<mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]
P.O. Box 39, Bozeman, MT 59771
(406) 522-4143 (406) 556-7116 fax
------------------------------------------
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected]
Sent: Friday, January 06, 2012 10:17 AM
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: [RC] [ RC ] The Biology of Left vs Right / What attracts people * *
* * *
1/6/2012 8:56:24 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, [email protected] writes:
Grounding decision-making in quantitative data doesn't seem all that
important to me in religion, or to a lesser extent in politics.
Chris :
Any reasons for your outlook about these areas of life ? Not that I would
put it
in terms of "quantitative data." I prefer not to think of these things in
terms
of charts or tables or pages of statistics. But there are other kinds of
"solid facts."
Take Freud and psychology generally. NOT because Freud was always right,
since he was wrong a lot of the time, but his approach recommends itself.
Freud's observations were, in essence, based on case studies. Case studies
are legitimate qualitative research tools. Since I am the author of a
qualitative research methods textbook for Sage Publications I can hardly
discount qualitative research methods. Freud made some great observations
and presented them convincingly. Over time, as you note, many of his
conclusions seem primitive or wrong, but his approach came from a reasonable
scientific base as did those of Adler, Piaget, Erickson, Rogers, etc.
When I believe I always want to know why. Is it because the belief has some
kind of objective pull, or is it because of long-delayed effects of a trauma
I lived through many years ago ? Because my logic is faulty ? Because
my knowledge of something is skewed ? That is, for me it is important
to test whatever ideas are attractive.
When it comes to religion, I think it is reasonable to take an unscientific
approach. Faith is sometimes enough. If you have experienced God, then
what more proof do you need?
In other words, there are reasons why I'm not a Theosophist and
not interested in TM and not a member of the Green Party, or whatever.
Not just reasons why I have become a Radical Centrist or have
critical but ecumenical religious views.
The study of religions is different than faith based on experiencing God.
Here a historical/scientific approach to discover the core roots of
comparative religions is sensible, and to me, interesting.
For sure, this is the ideal model of how this works. There are plenty of
times
when any testing is after the fact. But, still, I'm always interested
in being "grounded," as you and Ernie would say.
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. You know it when you see it, no proof is
necessary.
I feel sure the same is true for you. But if it isn't, it would be
worthwhile
to learn why not. Or if it is, why did you phrase things the way you did ?
What are you really saying that maybe would be valuable to know ?
I am a huge believer in the scientific method. I use it every day; albeit,
not in the same way a physicist would test the speed of light. That said,
some questions are unanswerable by objective analysis. If the universe was
started by the big bang, what set up the conditions for the big bang? Was
it God, or something else. I think it is okay to go with a gut-level belief
about spirituality and religion and to rely on faith. If we try to go for
too much proof we may be thinking ourselves out of core beliefs and values
that can be very grounding to ourselves as healthy individuals.
As I think of this, alcoholics anonymous comes to mind. The reliance on
faith in God is a primary directive in the 12 steps. A lot of people have
been helped by thinking... okay, it is time to let go of doubt, to believe,
and to use this belief to make my life better.
THE TWELVE STEPS OF ALCOHOLICS ANONYMOUS
1. We admitted we were powerless over alcohol-that our lives had become
unmanageable.
2. Came to believe that a Power greater than ourselves could restore us to
sanity.
3. Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to the care of God as
we
understood Him.
4. Made a searching and fearless moral inventory of ourselves.
5. Admitted to God, to ourselves, and to another human being the exact
nature
of our wrongs.
6. Were entirely ready to have God remove all these defects of character.
7. Humbly asked Him to remove our shortcomings.
8. Made a list of all persons we had harmed, and became willing to make
amends to them all.
9. Made direct amends to such people wherever possible, except when to do
so would injure them or others.
10. Continued to take personal inventory and when we were wrong promptly
admitted it.
11. Sought through prayer and meditation to improve our conscious contact
with
God, as we understood Him, praying only for knowledge of His will for us
and the power to carry that out.
12. Having had a spiritual awakening as the result of these Steps, we tried
to
carry this message to alcoholics, and to practice these principles in all
our
affairs.
Chris
Curious in Oregon
Billy
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think it is interesting that the eye movements of liberals and
conservatives might be
different, but it won't make me vote differently.
However, when I make life-changing recommendations about how children might
live their lives (www.constructiveagreement.com), I try to ground my
recommendations in the best-available research data. Not only do I study
the results of the study, but I also examine the research methods used.
Why? The decisions I make are too important for me to rely on just my gut
feel. I don't want to be arrogant and think that my personal or instinctive
opinion is all that is needed.
Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Dr. Ernie Prabhakar
Sent: Friday, January 06, 2012 9:00 AM
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [RC] [ RC ] The Biology of Left vs Right / What attracts people
to objectivity ?
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 6, 2012, at 6:52, [email protected] wrote:
> What attracts people to objectivity ?
Not quite the right word, but I know what you mean.
>
> Suggestions anyone ?
Speaking for myself, the simplest answer is "alienation". I didn't belong
either in my home culture of India or my host culture of America. The reason
I went into Physics (and Christianity) was largely to find some transcendent
truth to ground my identity. And perhaps give me a "safe" place to critique
and integrate my group identities.
Great question, though. How about the rest of you?
E
--
--
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
--
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
