If you were to open any general psychology textbook, you would find that psychology is not a singular category, but rather has many different subcategories. There is social psychology, evolutionary psychology, amongst others, all which can be found in your average general psychology textbook. Each one of these are a smaller part of a whole, but no less important. The authors tell how the body is made up of organs, which are made of cells, which are made of atoms, and how each one of these bodily subgroups may have different views on what something is.
There are a “variety of possible perspectives” pertaining to truth in our world. These perspectives can also be called “levels of analysis.” We can choose which level to view a subject on, but if we only view the subject through one level, our view is incomplete. An example for this was in the form of a painting. Up close, the observer of a painting can notice the paint stroke pattern, the type of paint, the mixture of color, and so forth. Unfortunately for the observer, they are only looking at a fraction of what the painting truly is. To get the full effect, they must step back and look at the “big picture.” Because of this tunnel vision, no scientist may claim that science proves there is no God. This is because, like the observer of the painting, he is focused in too far to notice the big picture.
Like a picture, there is bound to be different interpretations on subjects in science. The definition of love has many differentiating perspectives in the area of science. A physiologist will explain how certain chemicals arouse in the brain to send off pleasurable nerve impulses. A Psychologist will tell you how social acceptability and personality compatibility work toward this. A poet will describe the feeling of love. One explanation does not cause another, but rather work together to complement each other and show truth.
We view subjects like love on multiple levels for our convenience. This is the reason explanations of certain subject complement each other. The subject of incest is well explained by a combination of religious, sociological, and biological reasoning. This explaining shows different levels of science “meeting in the middle” to provide a well formed consensus about a subject. Unfortunately, this does not happen with all things. When a religious explanation is based upon a miracle from God, it met with skepticism by other levels of perception.
Levels of explanation can be complementary if those levels seek a middle ground of truth. All truth, from all levels of perception, are one in God’s world. We break this truth down into different parts for our needs. With that in mind, “methods of psychology are appropriate only for their own purposes.” Psychology is but one aspect of a greater whole.
This chapter brought up several good points, one of which I have held close. To truly understand, you must contrast, not adhere to a single idea. To trust the truth of only one perspective is like trying to finish a puzzle without all the pieces. There is but one picture of truth, the one God has provided. We have all these perspectives, and sub-perspectives to try and break down this truth, but doing this, we forget that all these are supposed to work together.
Comments
Post a Comment