The Cognitive Organization of Rational Spirituality

By Suzanne Howard

 

The instructions for this report many be found at http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/theistic-psychology.htm

 

1.  Preface

 

            My first report was about the general topic of theistic psychology, based on the Writings of Emanuel Swedenborg.  Theistic psychology is different from atheistic psychology in that god is allowed in to the explanations of phenomena in theistic psychology.  Dr. James says that it is rational to allow god in to science and illogical to separate God from science.  In Report1, I have discussed my own experiences about god, religion, and science.  I have also discussed various articles about theistic psychology.  I have concluded that theistic psychology could have a profound impact on the subject of psychology, such as in the explanation of human behavior.  However, I do not think that many people will accept the concept of theistic psychology because it is such a new and radical idea.

 

            Report 2 (this report) is also about spirituality and God.  My classmates and I were instructed to take the Diagnostic Test of Rational Spirituality that was constructed by Dr. James.  We then considered the three phases of thinking about spiritual topics.  We also discussed topics relevant to spirituality that were present in our daily lives.   Although I am still unsure about many topics of spirituality and God, this report has given me a greater understanding about what my views about spirituality and God actually are.

 

2.  Introduction

 

The Diagnostic Test of Rational Spirituality is a test designed by Dr. James.  This test, consisting of 100 items, is supposed to measure your dominant level of thinking regarding spiritual subjects such as: Who or what is god? Can there be a science of God from god about God?  What is love, good, truth, and wisdom? And are miracles real?  For each question, there are three possible answers that correspond to the three ideologies of rational spirituality: phase 1 ideology, phase 2 ideology, and phase 3 ideology.  You then add up the number of times you have marked an answer for each phase.  The phase that you have marked the most is your dominant phase of thinking.

 

In order to explain what this test diagnoses about the cognitive organization of thinking regarding god and the causes of events in the world, I must first explain what rational spirituality is.  Emanuel Swedenborg was a 17th century Swedish scientist.  He was given the unique ability by God to live simultaneously in this world (physical world) and in heaven and hell (spiritual world).  Through the Writings of Emanuel Swedenborg, we have a documented history of the thinking processes of the first humans up until the cognitions of modern humans.  Swedenborg had a chance to meet the first humans in their heavens, and he wrote that were conscious of the upper portions, or celestial regions, of their minds.  Because of this ability, they were conscious both in this world and in the spiritual world.  This dual consciousness was the source of their science because it was the source of truth given by God.  What happened to humans after the ancients is know as the Fall of the human race.  Humans eventually lost the ability to be conscious of the spiritual world and all of their incoming information came strictly through the physical senses.  These humans (including ourselves) are called the split-brain race.   Because humans were no longer conscious of the spiritual world and of God, God made scientific revelations about himself and the spiritual world available to chosen individuals.  These individuals wrote about their experiences so that all people would have access to the knowledge of god in the Sacred Scriptures.

 

So what is rational spirituality?  The ancient humans had the ability to understand the spiritual world.  This is because they had direct sensuous of the spiritual world and were able to talk to the inhabitants of heaven and hell.  How do we split-brain humans obtain rational spirituality?  Because we do not have this direct consciousness with the spiritual world, we can only obtain access to spiritual information by knowing and understanding Divine Revelations that are given to us in Sacred Scripture.  Through Divine Revelations we can obtain a greater understanding of God and truth through the process called rational spirituality.

 

The Diagnostic Test of Rational Spirituality is supposed to be able to determine your dominant type of thinking regarding spiritual topics.  For example, if you score highest on phase 1 ideology, the Test says that your dominant thinking about spiritual areas is characterized by both religious and material traits.  Some of the following traits may apply to you: fundamentalism (male dominant view about women and society), superstition (pre-scientific, irrational), materialism (there is no spiritual world), and animism (everything is alive and has a spirit).  Phase 2 ideology is characterized by universalism and personalism attributes in dominant thinking about spirituality.  Some of the following traits would characterize a person with phase 2 dominant thinking: personalism (personal relationship with god), a tendency to believe in what the church calls the “mysteries” of god, and a focus on the sanctity of marriage.  Phase 3 ideology is characterized by dominant thinking about spiritual topics that is characterized by a rational or scientific understanding of god.  Some of the characteristics of a person with phase 3 dominant thinking are as follows: scientific dualism (the belief in both a physical world and a spiritual world), everyone has a heaven or hell in their mind, and the application of rational spirituality to everyday reality.

 

The 100 questions on the test were designed to give the test taker an understanding of the way they think about God and events in the world.  The test taker is instructed to pick the answer that best represents their current understanding of the topic at hand.  Each answer will correspond with one of the three ideologies.  The ideology that the test taker has chosen the most is their dominant ideology.  Now I will cite five examples of the questions and explain the level of thinking that they measure.

 

#12.  What is heaven and hell?

  1. Heaven and hell are operations of the human mind maintained by our chief love and affections.
  2. Heaven is the Kingdom of God on earth restored to its glory.
  3. When you feel great, you’re in heaven.  When you’re depressed, you’re in hell.

 

Answer (a) reflects phase 3 ideology.  This is because the theory that heaven and hell operate in the human mind is a concept proposed by Emanuel Swedenborg.  Answer (b) reflects phase 2 ideology.  The concept that heaven is the Kingdom of God is a religious, specifically, Christian concept.  Answer (c) reflects phase 1 ideology.  The idea that heaven and hell are only descriptions of high and low emotions is not a Christian concept, but may be a concept of another religion.  Another possibility is that someone who believes this statement may be an atheist.

 

#19.  Which assertion about planets represents more nearly your own view?

  1. Most planets do not support human life, but some might.  Space exploration will provide a valid answer.
  2. Life was created on this planet.  In the coming future, all planets and stars will be destroyed and a new Kingdom of God will arise with those who are saved, and it is going to last forever.
  3. An endless number of planets are constantly being created to support a human population that can prepare itself for heaven.

 

Answer (a) reflects phase 1 ideology.  I think this question does represent rational thinking.  However, I would change the word most to many because we do not know if most planets do not support human life, yet we do know that many do not.  I think this question could be reworded to say that most planets have never and will never support human life.  That question seems more related to level 1 thinking.  Answer (b) reflects phase 2 ideology.  The concept that the Kingdom of God will last forever and include all those who are saved is a religious and mystical concept that has no scientific evidence to support it.  Answer (c) is a phase 3 ideology.  The concept that planets are created to support human life is an idea that is stated in the Writings of Swedenborg.

 

#29.  What does spiritual salvation consist of?

  1. Salvation is by means of sincere faith in the cleansing power of the blood of Christ.
  2. Salvation is by means of progressive character reformation from good to evil.
  3. Salvation is by means of religious piety sincerely performed until death.

 

Answer (a) reflects phase 2 ideology.  Salvation by faith alone is a characteristic of this second level of thinking.  Answer (b) reflects phase 3 ideology.  This Swedenborgian concept seems rational to me.  The other answers do not seem rational because it seems that salvation must be achieved by works and not faith alone.  It also seems irrational that following religious doctrine will ensure one’s faith.  Answer (c) reflects phase 1 ideology.  This belief in salvation by means of religious piety seems illogical and is not supported by any scientific evidence.

 

#34.  What is theistic science?

  1. The attempt to turn science in to religion, or to blur the differences.
  2. Scientific dualism in which God’s role in every phenomenon is explained by means of scientific revelations given through the Word.
  3. An intellectual movement in the history of science that ended with the modern era of science.

 

Answer (a) reflects phase 2 ideology.  I think that this answer does not give an accurate response to the question asked.  It seems that the answer is not stating what theistic science is, but rather an opinion about theistic science.  Answer (b) reflects phase 3 ideology.  I think that this is the only logical answer to the question because the question asks for a definition and this is it.  Answer (c) reflects phase 1 ideology.  This answer is obviously not true.  If theistic science was strictly historical then we would not be taking this class.  Obviously there are many who believe in theistic science, so it would be false to say that it ended with the era of modern science.  Overall, I think that this question is misleading because there can only be one logical answer.

 

#53.  Is it possible to prove that the Bible is Divine?

  1. No, since it requires spiritual faith rather than proof.
  2. Yes, by using correspondences to demonstrate the existence of an orderly internal semantic series from Genesis to Revelations, showing that the historical events were brought about by Divine Providence to convey the internal series to our understanding, by which we might be regenerated.
  3. No, because it was written by human beings!

 

Answer (a) reflects phase 2 ideology.  I think that part of this answer makes sense and the other part does not.  I think that by saying “No, it is not possible to prove that the Bible is Divine” is true in the sense that as of right now proof is not possible, but that does not mean that we will never have that proof.  Answer (b) reflects phase 3 ideology.  My reasoning is similar for this answer.  We do not have the knowledge of how to use correspondences right now; therefore, we do not have proof right now.  However, if and when we do have that knowledge, then it would be possible to prove the Divinity of the Bible.  Answer (c) reflects phase 1 ideology.  It seems irrational to say that the Bible cannot be Divine just because it was written by humans.  We must understand that that anything is possible.

 

3.  Applied Theistic Psychology

 

In this section, I will describe three events that deal with the way people in our society think about God and the causes of daily events in our world.  After I summarize each viewpoint, then I will state which level of thinking best describes each scenario.

 

            I asked my roommate about her opinions about God and spirituality.  She is an 18-year-old college student.  She is Jewish, but is no longer practicing.  She told me that she believes in a higher power, but would not necessarily say that the higher power is God.  She also believes in the possibility of multiple gods.  She believes that humans control their own destiny and that God has no part in it.  She believes that God had no part in the creation of the Universe or in the creation of human beings.  She said that she does believe in an afterlife, but would not necessarily call it heaven and hell.

 

  • I believe this type of thinking best represents phase 1 in the model of Rational Spirituality.  Her thinking is characterized by a variety of beliefs, some religious and some not.  I think that she holds some of her religious beliefs, such as the belief in God and in the afterlife, because of her Jewish upbringing.  However, throughout her life, her beliefs about God and spirituality have changed.  Now she believes in such things as the possibility of multiple gods.  The characteristic that seemed most clear to me was that she was uncertain about her beliefs, in that she was not positive about what she actually believed about God and spirituality.  I think that as time goes by she will have more experiences with God and spirituality, and it will help to either reconfirm her beliefs or give her the opportunity to reevaluate them.

 

My second source comes from the Honolulu Star Bulletin.  The article, entitled Reaching for God was written shortly after the September 11th terrorist attacks.  Reverend Henry Blackaby makes a connection between these attacks and turning back to God at a conference of the Fellowship of Companies for Christ International on Maui.  He said that it is not good that Americans have turned away from God.  The September 11th terrorist attacks may have a positive effect by bringing Americans back to God.  He also states that God did not permit this disaster to happen because he gave humans free will.  Therefore, we cannot blame God because of this tragedy.

 

  • I think this type of thinking is most characteristic of phase 2 thinking.  Some of the characteristics of the Reverend’s thinking and of level 2 include personalism (personal relationship with God), mysticism (Trinity of Three Divine Persons in One Godhead), reliance on intercessionary prayers, and a willingness to give allegiance to creeds containing mystical doctrine.  The Reverend has no scientific evidence when he says such things as, “If a nation leaves God out, it’s destined to be doomed.”  I think that many people have been misinformed by the Reverend’s preaching and other such information.  They are told that what the Reverend says is truth, but I think that it is just an opinion.

 

My third source comes from discussions about the movie The Passion of the Christ.  I have heard many people talking about this movie, but I have not seen it yet, therefore, I am an unbiased in my own opinions about the movie.  All of the people that I have heard from have said that they liked the movie.  They said that it was sad and very gory.  Dr. James had a very different opinion about this movie.  He said that he would not see this movie because it portrays the wrong message about Jesus.  He said that the message of the movie is that by identifying with the suffering our faith is strengthened.  However, in reality, only our mystical faith is strengthened and not our rational faith.  Jesus’ life on earth and death on the cross has not saved us from sin, but rather saved us from the tendency to only do evil.  We know that we will not automatically go to heaven because of Jesus’ suffering.  The way in which we are saved is by the regeneration or reformation of our character. 

 

  • I think these people’s views (other than Dr. James) would be most closely linked with phase 1 or 2 thinking.  They might either believe that the movie portrays how Christ’s suffering has saved us, or on the other hand, they may just think it was a beautifully made movie and may not believe in Christianity at all.  On the other hand, Dr. James’s take on this movie best represents phase 3 thinking.  The idea of character regeneration is a central concept in the Writings of Swedenborg.

 

4.  Conclusion

 

My views about God and Swedenborg have changed since the beginning of the semester.  Before I took this class, my views about God and religion were not concrete.  I did not know if I believed in the Catholic Church any more, and was not even sure about my beliefs in God.  I did believe that there was some force called God, but I was completely unsure about such things as heaven and hell and how people are allowed to get there.  When I started taking this class and learning about Swedenborg, I was very against it and felt that everything that I was being taught was completely untrue.  I would get very upset while reading the assignments and wonder about the relevance of the subject of theistic psychology to traditional psychology.  Then, I learned about the positive bias, and I realized that I need to understand that everything that I am being taught from the Writings of Swedenborg is quite possibly the truth.  Now I am still not completely sure about any of my beliefs, but I think that I have a greater understanding about my personal viewpoints.  There are still many things about Swedenborg that I do not understand or seem illogical to me.

 

            Learning about the topics of spirituality has helped me to recognize some of my own beliefs.  However, I am not sure that the Diagnostic Test of Rational Spirituality can accurately place one’s thoughts in to one of three categories.  When I took the test, my score was just about distributed evenly throughout the three categories. I felt that many of the questions were misleading because I think that they could be viewed by the test taker as ambiguous and could be interpreted as saying more than one thing.  For example, the questions about the definition of something should have only one answer.  I think that a better question about these definition words might be, “What does this word mean to you.”  Then the test taker could write their own subjective interpretation of the word.  Overall, this assignment has made me think about my own convictions about God and science.  I am glad that I have a better understanding of my own beliefs.

 

5.  Future Generations

 

            To the future generations, my advice to you is still the same: Have a positive bias.  The positive bias will allow you to think about the material that you are being taught in a logical way.  You will have time to process this new information before dismissing it before you have even had time to consider it.  I think that by learning about these topics, you will appreciate your greater understanding of your personal beliefs about God and spirituality.

 

 

 

My Home Page

 

G20 Class Home Page