BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Underground > Conversation >

The philosophical value of faith?

  
  

Page: 1(2)

 
 
Closed for Business Time
12:27 / 27.10.07
AP, apologies for the brevity. You are quite right to demand some more substance. I'll quickly outline the findings from two recent reviews in the fields of psychology and medicine, respectively.

I. Religiosity and Mental Health: A Meta-Analysis
of Recent Studies
CHARLES H. HACKNEY
GLENN S. SANDERS
Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 42:1 (2003) 43–55

"To begin with, an overall relationship was found between religiosity and mental health across all conditions (r = 0.10). This indicates that regardless of any considerations of religiosity or mental health definitions, religiosity may be said to have a salutary relationship with psychological adjustment. This finding is consistent with prior reviews and with the meta-analysis conducted by Bergin (1983), who found a mean correlation of 0.09 between religiosity and mental health. Observing the mean effects sizes within each combination of religiosity and mental health definitions, a number of interesting patterns emerge. First, there is support for each position that
has been taken within the religiosity-mental health debate. Depending on which definitions of religiosity and psychological adjustment one used, evidence could be found supporting a positive relationship between religiosity and mental health (consistent with studies such as Koenig and
Larson 2001), supporting a negative relationship (consistent with studies such as Schafer 1997), and supporting the position that there is no relationship (consistent with studies such as Lewis et al. 1997). This finding could partially explain the multiplicity of confusing and contradictory findings within this field of inquiry. Second, an overall pattern can be seen in which using institutional religiosity as the defining characteristic produces the weakest (and the only negative) correlations across the board, with ideology producing stronger effects, and personal devotion producing the
correlations of greatest magnitude." (p. 51)

There's a range of caveats pertaining to these results, the most important being that these are all correlations studies, saying nothing whatsoever about the causal relationship between mental health and different dimensions of faith and religious affiliation.


II. Religion, Health and Medicine in African
Americans: Implications for Physicians
Jeff Levin, PhD, MPH; Linda M. Chatters, PhD; and Robert Joseph Taylor, PhD
JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL MEDICAL ASSOCIATION VOL. 97, NO. 2, FEBRUARY 2005, 237-249.

"To summarize, research over the past 20 years
points to a significant impact of religious participation on indicators of physical and mental health. Moreover, this association appears to vary but yet is not explained away by race. This is expressed through: a) studies of physical morbidity in which religiousness exhibited protective effects even after adjusting for effects of race; b) studies in which racial differences were found in the presence and magnitude of religious effects on health; c) studies of African Americans, especially older adults, in
which religiousness was a salient protective factor against morbidity, mortality and depressive symptoms or a correlate or determinant of positive wellbeing. Whether or not religion is more salient a preventive resource for mental health among African Americans than among whites is still an open question. But its importance as a generally protective factor for physical and psychological morbidity among African Americans is strongly supported. These findings among African Americans are consistent with religion and health research among the general population. Religious participation, broadly defined, appears to exhibit moderate but statistically significant protective effects on subsequent morbidity and mortality. Religion, then, is similar to other psychosocial and behavioral factors observed to mitigate or exacerbate the risk or odds of adverse health outcomes at the population level. Examples of psychosocial variables whose effects have been validated epidemiologically among African Americans and/or the general population include such familiar constructs as stressful life events, the type-A behavioral pattern, coping, hardiness, locus of control, bereavement, John Henryism and social support." (p. 243).

Again, there are a range of conditions pertaining to these conclusions. If anyone wants to read these but don't have access, do PM me.

Now to your other points. I seem to have been under the impression that the thread was still in HS when I made my first post (.. smack more of Lab-material etc) when that might well not have been the case. I certainly didn't mean to invalidate the substance of your contribution, it was more a rather poor attempt at sorting one type of material from the other (philosophical-theoretical-HS stuff from clinical and other scientific/Lab-affiliated stuff). In the context of the Conversation there is, as you rightly say later, no need to separate these issues. It might be successfully argued that separating the theoretical from the empiricial issues is counterproductive whatever the forum, but I'll leave that for now.

I hope this clarifies my posts, apt plutology. Apologies for not making more of an effort.
 
 
Jack Fear
13:02 / 27.10.07
eVader saith:

Individual faith is seldomly restricted to the realms of the individual, but also influences the decisions on more "wordly" matters. Such as the right to life, the duty to turn the other cheek and the joy of being a good samaritan. I think all of these aspects of human life should be judged after actually examining the subject (impacts, causes, relations etc.) and a faith-based decision will most probably, per definitionem, not do that.

We are actually largely agreed on this. Again, it's a matter of giving primary use to the tool most appropriate for the job.

But that's not to say that we should use only a single tool. After all, we use all five senses to perceive the world, and it is in the synthesis of those perceptions that the truth emerges.
 
 
Jack Fear
13:03 / 27.10.07
Nolte: What the devil is "John Henryism"? Is that the obscure medical condition of being born with a hammer in one's hand, lawd lawd?
 
 
Closed for Business Time
13:14 / 27.10.07
DURHAM, N.C. – John Henry, the figure from American folklore who worked himself to death to beat a steam engine, is a key to understanding the medical reality of African Americans in the 21st century, according to researchers from Duke University Medical Center and their colleagues. African Americans continue to have poorer health than other groups, even though their economic situation has improved significantly, said the researchers.

'John Henryism,' is a coping style that has a clear genetic basis in African Americans and reflects clear personality traits, they reported. The effects of John Henryism (JH) are apparent in clinical and non-clinical settings, can influence emotional reactions and may impact how African Americans function in their everyday lives, the researchers said.

The findings from four studies that examine JH and health outcomes among African Americans were presented on Friday, March 3, 2006, as part of a symposium organized by Duke researchers at the American Psychosomatic Society's annual meeting in Denver. The studies were funded by the National Institute on Aging.

Psychologists have formally recognized John Henryism as a style of strong coping behaviors used by many African Americans to deal with psychosocial and environmental stressors such as career issues, health problems and even racism. The classic traits of JH are seen among those African Americans who are extremely preoccupied with success, particularly in new environments with which they have little experience. Most commonly, people with JH are extremely goal-oriented but often lack the resources they need for success, such as financial or emotional support, the researchers said.

People with high levels of JH and inadequate resources have a much higher prevalence of health disorders, the researchers added, because they drive themselves toward reaching specific goals at the expense of their health, often without realizing they are doing so.

- From here
 
 
HCE
14:37 / 27.10.07
I think it's pretty common that we find those kinds of indications in our various scriptures and hero narratives?

Well, the point I was trying to make is that you're talking about a specific 'we' (as you noted when you mentioned your views were influenced by your own studies) and if you're trying to get at universals, you're going to need a global database.

With respect to ferocity I was thinking specifically of the Yanomamo (or Yanomami), who have a complex society with markedly differing gender roles. There are definitely some problems with the field work done by Napoleon Chagnon, the person whose research in this area is best known, but it is generally accepted that a certain level of ferocity is considered an appropriate response to conflict resolution. The form is more ritualized for violence between men than it is for violence against women, with set steps of escalation intended to provide a release for fears, anger, and social tensions. However ritualized, though, the violence is genuine and injuries do occur -- it is not just symbolic. The behavior of Jesus, as you describe it, would be completely inappropriate in such a social context.

For example, in order to feel shame at injustice, people must share the same sense of what is just, and also the idea that an appropriate response to injustice is shame (rather than fear, anger, delight at another's cleverness or trickiness, sorrow, or anything else).

I think the line of thought you're interested in can still be usefully pursued. Does it have to be universal to be meaningful? After all, you are unlikely to travel to the region of Venezuela where people live who have so markedly different a social order than yours. I don't think the stories you described become suddenly false or empty just because they're meaningless to others.
 
  

Page: 1(2)

 
  
Add Your Reply