Biased-Psychology

I had and still have a lot of respect for my former high school psychology teacher. She would have a major impact on me going on to get my own degree in psychology. She, like many of my teachers, was wise and full of wisdom. She also had a classroom full of students that were easily impressionable. I and other students assumed that whatever the teacher said was implicitly true. We did not have the knowledge to refute what she said, or the wisdom to see the biases that existed in the textbook or her teaching. In this class, and it seems in several psychology textbooks I have seen, there is a disdaining attitude towards Judeo-Christian beliefs that do not exist for secular or other religious views.

For instance, when we studied group thoughts and social psychology, we got to spend some time looking at religious beliefs. Our class was asked questions and studies that were not to help us understand Judeo-Christian beliefs, but to challenge any belief in them. We were told that religious beliefs like that of the Jews were to unify their culture. I would say that is true but putting it lightly. We were also asked about what was more likely for Jewish beliefs. We were asked if God really spoke to one man, or if that man had gotten sick eating pork. Our class through text and word were pushed to see Jewish law as not inspired by God, but based upon someone’s stomach. As children, we had no idea how to refute that. We did not see or know how this class was misrepresenting Jewish law and oversimplifying it. Jewish law that was given by God through Moses was something amazing and divine, instead of us seeing the awe that original Jews must have had when they said “We will obey all you have spoken,” this class replaced the thundering words of God with the gurgling of someone’s stomach. Jewish law probably had health benefits, but that is an oversimplification of it. Not all of the laws related to dietary health, nor follow that idea. These laws were for a people who wanted God as their king and were called to be holy and set apart from the people around them. These laws made them different and a light to the people around them. I and the students in this classroom could not make that kind of argument when our reality was challenged with a strawman. I think that many textbook authors, and unfortunately some teachers, know that.

This challenge of beliefs did not extend to other religions. Eastern beliefs like Tai-chi were spoken of with positivity. This belief system is a placebo at best, but our learning material spoke in away that made it clear that it did not want to accidentally offend any followers. Christians were not given this same respect. We looked at the beliefs without looking at the factuality of it. For a psychology course that was simply looking at the beliefs of people, this was a perfectly fine approach. Bhuddist beliefs were spoken of with deep respect. Our textbooks spoke of the prowess certain Bhuddists had over their body with a certain awe. Our class had a session on learning how to do meditation. We actually had an outside instructor and professional come in for this part. We were shown how to “empty our minds.” This stands in contrast to Christ and His teachings that tell us to fill our minds.

I want us to see that textbooks are biased, and some teachers may be also. This example is from a classroom on psychology, but this can happen in almost any classroom. Our faith was not just questioned by the textbook, but by a teacher directly. For students, you may have teachers who feel it is their job to push you to question God. If you are challenged, make a note outlining why. The burden of proof should not fall on you, but for your benefit, you should seek answers. You will likely find that your teacher has mischaracterized who God was with a strawman. If you are confident enough, consider calling the teacher out on their evil act or sharing truth with the class. In my situation, I had a teacher who mischaracterized Jewish belief. Her image of Jewish law was not of true Jewish law. She had made a different “Jewish law.” This one was easy to debunk and challenge. Further, she was doing little else than asking questions. She was not giving answers, she was only asking questions. Questions are not answers. Other than giving doubt, she had nothing else to offer. She tried to cause us to doubt God was there, but gave us no proof that He wasn’t.

I had a friend who was beaten up outside of school. Due to his Christian beliefs, he did not raise a hand against his abuser. He let the attacker have the other cheek in the most literal way that he could. Some people afterwards had respect for him while many others questioned where his God was during all of that. As before, questions are not answers. God was with him the whole time, enabling him to take the next punch. God was enabling him to see the image of God in the oppressor, even though the attacker found nothing valuable in him. Don’t be taunted only by empty questions. Questions are often the best that our opponents have to offer.

Subtle Psychology Textbook Biases

Once again, this is a common subtlety in wording that I have seen in psychology textbooks, but can be found in many others too. This textbook says,

“Few “truths” transcend the need for empirical testing. While religious beliefs and personal values may be held as matters of faith, without supporting evidence, most other ideas can be evaluated by applying the rules of logic, evidence, and the scientific method.”

This psychology textbook author on the very first pages paints the assumptions that religious beliefs exist outside of logic, evidence, and the scientific method. As Chapter 1 has shown, following Christ is embracing logic and evidence. As chapter 4 has shown, Christianity (unlike evolution) does not run counter to scientific methods. Textbooks and society have pushed a bias that says Christian belief is outside of science and logic for long enough that I even meet Christians who think this too. This section is short, but I include it, so that you, dear reader, can hopely be aware and catch these examples more easily.

Psychology: Is Religion just a Self-Help Group?

A common representation of religion and religious gatherings is that it is simply a self-help group. One textbook I saw painted religious gatherings as a group therapy session where self-blame is discouraged. Most psychology textbooks, when they discuss religion in general (which for some reason means a picture of a church in the background), paints it as a place of finding superficial hope. While this may be true of some religions, this is absurd for followers of Christ. Jesus does give us hope, but it is ultimately a hope stemming from the peace we now have with the almighty God. it is not always a worldly peace that a worldly hope thinks about. In Christianity, Self-blame is one of the first steps towards hope. For these authors to claim that church is a solace from self-blame and accountability, is to show they have never likely been inside church. We do not encourage sin to go unstopped or unrecognized. Christ tells us to deny ourselves and walk away from sin. Self-blame is part of that. In some ways, Christians meeting together may be like a self-help group as we help each other in our walk with Christ. It is far more than that though. Textbooks that speak only that church is like a self-help group is speaking from ignorance. Church is a gathering of people who have realized that they need more help than any amount of self can fix.