WEBVTT 00:00:30.190 --> 00:00:31.250 Welcome, everyone. 00:00:31.470 --> 00:00:33.490 My name is doctor Steven Grundmann. 00:00:34.030 --> 00:00:39.570 I teach integrative studies in our doctorate in psychology program, and I'll be your emcee tonight. 00:00:40.085 --> 00:00:44.985 And now I invite our president, father Charles Sikorsky, to open us in prayer. 00:00:45.845 --> 00:00:47.225 Well, thank you, doctor Grundmann. 00:00:48.245 --> 00:00:54.985 This I'd also just like to quickly welcome doctor Eric Johnson to Divine Mercy University. 00:00:56.330 --> 00:00:58.910 We're very excited to have you with us this evening. 00:01:00.250 --> 00:01:07.630 You'll be speaking to our faculty, students, staff, friends, and, co travelers on this great mission that we have. 00:01:07.930 --> 00:01:28.550 And, I had the the grace and blessing to meet doctor Johnson last year down in Houston at Houston Baptist University where he where he works in doing great things down there in in bringing an integrative approach to counseling and psychology, and we're just very blessed and honored to have him with us, this evening. 00:01:29.090 --> 00:01:32.370 So let's begin with a prayer in the name of the father, and the son, and the holy spirit. 00:01:32.370 --> 00:01:32.870 Amen. 00:01:33.570 --> 00:01:44.635 Heavenly father, who's created all things with great love, with great wisdom, created the earth, the universe, and at the center, the human person. 00:01:45.735 --> 00:01:54.650 And at the center as well, each and every one of us, who are made in your image and your likeness, body, mind, soul. 00:01:56.710 --> 00:02:04.410 We thank you for the great gift of life, of existence, and the great gift of the mission and the purpose that you give to each of our lives. 00:02:05.155 --> 00:02:21.270 Wanna pray that your holy spirit will guide us this evening, stimulate our minds and our hearts, and help it help this evening to be a a way to help us to commit more deeply to follow you each and every day of our lives. 00:02:21.270 --> 00:02:31.370 We pray for our speaker that you strengthen him, with the grace and wisdom, to communicate your intelligence and your love. 00:02:32.685 --> 00:02:53.680 And, also, we pray that, all those who are committed to spreading and building your kingdom in this field of psychology mental health, that we work together to really strengthen our culture to make to help people to understand who they truly are, what their true good is, and what their eternal destiny is. 00:02:53.980 --> 00:02:56.160 So we ask and thank you for this opportunity. 00:02:56.780 --> 00:03:05.755 Pray in a special way for all those who are suffering from mental illness, emotional problems, difficult interpersonal situations. 00:03:05.895 --> 00:03:15.115 We pray for them, for their healing, for the grace and strength for them to overcome the obstacles that they're they're battling with, that they're struggling with right now. 00:03:15.390 --> 00:03:19.090 We ask all these things in the name in the name of your son, our lord Jesus Christ. 00:03:19.230 --> 00:03:21.550 In the name of the father, and the son, and the holy spirit. 00:03:21.550 --> 00:03:22.050 Amen. 00:03:22.430 --> 00:03:24.130 Thank you so much, father Charles. 00:03:25.790 --> 00:03:39.635 Tonight's presentation is part of the Newman lecture series, which features speakers who are widely recognized, series, which features speakers who are widely recognized for their contributions to the fields of psychology, moral and political philosophy, theology, and law. 00:03:40.015 --> 00:03:50.870 This lecture series is held under the sponsorship of Divine Mercy University and seeks to promote an international conversation among various disciplines that treat the human person. 00:03:51.490 --> 00:04:02.535 Each lecture series is published with an eye toward building a body of learned discussion that is Catholic both in its breadth of research and its dialogue with contemporary Catholic Christian thought. 00:04:03.795 --> 00:04:06.215 And I'd like to announce tonight our speaker. 00:04:06.835 --> 00:04:16.470 Eric l Johnson is professor of Christian psychology at the Gideon Institute of Christian psychology and counseling at Houston Baptist University. 00:04:17.490 --> 00:04:24.230 Prior to this position, he taught psychology, worldview studies, and Christian counseling for twenty eight years. 00:04:25.195 --> 00:04:41.790 Eric is currently working on the third edition of psychology and Christianity, five views, and he co edited evidence based practices for Christian counseling and psychotherapy and marriage, its foundation, theology, and mission in a changing world. 00:04:42.250 --> 00:04:57.895 In addition, he has written over 60 peer reviewed journal articles or chapters, as well as foundations for soul care, a Christian psychology proposal, and God and Soul Care, the Therapeutic Resources of the Christian Faith. 00:04:58.355 --> 00:05:01.895 And he was a coauthor of Christian Psychotherapy in Context. 00:05:02.675 --> 00:05:04.055 His wife is Rebecca. 00:05:04.675 --> 00:05:09.840 They have two children and three grandchildren, and they love traveling to Europe. 00:05:10.460 --> 00:05:13.280 Please join me in welcoming doctor Eric Johnson. 00:05:14.380 --> 00:05:16.700 Thank you. 00:05:16.700 --> 00:05:17.600 Doctor Johnson. 00:05:19.180 --> 00:05:20.720 Thank you, doctor Grudman. 00:05:20.780 --> 00:05:22.880 It's such a pleasure to be here. 00:05:23.795 --> 00:05:29.955 I I can't tell you on how many levels I'm, just just very happy, very filled with happiness. 00:05:29.955 --> 00:05:45.000 I've had such a great esteem for your institution and, particularly, delighted to be in a series that is celebrating the career of Paul Vitz, who has been a a a hero. 00:05:45.060 --> 00:05:52.605 I I you know, I'd like to call him a mentor from afar, because I've I've been so encouraged by his work over the years. 00:05:54.505 --> 00:05:57.805 So, yeah, I'm just I'm just thrilled to be here. 00:05:59.625 --> 00:06:17.255 And part of the, the delight has to do with the the fact that this past, year, I, with some friends actually, went had a a reading group, and we and we read through the meta model for of the person. 00:06:18.115 --> 00:06:29.520 And, you know, I I, I I had good reason to think it was gonna be great having read a lot of the literature that that, you folks have been producing at DMU. 00:06:29.520 --> 00:06:46.365 But, I I I think we were all knocked off our feet in to just to see the thoroughness with which, and understanding of the person was being articulated by, by psychologists and, taking seriously philosophy and theology. 00:06:46.905 --> 00:06:54.765 So, yeah, I've I, I'm just just deeply thankful to be here and to to be to be participating. 00:06:57.280 --> 00:07:07.860 So, might just mention that if you're interested in, in in questions, there will be some time for, questions and comments. 00:07:08.400 --> 00:07:12.855 I I love dialogue, and I'd love to get some feedback on some of the things that we're gonna be talking about. 00:07:13.895 --> 00:07:16.715 So so please, keep this in mind. 00:07:17.255 --> 00:07:23.915 My focus today is gonna be on what I'm calling form psychology. 00:07:24.935 --> 00:07:59.400 And I, modified the title a little bit, after I I first sent it out, that, I I'm I'm calling this now a a meta model for becoming a whole person, not to take anything away from from, this wonderful book that I've already mentioned, but rather to build on on that, because I when I when I read this, I I saw so many linkages with with work that I've been doing, myself, though though so much more well developed in so many ways. 00:07:59.620 --> 00:08:09.195 But I what I wanted to do is to focus particularly on, one of the the themes of the meta model. 00:08:09.195 --> 00:08:35.725 But, before I do that, I I I let me just say again, how much I've appreciated this man, going back to psychology of self worship, which was, you know, maybe one of your first books, doctor Bitz, but but was really a lightning rod for so many of us who who who sensed the things that you were saying there. 00:08:36.185 --> 00:08:43.625 And, yet, this was the first book that I was aware of that articulated them, with from a psychological standpoint that was just so helpful. 00:08:43.625 --> 00:09:03.740 And and, I I also wanna rave just for a moment about Sigmund Freud's Christian unconscious, which, you know, I can't I I can't speak highly enough of that work doing original research, but but also, if I can put it this way, psychoanalyzing Freud from a Christian worldview standpoint. 00:09:05.795 --> 00:09:20.535 And, I I I, there there, you know, there are many other things that we could, that I I could talk about, but these two works in particular, have been just deeply encouraging to me throughout my much of my career. 00:09:21.290 --> 00:09:33.610 And, and then and then to to to read the meta model this year and to see that as a culmination of of your work as as well as the work of other folks at DMU, just god bless you. 00:09:33.610 --> 00:09:34.330 Thank you, god. 00:09:34.330 --> 00:09:44.645 Thank I I'm thankful to god for for for all that you've done for us, for me and for so many of us that are here and around the world that aren't that aren't here. 00:09:46.145 --> 00:09:59.420 So as I as I suggested, the the theme that that is particularly I'm gonna be sort of resonating with this evening is this, the notion that's very important. 00:09:59.420 --> 00:10:05.120 It's so so important it warrants a chapter in the book that the person is a personal unity. 00:10:05.705 --> 00:10:11.885 I'm just gonna read an a a number of the quotes, that are related to this from the from the Meta Model book. 00:10:12.105 --> 00:10:19.485 Each person is a personal unity and individual substance with unique human, moral, and spiritual goals or ends. 00:10:19.840 --> 00:10:33.540 A person's unity or wholeness comprises the physical body and the spiritual soul as a physical philosophical source for understanding the gift of human life, personal identity, meaningfulness, and dignity. 00:10:34.215 --> 00:10:47.515 And then the last quote I'm gonna read is this model recognizes the development over time of the organic whole and unique identity of each person who also is culturally, historically, and ecologically situated. 00:10:48.070 --> 00:11:01.530 And and this model challenges the individualist the individualist, reductionist, relativist, and dualist approaches to the person often found in certain strains of philosophy and psychology. 00:11:02.885 --> 00:11:17.065 Well, I I I I wanna gee, I that that I just so resonate with that and and have wondered since what is it about the Christian worldview that draws us to to want to emphasize personal unity. 00:11:18.620 --> 00:11:31.680 Yeah, because this just when I as I read this this, these these sentences and the and the chapter in particular, I just thought, you know, I I don't see this emphasis so much in modern psychology. 00:11:32.785 --> 00:11:36.565 And, I, you know, I think there are reasons for that. 00:11:37.745 --> 00:11:41.845 I think there are limitations, to modern psychology. 00:11:42.065 --> 00:11:45.045 They're they're, some of their underlying assumptions. 00:11:46.210 --> 00:11:58.210 Again, not everyone, of course, in in the field, but but speaking generally about modern psychology, there is a individualist and reductionist, relativist, dualist approach. 00:11:58.210 --> 00:12:13.125 I I wanna add a degree of positivism that still is very, very strong that sees the natural science methods as really the key to understanding human beings. 00:12:13.790 --> 00:12:32.575 And I wanna suggest I'm not gonna defend this, this evening, but I wanna suggest that that a commitment, a kind of exclusivist commitment to natural science methods that you find in modern psychology, I think, makes it difficult to comprehend the whole person. 00:12:33.995 --> 00:12:51.080 And and and I think because a Christian worldview doesn't have some of the same constraints, it it has tended to, draw Christians to want to emphasize more the whole person because we realize that's a really important characteristic of human beings. 00:12:55.220 --> 00:12:57.960 So, I wanna ask this question. 00:12:59.985 --> 00:13:12.165 What if psychology were shaped more by its object, human beings, rather than natural science methods? 00:13:13.170 --> 00:13:51.960 And, I would like to suggest that if if that were the the case, that then human science methods, which, of course, many people are open to, but it's just not given the, there's not an openness to human science methods as much as there is to natural science methods, as well as other legitimate sources of relevant knowledge that could be critically synthesized with the contributions of modern psychology. 00:13:52.020 --> 00:14:17.780 Or we might say the contributions available to us through natural science methods, including the work of other disciplines like literature, philosophy, and theology, human experience, values, and ethical and spiritual experience, common sense, and natural law perspectives, as well as everyday discourse, including things like testimony, the value of testimony, and the value of sacred texts. 00:14:19.280 --> 00:14:32.115 I think were such, an openness to occur in contemporary psychology, cultural psychology would also become a more influential subdiscipline than it currently is. 00:14:32.115 --> 00:14:35.255 Although, of course, some people do do take it seriously. 00:14:35.715 --> 00:14:37.815 I think it would grow in importance. 00:14:38.435 --> 00:15:01.445 And implicit contextual influences would be recognized as foundational to human life as well as to psychological science, factors like embodiment, worldview beliefs that are extremely important in the human sciences, like psychology, but are largely ignored, in contemporary psychology. 00:15:02.065 --> 00:15:04.725 The social imaginary and narrative. 00:15:05.025 --> 00:15:08.945 Again, it's not to say that nobody's paying attention to these features. 00:15:08.945 --> 00:15:19.980 It's just that it's a minority approach, It's a minority view that is open to these as well as, more traditional, natural science empirical research. 00:15:20.760 --> 00:15:36.375 And I think this would lead to a synthesis that that would contribute to a a more comprehensive, richer, and more pluralistic psychology than the contemporary version that we're all committed to participating in. 00:15:37.330 --> 00:15:39.810 And here, I'm gonna make a rather bold statement. 00:15:39.810 --> 00:15:45.750 I wonder what what, those of you participating think of this. 00:15:45.890 --> 00:15:48.230 Perhaps we can talk about it at the end. 00:15:48.815 --> 00:15:54.035 I think this would allow for a very for for very different kinds of psychology. 00:15:55.135 --> 00:16:12.170 Psychologies that are based on different world views than the world view of naturalism or materialism, which really is the dominant worldview in our day, including, can I say, a Catholic Christian psychology? 00:16:13.430 --> 00:16:24.285 Now I'm not suggesting that that's what is is being, proposed in in the meta model of the person. 00:16:25.225 --> 00:16:41.020 Maybe this is a little bit more my own, desire, to to work on a Christian psychology, but I had to I had to say it the way it was said, because I'm so appreciative of, of of a Catholic Christian agenda, honestly. 00:16:42.905 --> 00:16:58.970 We could talk about what Catholic means, you know, maybe in the question and answer time too, but I but I certainly, am deeply appreciative of the Catholic tradition, in the great tradition, and, consider myself a a student, eager to learn more. 00:17:00.310 --> 00:17:02.330 So what what is a form psychology? 00:17:02.390 --> 00:17:04.570 Well, we have to begin with what is a form. 00:17:05.510 --> 00:17:12.245 This concept is, as I suspect you know very well, has a rich heritage in Western thought. 00:17:12.245 --> 00:17:17.365 Aristotle, wasn't the first to use it, but he distinguished between form and matters. 00:17:17.365 --> 00:17:27.330 You probably all know, arguing that form is the particular organization of the matter of a natural being, which it shares in common with other similar beings. 00:17:28.030 --> 00:17:41.165 He believed that a human soul was the form of the body of a particular individual, and I I think I'm I'm far from knowledgeable in these matters, but I think Aquinas basically accepted Aristotle's understanding in this area. 00:17:41.945 --> 00:17:43.965 But I'm happy to to learn more today. 00:17:44.505 --> 00:18:00.210 In in our day, form can mean a visible shape or configuration as well as the essential nature of a species of a thing, and its synonyms are whole, structure, scheme, pattern, system, and gestalt. 00:18:01.985 --> 00:18:12.885 I will be using form in a very specific way to refer to a pattern or a configuration of the features of the whole human person. 00:18:14.050 --> 00:18:20.870 And I think that there may be a number of forms of the human person. 00:18:21.330 --> 00:18:25.330 I think there are multiple forms of the human person. 00:18:25.330 --> 00:18:39.755 So I'm obviously stretching what Aristotle and Aquinas was getting at, though I think you'll see that I'm actually agreeing with them and maybe I hope I'm expanding and elaborating on, the notion of the soul as form. 00:18:39.755 --> 00:18:55.960 But I I think there are many forms of the form, if I can if I can put it that way, including the body, personality, the self, and and some other ones that we're gonna look at briefly, communion, narrative, character, and the Imago Dei. 00:18:58.105 --> 00:19:01.165 And I think I didn't finish that sentence, so we'll move on. 00:19:02.825 --> 00:19:12.860 So now I'm gonna go through a list of the forms that I that that, inform a form psychology. 00:19:13.720 --> 00:19:17.180 And I think we're gonna look at maybe seven or eight of them today. 00:19:19.000 --> 00:19:21.880 The first, we we're we're gonna start with the body. 00:19:21.880 --> 00:19:24.300 The the living body is a material form. 00:19:25.205 --> 00:19:38.550 It is a person's location in space, their physical presence, and we might say one's sight of engagement with the world and others in in this life. 00:19:39.010 --> 00:19:42.870 One's living body, however, is an object among other objects. 00:19:43.010 --> 00:19:47.430 And so I wanna distinguish something that some phenomenologists have been talking about, the flesh. 00:19:48.210 --> 00:19:55.385 The flesh, by contrast, is an invisible form, like all of the other forms that we're gonna look at. 00:19:55.605 --> 00:20:10.230 The flesh is the experience of one's living body, the living body from within, we might say, an ongoing unity of impressions, affections, and initiatives in the course of life. 00:20:11.010 --> 00:20:20.070 Can I say the the embodied soul with nothing else added when we when we refer to the form of the flesh? 00:20:21.285 --> 00:20:25.625 I wanna suggest that the the most important part of the flesh is the heart. 00:20:27.525 --> 00:20:45.090 I'm speaking of the heart psychological heart, which is, we might say, the depth and center of the soul out of which precedes our emotions, our values, and as we develop our loves, our virtues, and, yes, our worship. 00:20:46.030 --> 00:20:58.275 And because the Holy Spirit comes to live in in the heart, in the flesh, in the body, when we are regenerated, all of that is changed, I think. 00:20:58.275 --> 00:21:06.660 I I think all of that is affected by the holy spirit who dwells in in our innermost being, in the heart. 00:21:07.520 --> 00:21:22.175 The living body and the flesh, therefore, are corollary forms, material holes of the human person, originary and basic and inextricably united in their materiality. 00:21:24.075 --> 00:21:24.975 Excuse me. 00:21:26.635 --> 00:21:27.035 Alright. 00:21:27.035 --> 00:21:30.255 Well, let's keep going to, another form. 00:21:31.035 --> 00:21:33.270 Personality architecture. 00:21:34.370 --> 00:21:45.350 I borrow this term from Servone, a social cognitive personality theorist, but just the term to to label Myers Mayer's model of personality. 00:21:46.245 --> 00:21:50.185 John Mayer is a wonderful personality psychologist in our day. 00:21:50.245 --> 00:22:01.960 And from his viewpoint, he would define personality psychology as the study of how psychological systems are organized into a whole. 00:22:02.580 --> 00:22:03.720 What is that whole? 00:22:03.860 --> 00:22:10.520 Well, I wanna suggest that whole could be labeled with Servone's term personality architecture. 00:22:11.585 --> 00:22:23.045 That architecture includes all the psychological components of the soul, including sensory, motor, cognitive, linguistic, affective, volitional, relational, artistic, ethical. 00:22:24.050 --> 00:22:25.250 We could go on and on. 00:22:25.250 --> 00:22:32.450 We need to include the spiritual systems and their subsystems common to all mature human beings. 00:22:32.450 --> 00:22:36.230 I'm speaking about the adult, you know, mature formation. 00:22:36.370 --> 00:22:43.425 Of course, human development studies how all of these, systems and subsystems develop over time. 00:22:43.725 --> 00:22:50.865 And and personality architecture, of course, also has to consider their grounding in neurological structures and in the living body. 00:22:51.630 --> 00:22:59.330 Perhaps we could liken the study of personality architecture and psychology to human anatomy and biology and medicine. 00:23:00.110 --> 00:23:06.345 However, it's the lowest level of at least the, invisible forms. 00:23:06.345 --> 00:23:09.965 I I have to qualify that given the fact that I I talked about the flesh. 00:23:10.265 --> 00:23:19.885 But, but I but I'm saying that in comparison to the other forms that we're gonna look at for it's almost entirely an abstraction far removed from most of human life. 00:23:20.890 --> 00:23:27.050 We could talk about it conceptually, but it's hard to get a handle on that in in everyday life. 00:23:27.050 --> 00:23:35.455 And I just I think that's a very important feature of a of a human science like psychology that we need to attend to. 00:23:36.555 --> 00:23:41.535 Well, next, let's consider personality signature. 00:23:42.715 --> 00:23:53.710 This term is borrowed from Daniel McAdams and, particularly one article where he highlights, the concept, with with pals. 00:23:53.850 --> 00:23:55.310 Can't remember her first name. 00:23:55.530 --> 00:24:13.985 But to refer to an individual's relatively unique configuration of cognitive, emotional, behavioral, and relational dispositions that are relatively stable across situations and over time, and that tend to distinguish one individual from others. 00:24:15.610 --> 00:24:19.150 This is what most of us think of when we think of the word personality. 00:24:19.370 --> 00:24:31.545 And, of course, this is so fascinating and interesting and has captured a lot a fair amount of attention over the, last hundred and fifty years in modern psychology that, interest has ebbed and flowed. 00:24:31.545 --> 00:24:40.445 And I think we're in a time where it's still fairly, less of interest than I'd say was in the fifties and sixties. 00:24:41.240 --> 00:24:48.300 But, we're all aware, I'm sure, of the most well supported model of personality signature, which is the five factor model. 00:24:48.760 --> 00:24:58.355 I won't go into that, but I I just want you to know that those are the kinds of things that would be considered in in a discussion of personality signature. 00:25:01.615 --> 00:25:07.555 Wanna move, next to the self as a form, but, actually, as two forms. 00:25:07.775 --> 00:25:14.010 There's I think two forms of the self have been identified in the history of of human thought. 00:25:14.710 --> 00:25:19.770 Mature humans have the capacity to be aware of and reflect upon themselves. 00:25:22.230 --> 00:25:35.985 Many psychologists, therefore, over the centuries, have distinguished between the I self, the knowing agentic self, the self as subject, and the me self. 00:25:36.765 --> 00:25:51.170 All that one knows and feels about oneself, especially what's one is conscious of, sometimes called one's self representation, sometimes termed the self as object. 00:25:51.710 --> 00:26:00.885 A distinction has been recognized to this day by some of the leading modern self psychologists. 00:26:00.885 --> 00:26:05.145 So the self as object or as self representation. 00:26:06.405 --> 00:26:24.330 One's self representation consists of the sum of one's knowledge and one's self knowledge and one's self evaluations, including various domains of oneself representation, like one's appearance self. 00:26:25.245 --> 00:26:35.425 The the the the knowledge and evaluation I have of how I appear to to my to myself in the mirror and to and to others, my physical self in that sense. 00:26:35.805 --> 00:26:39.905 But also my athletic self is different from my appearance self. 00:26:40.070 --> 00:26:48.950 So I might not be very attractive physically, but I might be very, given to sports, very good basketball player, for example. 00:26:48.950 --> 00:26:55.270 So my athletic self could be I could feel really happy about that and not so happy about my appearance. 00:26:55.270 --> 00:26:58.945 So, we also have a social self, an intellectual self. 00:26:59.405 --> 00:27:06.065 Susan Harder has identified, I think, in adulthood over 20 of these domains of self representation. 00:27:07.325 --> 00:27:16.510 And so all of that would go into how we view ourselves as an object, as well as one's future selves. 00:27:16.890 --> 00:27:31.415 And I think parts of oneself that we become aware of, in in adulthood, like one's false self, All of that would be included in one's self as object, one's self representation. 00:27:31.715 --> 00:27:34.135 All of this is a form I'm suggesting. 00:27:34.755 --> 00:27:47.980 It's a whole of the person that has been, I kind of identified, separated out, recognized as, having certain unique features. 00:27:49.495 --> 00:27:58.955 And it differs from, in some respects, from the self as subject or what I like to term personal agent. 00:27:59.655 --> 00:28:21.005 The self as subject refers to the sense that mature humans have of being an alive, conscious, embodied, self aware, unique, rational, volitional, moral, and relatively free source of their own actions, a center of being as it were for which I'm I'm sorry. 00:28:21.005 --> 00:28:22.365 I should have finished the sentence. 00:28:22.365 --> 00:28:32.385 A free source of their own actions for which they are responsible, but but also the sense that that mature humans have of being the center of their, of who they are. 00:28:33.210 --> 00:28:39.150 Many terms are used for this form, but the one I've settled on is personal agent. 00:28:40.650 --> 00:28:44.270 Well, some contemporary psychologists began to investigate this form. 00:28:44.970 --> 00:28:56.135 Most, I think, mainstream modern psychologists would say it belongs in philosophy because of of the the quality of subjectivity that many of its features entail. 00:28:59.830 --> 00:29:01.290 Well, let's move to character. 00:29:03.510 --> 00:29:12.410 I think another striking contribution of the meta model of the person is the work that's been done in that book on character. 00:29:13.295 --> 00:29:22.575 And I don't have to tell you, how how special that work is, but I I just wanna let you know I'm I see it, and I appreciate it. 00:29:22.575 --> 00:29:24.995 And, it's it's a major contribution. 00:29:26.410 --> 00:29:28.730 And and character is a form too. 00:29:28.730 --> 00:29:32.510 It's a it's a it's a a perspective on the whole person. 00:29:33.130 --> 00:29:35.790 I would say an aspect of the whole person. 00:29:36.170 --> 00:29:39.290 Character is a form in two related but distinct ways. 00:29:39.290 --> 00:29:49.155 First, as the tapestry of one's virtues and vices, one's morally significant dispositions at a given point in time. 00:29:50.095 --> 00:29:59.130 And second, I would say we you we often use the term in a very different way, but also an important way as the tell us of one's moral development. 00:30:00.150 --> 00:30:03.210 And we may have may have that more or less well articulated. 00:30:03.750 --> 00:30:14.425 We may be more or less self aware of what that is, but it operates at some conscious, semiconscious, unconscious level guiding human life, I think. 00:30:15.285 --> 00:30:23.145 Personal agency, we should add, the form of personal agency determines to some extent the shape of one's character. 00:30:24.890 --> 00:30:30.010 And that's an interesting, distinction, I think, to that we could tease out. 00:30:30.010 --> 00:30:30.670 You know? 00:30:31.050 --> 00:30:35.870 I'm suggesting that two forms are I think they're all interrelated, of course. 00:30:36.010 --> 00:30:44.585 But in a very special way, person the form of personal agency, is extremely influential on the shape, the form of character. 00:30:46.005 --> 00:30:54.745 Like personal agency, this this form has been more the focus of philosophy over the centuries than the work of modern psychology. 00:30:55.440 --> 00:31:14.585 That's certainly been the case until this century, this particular century, in in in the advent of positive psychology when, in year 2000, that that movement, that discipline, we maybe could say call it, began investigating the virtues. 00:31:15.445 --> 00:31:29.460 And, gee, it was very clear that, folks at DMU are really appreciative and really contributing to the field of positive psychology as as I as I have and and and do, very much. 00:31:29.920 --> 00:31:37.805 But I also wanna mention here that positive psychology has given very little consideration to character as a whole. 00:31:38.745 --> 00:31:55.260 As we think about the many, you know, hundreds of studies now that have been done in positive psychology, they primarily are focusing on virtues, which, of course, is really important and sent foundational to our understanding of character, constitutive of our understanding of character. 00:31:55.720 --> 00:31:56.120 Yes. 00:31:56.120 --> 00:31:56.520 Yes. 00:31:56.520 --> 00:31:57.180 That's true. 00:31:57.560 --> 00:32:04.840 But it's it's hard to find actual treatments of the subject of character, at least, that I'm aware of. 00:32:04.840 --> 00:32:09.355 And I'd really be very happy to find exceptions to that. 00:32:09.355 --> 00:32:12.415 But, that's my understanding thus far. 00:32:12.875 --> 00:32:33.130 Moreover, the fact that every moral tradition and commute or or community has its own telos suggests a need for greater pluralism within this discipline of positive psychology, perhaps leading to a change in the label someday, positive psychologies. 00:32:34.485 --> 00:32:39.845 I I think someday that that ought to become more present in the literature. 00:32:39.845 --> 00:32:43.845 It's there, and there are some people who are more, aware of it than others. 00:32:43.845 --> 00:33:04.985 But I think contemporary positive psychology still is has a modern bias towards a kind of tradition neutral approach, a tradition kind of gen development of a kind of generic approach to human beings that ignores moral traditions and communities. 00:33:05.045 --> 00:33:29.870 And and and while there are exceptions to that, I think this will be a significant advance that I'm I I suggest or that I I suspect, that the folks listening today, would agree, needs to grow and develop, into a a more pluralistic appreciation for how important community is in the formation of character. 00:33:32.575 --> 00:33:36.275 Communion, I think, is another form. 00:33:36.575 --> 00:33:37.555 Let me explain. 00:33:38.175 --> 00:33:51.630 It's a it's a form different than all the others in that it's essentially social, consisting of any significant relationship between at least two humans. 00:33:52.170 --> 00:34:09.870 Now I've I've jumped into an another dimension here, in in this way, and I I I need more time to really unpack what this means because I've kind of violated the maybe we could say the the rules that have guided the previous, definitions of form, so much. 00:34:10.350 --> 00:34:25.765 Because, really, I'm suggesting that that every relationship a person has could be seen as a form, could be seen as a kind of communion, and therefore, there would be multiple forms of communion. 00:34:25.985 --> 00:34:31.045 And, gee, that that just that requires a lot more explanation than I have the time to give it today. 00:34:31.425 --> 00:34:38.005 But, let me let me add that this form may seem counterintuitive to everything I've said up to this point. 00:34:38.630 --> 00:34:43.290 I think particularly from an individualistic Western standpoint. 00:34:44.230 --> 00:34:53.465 But the concept of form applies to any whole, historically, and then even in the word the way we use the word. 00:34:53.465 --> 00:34:57.565 So all the holes that we know are compounds of some sort or other. 00:34:57.865 --> 00:35:01.485 And while it might be a jump, I don't think it's a big jump. 00:35:02.265 --> 00:35:18.020 It it I think it reflects what Brett Slife has called a strong relational view of humanity, where sociality is not an add on feature to the individual, but it's constitutive of human beings. 00:35:18.665 --> 00:35:43.420 And I I know having read the meta model, of the person book that the folks at DMU feel at least similarly as I, if not identical to what I I'm not certainly suggesting that you would necessarily agree with this assertion I'm making here, but but I know that there that you resonate with this sense of a strong you have a strong relational view of humanity as well. 00:35:43.420 --> 00:35:47.585 And and and I was delighted to see that theme throughout the the book. 00:35:48.605 --> 00:35:49.105 Gee. 00:35:49.165 --> 00:35:49.645 Why? 00:35:49.645 --> 00:36:02.385 Because Christianity is a strongly relational worldview for many reasons, but perhaps, ultimately, we can say because the trinity is our transcendent archetype, if I can use that word in that way. 00:36:03.010 --> 00:36:20.785 It it it but at at any rate, the the this form I'm calling communion, it encompasses gender and sexual dynamics, marital and family bonds, friendship, power and mutuality, interpersonal boundaries, obligations to the other degrees of intimacy and differentiation. 00:36:21.165 --> 00:36:23.345 I could go on and on, of course. 00:36:24.285 --> 00:36:28.385 And then maybe the last thing I could say is that the telos of communion is love. 00:36:31.490 --> 00:36:42.790 Well, let's move on to another sort of controversial kind of form because this is also different than all the others, at least in the way that I've talked about them so far. 00:36:42.930 --> 00:36:43.430 Narrative. 00:36:44.985 --> 00:36:49.325 Narrative because it's a in intrinsically temporal form. 00:36:50.185 --> 00:36:53.785 And let me just quote Daniel McAdams, one of the great narrative psychologists of our day. 00:36:53.785 --> 00:37:12.230 Life stories organize disparate experience into integrated wholes, Centered in the present, anchored in the past, and anticipating the future, the form of narrative increases in complexity over the lifespan. 00:37:13.010 --> 00:37:24.625 And and I wanna suggest this is a little tricky, but and I don't have time to unpack it, but it's derived from one's real life embodied existential drama. 00:37:25.725 --> 00:37:31.020 I think there's a a an important distinction to be made between one's narrative and one's drama. 00:37:31.800 --> 00:37:34.760 But, the narrative is what we kinda carry around with us. 00:37:34.760 --> 00:37:36.140 The drama is what we're living. 00:37:37.000 --> 00:37:43.985 But but the narrative is what we carry around with us, and it's a form that develops over time derived from our drama. 00:37:44.285 --> 00:37:52.045 But that narrative should become increasingly well integrated over the course of our lives unless it's been hampered by trauma. 00:37:52.045 --> 00:38:17.485 And, of course, there's been some wonderful work over the last twenty years in understanding how trauma inhibits the development of a healthy narrative because of it, research on attachment and its, unfolding effects throughout life and and and the impediments to, to, the to a healthy narrative, that are the result of a a insecure attachment early in life. 00:38:18.025 --> 00:38:26.125 But, nonetheless, a narrative as a whole, and, I would argue a kind of form of the person. 00:38:29.120 --> 00:38:32.820 The last one that we're gonna talk about today is Imago Dei. 00:38:34.400 --> 00:38:46.255 Imago Dei has been understood in different ways over the centuries as as we all know, but I think we could boil them all down to two. 00:38:46.255 --> 00:38:50.035 To human resemblance to god in many of its facets. 00:38:50.175 --> 00:38:57.530 Of course, theologians and philosophers probably argue about about that, you know, what's most important in that resemblance. 00:38:57.910 --> 00:38:59.630 We won't go there tonight today. 00:38:59.630 --> 00:39:22.185 But, also, I think a very important, other way that the image of God has been understood that is very important for for so many reasons, because it's less static than than the first, discussion tends to be, is the intentional reflection of God. 00:39:23.550 --> 00:39:27.570 I think it was maybe Irenaeus was the first one to identify that. 00:39:28.830 --> 00:39:47.195 But this intentional reflection of God, the Imago Dei as a as a mirror of what we receive from God in worship in in that wonderful term that I've read from so many Catholics, active receptivity, in love, and it's in in accountability. 00:39:47.815 --> 00:39:52.930 All of that is a part of this intentional reflection of God, I think. 00:39:53.710 --> 00:39:56.990 And so, this too is a whole. 00:39:56.990 --> 00:39:58.610 It's a form, I think. 00:39:58.670 --> 00:40:00.290 The Imago Dei is a form. 00:40:00.670 --> 00:40:03.890 It's the highest form, I think, from a Christian standpoint. 00:40:04.030 --> 00:40:07.905 It's we might say it's the fulfillment of all the other forms. 00:40:07.905 --> 00:40:16.325 In some sense, perhaps all the other forms feed into this highest form in some sense. 00:40:17.105 --> 00:40:29.000 To love god supremely entails loving all creatures in relation to him, including oneself and living accordingly. 00:40:29.860 --> 00:40:36.440 And so the Imago Dei is a, we might say, a master psychological concept for a Christian psychology. 00:40:38.025 --> 00:40:51.725 This form then gives a sense of transcendent unity and meaningfulness to human life, the neglect of which we theist believe is disastrous for human beings in the long run. 00:40:55.010 --> 00:40:59.590 And where shall I go next, but to talk about Jesus? 00:41:01.410 --> 00:41:10.535 The son of God, we're told, exists in the form of God, but became flesh and now exists in human form, morphe. 00:41:11.795 --> 00:41:32.830 As the image of God, Jesus Christ in his life, death, resurrection, and ascension is the archetype and telos of humanity in in a sense qualified properly, of course, after whom all human beings were patterned and according to which their lives are to be conformed. 00:41:34.965 --> 00:41:52.250 Form psychology, I'll tell you, was inspired by the great twentieth century Catholic theologian, Hans von Balthazar, who referred to Jesus Christ in his one of his great works, the volume one of the glory of the Lord as the form of all forms. 00:41:58.630 --> 00:42:18.740 The gift of God who united God and humanity for all eternity in in his own person, who is now reconciling humanity to God and offering transcendent meaning and purpose to all human beings. 00:42:20.160 --> 00:42:27.620 A Christian form psychology sees Christ as its foundation, as its center, and as its end. 00:42:31.005 --> 00:42:35.665 So we've covered a a lot of territory, in in our time together. 00:42:37.005 --> 00:42:45.850 Let us summarize, the features of the form, which I hope will help clarify the definition because I didn't give much of a definition at the beginning. 00:42:47.510 --> 00:42:51.590 The forms, I would suggest in maybe I don't know. 00:42:51.590 --> 00:42:52.950 I don't know if I wanna stick to this. 00:42:52.950 --> 00:42:59.525 I came up with this this week, and I might change my mind next week, or after our conversation, later. 00:42:59.585 --> 00:43:04.725 The form but I'm this is what what I said, earlier this week when I was preparing this, slide. 00:43:04.865 --> 00:43:08.005 The forms supervene on the soul. 00:43:08.945 --> 00:43:10.385 Maybe maybe that's true. 00:43:10.385 --> 00:43:11.605 Maybe that makes sense. 00:43:11.780 --> 00:43:16.260 The forms supervene on the soul and the and forms in the soul. 00:43:16.260 --> 00:43:20.920 Maybe the the the forms and the form of the soul supervene on the body. 00:43:22.980 --> 00:43:23.800 I don't know. 00:43:24.305 --> 00:43:25.205 Try that out. 00:43:25.505 --> 00:43:28.245 Help me out if if if you don't think that that works. 00:43:29.345 --> 00:43:34.065 But here's here's some other considerations of the fee of features of the form. 00:43:34.065 --> 00:43:40.570 The forms share some features with each form, shares some features with other forms. 00:43:40.570 --> 00:43:45.230 But but but each form is a unique configuration of the soul. 00:43:46.410 --> 00:43:50.250 It's a unique configuration, I should say, of the of features of the soul. 00:43:50.250 --> 00:43:59.165 The soul would would be that which encompasses all the features of our invisible immaterial nature. 00:44:01.865 --> 00:44:09.520 But each form would be a particular configuration, so we might say a set of features of the soul. 00:44:12.540 --> 00:44:17.420 And, yeah, and I and we should add, you know, maybe there's there's some that we haven't figured out yet. 00:44:17.420 --> 00:44:19.500 Maybe someday we'll find another form. 00:44:19.500 --> 00:44:20.320 I don't know. 00:44:20.625 --> 00:44:30.325 But at least the ones that we've looked at have been identified as, what I'm calling forms that that that humans are capable of discerning. 00:44:31.585 --> 00:44:47.330 God, of course, knows the soul better than any human being, and perhaps there are forms that he knows of that we don't see a a configuration of features that we're not capable of discerning, but I'll leave that up to more speculative types. 00:44:47.790 --> 00:44:49.490 Some forms are not identifiable. 00:44:50.935 --> 00:44:59.035 This is very important, feat a summary of features of of a form, I think. 00:44:59.255 --> 00:45:03.755 That some forms are not identifiable without a sufficient degree of human maturity. 00:45:05.670 --> 00:45:12.410 And and, boy, I'm I said a lot there because that's intrinsically critical of of some, versions of psychology. 00:45:14.150 --> 00:45:17.990 I I you know, I'm saying human maturity, and and I know that's a that's loaded. 00:45:17.990 --> 00:45:21.305 I'm speaking about that human maturity from a a Christian standpoint. 00:45:21.365 --> 00:45:24.325 But on the other hand, I think it's it's true. 00:45:24.325 --> 00:45:34.745 This is certainly reflected in the virtues tradition that, that in order to to to see certain things, one has to have a certain kind of character. 00:45:36.870 --> 00:45:38.570 And that's all I'm really saying. 00:45:39.750 --> 00:45:52.045 But that I think that's one reason why modern psychology is thus far incapable at least most, you know, mainstream modern psychology is incapable of of seeing certain forms. 00:45:53.705 --> 00:46:13.340 They they their their worldview prevents them a naturalistic worldview prevents them from being able to see, patterns of the soul that, folks who have a a a more elaborate, a fuller, more comprehensive worldview are unable to see. 00:46:15.825 --> 00:46:23.985 And so I I don't speak out of I don't want to speak out of any pride or or suggest that Christians are somehow better than than than anyone else. 00:46:23.985 --> 00:46:26.005 That's not my point, at all. 00:46:26.225 --> 00:46:30.805 But but but there's a point to be made here that I think needs to be stated. 00:46:31.640 --> 00:46:35.500 Each form is irreducible to the others, I think. 00:46:36.680 --> 00:46:43.260 They can be ordered according to their respective meaningfulness and ontological and human value. 00:46:44.225 --> 00:46:52.165 Now I'm not suggesting I did that this evening because I'm not suggesting that that the body and the flesh are necessarily the lowest forms. 00:46:52.625 --> 00:46:58.885 I don't really believe they are, but so the order that I presented them in is not necessarily that order. 00:46:59.310 --> 00:47:11.710 I'm just suggesting that I think there's some work to be done in in reflecting on that and and, seeking to discern their their respective meaningfulness and ontological and human value. 00:47:11.710 --> 00:47:21.925 Some forms are more important to us to become the kind of person that that we are to become, that god is calling us to become. 00:47:23.985 --> 00:47:33.820 They vary also in the degree to which they are knowable through a first person perspective, a second person perspective, and a third pers perspective. 00:47:36.120 --> 00:47:39.480 And all of them are teleological in some sense. 00:47:39.480 --> 00:47:52.125 And we all are aware that this is an area that, modern psychology has neglected, unfortunately, for the most part over the last hundred years or more. 00:47:55.890 --> 00:48:06.230 Well, let me take another step into controversy, but but but I but I but I wanna I wanna do so, knowing the risk. 00:48:06.775 --> 00:48:09.495 A potential but let me admit the reason why I wanna go here. 00:48:09.495 --> 00:48:13.515 A potential problem for reform psychology is how do we understand the whole person? 00:48:14.135 --> 00:48:32.660 Are we not left with a set of holes and and maybe made made our you know, if I if I complain about the fragmentation of modern thought and modern psychology, maybe I've just created my own fragmentation here, right, with this set of forms lacking a wholeness. 00:48:34.885 --> 00:48:36.425 So I wanna disagree. 00:48:37.765 --> 00:48:42.745 That's not that's it's actually the opposite conclusion that I hope people will draw from this conversation. 00:48:43.685 --> 00:48:47.305 And let me suggest that this these would be my, some of my arguments. 00:48:47.970 --> 00:49:01.215 Human life is constrained by an essential unity that is intrinsically greater than the sum of its forms, I you know, than the sum of its parts. 00:49:01.375 --> 00:49:09.795 But but in this case, what I wanna suggest is that the essential unity of the person is greater than the sum of its forms. 00:49:11.615 --> 00:49:18.660 Secondly, you and I experience a fundamental you oneness to our to our being. 00:49:19.440 --> 00:49:25.680 And and I I'm not giving much evidence for it in this in this slide, but but we all know it to be the case. 00:49:25.680 --> 00:49:39.805 And if we work in, study psychology, we know that much of psychology is is studying that sense of oneness, this integration, this this this power almost that the soul has been endowed with. 00:49:39.805 --> 00:49:41.585 In fact, I think I call it that way. 00:49:43.270 --> 00:49:43.510 Yeah. 00:49:43.510 --> 00:49:44.790 Let let me let me move on. 00:49:46.070 --> 00:49:47.590 So let me let me read that again. 00:49:47.590 --> 00:50:06.275 Humans experience a fundamental oneness to our being beginning with their originary experience from birth that simply develops in complexity over their lifespan, span, disrupted only by sin and exposure to the insults of a fallen world that can disrupt that certainly and cause dissociation. 00:50:07.135 --> 00:50:09.295 But that's not the way it's supposed to be. 00:50:09.295 --> 00:50:09.615 Right? 00:50:09.615 --> 00:50:14.790 That's not the way we naturally tend according to God's design plan. 00:50:16.130 --> 00:50:24.070 And then the trinity presents the archetypal model of plurality and unity, after which we're patterned and to which we are to become conformed. 00:50:24.130 --> 00:50:36.225 So I I don't think, I I think the same criticism, I suppose, of of form psychology could be labeled against the doctrine of the trinity, and I suspect few of us would wanna go there. 00:50:37.005 --> 00:50:44.900 However, the soul let let me add that the soul's intrinsic power can continuous unification is a mystery. 00:50:44.900 --> 00:50:46.440 I don't understand that. 00:50:47.380 --> 00:50:56.840 But but it's there nonetheless operating in a in in in our unconscious certainly and and to some degree in our conscious awareness. 00:50:57.615 --> 00:51:08.675 Recognizing, therefore, the the personal unity of human life is a feature of Christian psychology, which sees the whole person as inviolably sacred. 00:51:10.970 --> 00:51:13.790 So how are we to think of the plural form? 00:51:15.450 --> 00:51:19.630 I wanna just offer a a a simple concrete model. 00:51:20.730 --> 00:51:27.275 I'm not sure how helpful it is, but I'll offer it, as a as a set of Russian dolls. 00:51:27.575 --> 00:51:34.155 As you know, if you've seen them, each one is a whole doll nested within a larger doll. 00:51:34.775 --> 00:51:47.470 Together, they somewhat crudely represent a hierarchy of forms with higher forms providing a richer holistic context within which the lower forms are rendered more meaningful. 00:51:49.425 --> 00:51:53.845 Forms are not parts that together compose a plural form. 00:51:54.545 --> 00:51:56.325 A plural form is not an aggregate. 00:51:56.465 --> 00:52:04.630 It's not a composite or a compound of a set of forms as if each form was a piece of the whole pie. 00:52:04.630 --> 00:52:07.130 That's not what I'm wanting to communicate here. 00:52:07.910 --> 00:52:12.330 And help me if you can help me do a a better job of of this point. 00:52:14.070 --> 00:52:17.610 Yet the concept of a plural form is abstract. 00:52:19.805 --> 00:52:22.465 That's a problem with the term form for that matter. 00:52:23.725 --> 00:52:31.505 Plural form I'm using the term plural form then as, a term of, the the unity of the forms. 00:52:32.360 --> 00:52:42.220 But let me let me try and make connections to other aspects of what what we know and probably most of mostly agree upon upon. 00:52:43.160 --> 00:52:45.820 So the concept of a plural form is abstract. 00:52:46.040 --> 00:52:50.905 It needs to be personalized in order to be properly understood. 00:52:50.905 --> 00:52:56.265 I'm not sure how to do that, but I it seems to me necessary somehow for us to move in that direction. 00:52:56.265 --> 00:52:58.185 So let me let me put it this way. 00:52:58.185 --> 00:53:00.525 A mature human soul is a plural. 00:53:01.490 --> 00:53:03.030 I would I would say they're synonyms. 00:53:03.090 --> 00:53:06.870 I'm I'm quite happy to call that a synonymous sentence. 00:53:07.090 --> 00:53:07.650 You know? 00:53:07.650 --> 00:53:14.710 There's a better way of putting that, but, a plural form is a fully developed human person. 00:53:16.865 --> 00:53:18.225 And let me say it this way. 00:53:18.225 --> 00:53:22.965 A person is the unity, integrity, and fulfillment of all the forms. 00:53:25.185 --> 00:53:32.165 Put differently, the plural form is multifaceted and integral to being a mature person. 00:53:34.200 --> 00:53:41.340 And let me add finally I think this is finally, in terms of explaining what what is a plural form. 00:53:41.640 --> 00:53:51.475 And, each mature human person is ultimately ontologically one and absolutely, utterly unique. 00:53:52.655 --> 00:54:03.540 Well, you can tell I'm trying this that whole paragraph is just talking about synonyms using different words to say the same thing in slightly different ways or at least with a different term. 00:54:04.080 --> 00:54:08.960 The forms that will be most helpful however, I wanna I wanna say this. 00:54:08.960 --> 00:54:44.245 The forms that would be most helpful in the realization of of the wholeness of of the person, of the wholeness of the plural form are the flesh, especially the heart, purse personal agent and the conscience, character and the will of my father in heaven, narrative because of the unifying power of one story, communion because of the power of human relationship, and, ultimately, the Imago Dei, and, therefore, times that we spend with our god in worship and in communion. 00:54:44.545 --> 00:54:59.820 All of these would be ways in which our unity as personal beings, the unity of the person are are fed, are reinforced, grow. 00:55:00.760 --> 00:55:09.660 And and and let me just add, all of these forms involve the heart, the the unifying organ of the soul. 00:55:15.865 --> 00:55:20.045 So I think I just this might I think I just have two slides to go. 00:55:23.065 --> 00:55:40.820 So I wanna suggest that a form psychology could be a subdiscipline of Christian psych of a Christian psychology in the same way that personality psychology is a subdiscipline of modern psychology. 00:55:43.005 --> 00:55:48.225 Now that's that is, you know, saying a lot of controversial things there in a way. 00:55:48.605 --> 00:55:55.565 I I I, I love personality psychology, and I, you know, it's it's contributed to this discussion, of course. 00:55:56.680 --> 00:55:59.980 I think the study of personality is extremely valuable. 00:56:01.000 --> 00:56:21.285 But I think when you study the history of the study of personality in mod in modern psychology, you'll find that the study of the whole person's been severely constrained by positivism and what natural science methods will let modern psychologists get away with. 00:56:22.305 --> 00:56:23.285 And it's inadequate. 00:56:26.080 --> 00:56:37.780 I I think I think it's okay to say that that there are aspects of modern psychology that are inadequate, because of their commitment to certain methods. 00:56:40.125 --> 00:56:50.785 Form psychology is not psychology according to a modern definition of psychology. 00:56:52.950 --> 00:57:04.090 If we're to define psychology as it's derived psychology is a science derived exclusively from objectivist empirical research. 00:57:06.265 --> 00:57:19.490 I, recently floated a proposal for the a book on form psychology to one of the leading editors of the American Psychological Association printing press. 00:57:19.490 --> 00:57:21.330 And and he was very kind. 00:57:21.330 --> 00:57:25.430 We had a wonderful spirited conversation over the course of a couple weeks. 00:57:26.050 --> 00:57:38.985 And he wrote back to say that APA wouldn't be interested in in in this, proposal because there are too many ways in which I'm doing philosophy and theology, which are not a part of psychology. 00:57:40.565 --> 00:57:46.320 And, you know, I kinda felt like I had to send it first to APA, you know, just to kinda kinda see what would happen. 00:57:46.320 --> 00:57:52.340 And, you know, I'm I I'm always open to surprises, but that wasn't you know, I ended up not being surprised. 00:57:54.320 --> 00:57:57.620 It it doesn't fit the definition of modern psychology. 00:57:57.680 --> 00:58:00.805 May maybe maybe some are thinking here today. 00:58:00.865 --> 00:58:01.505 It doesn't. 00:58:01.505 --> 00:58:02.165 It shouldn't. 00:58:02.705 --> 00:58:03.525 That's okay. 00:58:04.545 --> 00:58:06.545 Some forms belong to empirical psychology. 00:58:06.545 --> 00:58:07.925 Others belong to philosophy. 00:58:08.145 --> 00:58:10.305 At least one, Imago Dei, belongs to theology. 00:58:10.305 --> 00:58:11.045 That's okay. 00:58:13.530 --> 00:58:20.990 But what if what if academic disciplines are an inevitable consequence of our finitude? 00:58:22.810 --> 00:58:31.805 Good as far as they go, but not necessary for the fullest understanding of which human beings are capable. 00:58:33.705 --> 00:58:42.530 How does god view the complexity of his creation, particularly the creation of his creation of human beings? 00:58:43.790 --> 00:58:47.490 Does god know his creation according to disciplines? 00:58:49.310 --> 00:59:06.975 I suspect he does, but not that he would be constrained by that, not that he would be in any way limited to understanding human beings through chemistry, physics, biology, psychology, sociology, and so on and so forth. 00:59:08.450 --> 00:59:12.870 Because we understand that knowledge is simple for god, and knowledge is one. 00:59:13.090 --> 00:59:14.790 God knows all things at once. 00:59:16.530 --> 00:59:25.125 God sees how everything is related to everything else in in the truest sense imaginable, truest sense possible. 00:59:26.065 --> 00:59:31.685 God's omniscience makes disciplines irrelevant for him, ultimately. 00:59:33.800 --> 00:59:40.300 So what if the goal of human life is to think and love like god does, ultimately? 00:59:43.480 --> 00:59:45.260 Admittedly, we're finite beings. 00:59:45.875 --> 00:59:52.375 But but if that's our goal, then maybe the intellectual process of analysis, a good process. 00:59:54.035 --> 00:59:54.355 Yes. 00:59:54.355 --> 00:59:55.155 For sure. 00:59:55.155 --> 00:59:55.655 Absolutely. 00:59:56.115 --> 00:59:57.255 Analysis is wonderful. 00:59:57.955 --> 00:59:59.015 It's a great gift. 01:00:00.160 --> 01:00:04.820 Analysis separates reality into disciplines and further into component parts. 01:00:05.840 --> 01:00:08.660 In order to better understand it, we must do analysis. 01:00:10.080 --> 01:00:14.500 But what if the intellectual process of analysis must be balanced? 01:00:15.965 --> 01:00:19.585 It must be balanced by the intellectual process of synthesis. 01:00:19.965 --> 01:00:34.390 Maybe it's actually a cycle of analysis and synthesis, analysis and synthesis, analysis and synthesis in which we seek to know reality and its unity under god like the human person. 01:00:36.210 --> 01:00:40.130 But if we need both analysis or let me put it this way. 01:00:40.130 --> 01:00:56.675 So if we need both analysis and synthesis to know and love well, then the pendulum of Western intellectual life needs to swing back considerably from our age of extreme analysis. 01:00:58.175 --> 01:01:02.370 And maybe Christianity would help lead the way. 01:01:05.390 --> 01:01:13.870 So, that's that's the end of of our conversation, and, I think we're gonna take a little bit a little break. 01:01:13.870 --> 01:01:16.530 Maybe somebody's gonna explain what we're gonna do next. 01:01:17.045 --> 01:01:18.265 What a kind invitation. 01:01:18.485 --> 01:01:19.045 Thank you. 01:01:19.045 --> 01:01:21.045 We will, in fact, do exactly that. 01:01:21.045 --> 01:01:41.280 We're gonna take about three to five minutes at this point, precisely in order for doctor Johnson to be able to look a little bit at, the questions that have come in, maybe prioritize them a little bit, and then we will, we'll resume with a question and answer period. 01:01:41.660 --> 01:01:53.615 So if you if you are, still have a a last minute question, you can try to sneak that in using the the chat box there at the base of the screen or the q and a box, which some people have already used. 01:01:53.835 --> 01:01:57.210 But we'll take about, about three to five minutes. 01:01:57.450 --> 01:02:02.970 And when doctor Johnson is ready, we will start our question and answer period. 01:02:02.970 --> 01:02:09.390 We'll run till about probably pretty close to 07:00 this evening, maybe run over just a little bit. 01:02:10.025 --> 01:02:13.165 So good good twenty minutes of, q and a. 01:02:13.705 --> 01:02:20.605 So maybe refill your water if you need to as we're preparing for that, and we will we'll begin shortly. 01:02:20.745 --> 01:02:21.485 Thank you. 01:02:21.680 --> 01:02:23.520 I'm just gonna begin with what I have here. 01:02:23.840 --> 01:02:25.600 Oh, my I'm just so happy. 01:02:25.600 --> 01:02:27.200 I'm just so happy by these questions. 01:02:27.200 --> 01:02:28.260 I can't tell you. 01:02:29.680 --> 01:02:32.260 Anyway, it's beautiful. 01:02:32.400 --> 01:02:35.965 What is the relationship of this meta model with Jungian and Adept psychology? 01:02:35.965 --> 01:02:40.705 Or or perhaps what's the relationship between form psychology and Jungian and depth psychology? 01:02:41.405 --> 01:02:45.425 And, you know, that, I have to think about that some. 01:02:46.765 --> 01:02:48.385 I certainly believe in the unconscious. 01:02:49.380 --> 01:02:58.600 And, and and so the question is but but I haven't I haven't I haven't thought deeply about where to put the unconscious in all of this. 01:02:58.900 --> 01:03:00.740 You know, which form does it fit best? 01:03:00.740 --> 01:03:03.745 It probably is in both in multiple forms. 01:03:03.745 --> 01:03:13.045 But, it's it's obviously would be a part of and I did think of it in this years ago, in in, the personality architecture. 01:03:13.745 --> 01:03:21.640 If you know, I mean, even Freud's early model of conscious, preconscious, and unconscious is a is a kind of architecture. 01:03:22.580 --> 01:03:31.160 I think we can do a lot more than that, and and John Meyer has has done such, to some degree, from a secular standpoint. 01:03:31.220 --> 01:03:36.285 So so at the very least, it's a part of the architecture of the soul. 01:03:37.385 --> 01:03:51.110 But but I I I wanna say that it's it also has to be a part of a personal agent, because a personal agent is self aware aware of of, him or herself as a a center of consciousness. 01:03:51.810 --> 01:04:03.825 And and as we grow in in development, and this is something that Soren Kierkegaard, one of the great Christian psychologists of all time, I have to say I have to plug him because he's he's been so important to me. 01:04:04.525 --> 01:04:20.590 He talks a fair amount in his work about the the the, the the tell us of of human life in his understanding is to grow in transparency before god, which which would mean growing in greater awareness of our unconscious. 01:04:20.890 --> 01:04:23.950 And he certainly talked about the unconscious a lot in his work. 01:04:24.490 --> 01:04:27.230 So I think it also would be located in personal agency. 01:04:28.170 --> 01:04:32.765 But see, I want wanna take more time to think about that. 01:04:32.765 --> 01:04:39.585 Perhaps you you could help me with that and send me an email at e l johnson at, h b u dot e d u, by the way. 01:04:39.805 --> 01:04:41.985 I'd love to have that written in the chat box. 01:04:42.650 --> 01:04:50.090 Eljohnson@hbu.edu, because I would love to get more interaction on this. 01:04:50.090 --> 01:04:57.385 This is gonna be some of the best conversation I've had on this model since it got published, in an article. 01:04:58.085 --> 01:05:00.585 A lot of this thought, not all of it, but some of it. 01:05:01.925 --> 01:05:05.525 So, I think, you know, like, for example, I'm thinking the Imago day. 01:05:05.525 --> 01:05:12.170 Oh, I'd love to think more about that, and how the unconscious is related to that, but not tonight. 01:05:12.950 --> 01:05:13.450 Alright. 01:05:13.830 --> 01:05:18.730 In the book of Exodus, it's referenced multiple times that god has hardened the heart of pharaoh. 01:05:19.190 --> 01:05:23.450 This may be an archetype of our inner potential to become tyrannical. 01:05:24.635 --> 01:05:26.495 That's profound. 01:05:26.875 --> 01:05:31.695 What does it mean in reference to the to this meta model, the hardening of the heart? 01:05:32.555 --> 01:05:37.935 It just so happens that I've I've been doing some research on the heart as a psychological construct. 01:05:38.390 --> 01:05:44.730 I I presented that at APA, couple of years ago and and and wanting to write, on that. 01:05:45.110 --> 01:05:49.130 So I have I have given some thought, to to this. 01:05:50.565 --> 01:05:53.285 But, admittedly, you know, what is the hardening of the heart? 01:05:53.285 --> 01:05:59.545 You know, it's a psychological process, that's not explained. 01:06:00.565 --> 01:06:16.090 But, you know, if the opposite of hardening is opening of the heart, a softness of the heart, then it seems that that that is possible that our awareness that I think of the heart is located in our chest. 01:06:16.470 --> 01:06:32.155 And it it's it's our emotions and values and even virtues in some sense that that, get that certainly the processing much most of the processing is happening in our brain, but it shows up in our in our torso. 01:06:32.535 --> 01:06:35.995 I I don't understand all of that, but it's it's it's about interoception. 01:06:36.375 --> 01:06:55.475 It's about our sense of a lot of important things that are that are really important in in a Christian worldview, but I think are really important to all human beings that happen to show up when when I I get a pain in my heart, you know, that leads to the phrase I'm brokenhearted. 01:06:55.775 --> 01:06:57.555 Anyway, we could go on and on. 01:06:57.775 --> 01:06:59.455 But, gee, where did this come from? 01:06:59.455 --> 01:07:02.195 The Bible has what is it? 01:07:02.575 --> 01:07:05.220 At least eight or 900 uses of the word heart. 01:07:05.780 --> 01:07:12.360 One old testament theologian said heart is the most important psychological term in the Bible, and then interesting. 01:07:12.740 --> 01:07:22.715 And as your as this, questioner is pointing to, one of those really important phrases early in the Bible is about the hardening of the heart. 01:07:22.715 --> 01:07:25.695 So I'm not really answering your question because I don't really know the answer. 01:07:26.955 --> 01:07:32.815 But but that you know, what I said would be sort of my off the cuff understanding of that process. 01:07:34.370 --> 01:07:37.010 Is it something directed to the strengthening of conviction? 01:07:37.010 --> 01:07:39.190 I think that's a beautiful connection to make. 01:07:39.970 --> 01:07:45.910 Is this a clue on how agency comes, out of a a theological perspective? 01:07:46.050 --> 01:07:46.550 Yes. 01:07:47.095 --> 01:07:48.215 I'm just gonna agree with you. 01:07:48.215 --> 01:07:49.575 I think you're doing some great work. 01:07:49.575 --> 01:07:50.315 Keep going. 01:07:50.455 --> 01:07:51.015 You know? 01:07:51.015 --> 01:07:56.615 Does the hardening of pharaoh's heart, tie anything to the gravitas of one's will? 01:07:56.615 --> 01:07:57.115 Yes. 01:07:58.535 --> 01:07:59.895 I I'd love to meet you. 01:07:59.895 --> 01:08:06.890 Whoever wrote that, I'd love to meet you because we could have a lot of fun over a coffee or or or something else. 01:08:07.430 --> 01:08:11.530 In your lecture, you mentioned the possibility so this is the next question. 01:08:11.830 --> 01:08:17.895 You mentioned the possibility of having multiple psychologies based on different world views, for example, a Catholic Christian psychology. 01:08:18.115 --> 01:08:25.015 And you notice that much of psychology today is based almost exclusively on a materialistic, worldview or net and the natural sciences. 01:08:25.795 --> 01:08:36.440 There's a few other people that ask this question, and I think it's, the way that I phrased everything tonight, I think makes it liable that I could be interpreted as a relativist. 01:08:36.500 --> 01:08:41.080 So let me let me read a little bit more on that, some some other questions that were asked. 01:08:41.475 --> 01:08:46.775 You mentioned that there are or should be multiple psychologies, one for each moral community tradition. 01:08:47.075 --> 01:08:52.695 This seems to imply that there exists no set of psychological first principles that cuts across all cultures. 01:08:52.915 --> 01:09:02.110 But shouldn't we seek that one single correct set of psychological principles that could be applied to all human beings rather than trying to define a separate one for each culture? 01:09:02.570 --> 01:09:04.910 Your view seems to contain more relativism. 01:09:10.265 --> 01:09:12.105 Maybe that's that's enough for now. 01:09:12.105 --> 01:09:15.225 I I think a few other people might have alluded to that. 01:09:15.225 --> 01:09:22.780 But, so let let me assure you that, that I sharply disagree with moral relativism. 01:09:24.200 --> 01:09:33.355 One, you know, one evidence of that would be, I suppose, you know, I didn't address this directly. 01:09:33.415 --> 01:09:36.615 I did allude to cultural psychology in an early slide. 01:09:36.615 --> 01:09:42.555 I I think cultural psychology is absolutely essential for for for for the field of psychology. 01:09:45.240 --> 01:09:57.740 And, cultural psychology and, I think, anthropology are disciplines that had made a really important distinction between an etic approach. 01:09:57.960 --> 01:09:59.265 So let me just put it this way. 01:09:59.265 --> 01:10:07.765 An etic approach to psychology, that's ETIC, and an emic approach to psychology, EMIC. 01:10:09.425 --> 01:10:17.740 And an ethic approach focuses primarily on what cultures have in common. 01:10:17.740 --> 01:10:20.240 So so these are two forms of cultural psychology. 01:10:20.620 --> 01:10:27.095 An ethic approach to cultural psychology is looking for what are the what what are these three cultures I'm studying share? 01:10:27.095 --> 01:10:33.115 What what do they have in common in terms of their emotional, phenomena, let's say? 01:10:33.495 --> 01:10:44.230 And an ethic approach is going to be looking more at what does this culture have to say about this particular psychological phenomena? 01:10:44.370 --> 01:10:47.670 What what's the set of emotions that this culture has? 01:10:48.530 --> 01:10:53.190 Both are intrinsic to the science of psychology. 01:10:54.045 --> 01:10:59.265 And if I had more time, I would have wanted to make that clearer than I did. 01:11:00.045 --> 01:11:08.750 In in my world, almost everybody has is a is a can I say it this way? 01:11:09.130 --> 01:11:10.650 Has been let me put it this way. 01:11:10.650 --> 01:11:12.830 Has been strongly influenced by modernism. 01:11:13.370 --> 01:11:17.950 And modernism historically is, is univocal. 01:11:18.170 --> 01:11:25.325 It it has one approach to reality, the right one that's that's supposed to be sort of worldview neutral. 01:11:25.625 --> 01:11:30.825 Now, of course, there's good exceptions to that in in mainstream psychology, but that's minority view. 01:11:30.825 --> 01:11:36.990 I I tend to go to division 24, which is the theoretical philosophical folks, and they're all over that stuff. 01:11:36.990 --> 01:11:37.650 You know? 01:11:38.430 --> 01:11:41.230 And the humanistic group is also all over that. 01:11:41.230 --> 01:11:44.990 They have a group a a subgroup called indigenous what's it called? 01:11:44.990 --> 01:11:46.930 About an indigenous psychology. 01:11:47.070 --> 01:11:53.255 So they they have they very much emphasized that, and I'm I'm a I'm a big fan of of, their work. 01:11:54.835 --> 01:12:02.790 So so I I sort of wrote this not thinking anything negatively about anybody present today or DMU on the contrary. 01:12:03.890 --> 01:12:04.530 I love it. 01:12:04.530 --> 01:12:07.110 I love I love everything I know about you folks. 01:12:07.250 --> 01:12:37.980 But just because this is this is how I how I marshal my argument to the the, sort of monolithic building edifice of modern psychology, which has a hard time recognizing that there are worldview differences that are of such a substantive level that that I think we need to think in terms of, yes, there is a a body of universal, psychological phenomenon that's common to all human beings across cultures and across time. 01:12:39.160 --> 01:12:42.300 And, of course, the Catholic tradition has always been a champion of that. 01:12:43.055 --> 01:12:59.070 But but, you know, Alasdair MacIntyre has also been a champion of recognizing the very important distinctions there are between traditions, both within, the Christian tradition as well as across other traditions. 01:12:59.770 --> 01:13:11.870 And somehow, I would argue that that we have to figure out that a comprehensive psychology, a comprehensive psychological science has to end up saying all of the above. 01:13:12.795 --> 01:13:15.375 And and how would that change an intro to psych textbook? 01:13:15.915 --> 01:13:26.130 Someday, you know, an intro to psych textbook is gonna look very different than the ones that are currently common, and because of these considerations that we're bringing to. 01:13:26.290 --> 01:13:39.190 But, you know, one of the things I I talk about with my students, we we have a mind we our campus and and Houston in general is a a minority majority region. 01:13:39.925 --> 01:13:44.985 So 60% of the people in Houston and 60% on our campus are technically minorities. 01:13:45.205 --> 01:13:47.205 And, you know, there's a beautiful irony there. 01:13:47.205 --> 01:13:47.705 Right? 01:13:48.005 --> 01:13:53.785 And and we talk about minorities see things that majorities can't see. 01:13:54.420 --> 01:13:59.540 And Christianity is obviously an intellectual worldview minority right now. 01:13:59.540 --> 01:14:05.720 So so so is Judaism and Islam and, you know, a lot of other, worldviews for that matter. 01:14:05.860 --> 01:14:13.675 But but that gives us eyes to see things that that are that are lost on the majority, that are lost on us when we're in our majority worlds. 01:14:13.675 --> 01:14:14.335 You know? 01:14:15.595 --> 01:14:18.155 And and therefore, this this encourages me. 01:14:18.155 --> 01:14:29.150 You know, this is why why doctor Vitz is such an important person because he's spearheaded ways of viewing psychology that are unique to a Christian worldview. 01:14:30.170 --> 01:14:34.270 And, it's gotten published in mainstream journals by mainstream publishers. 01:14:35.685 --> 01:14:38.265 And and and and I think we have a lot to contribute. 01:14:38.485 --> 01:14:58.240 A lot more in the in the twenty first century will be contributed by by folks at DMU and others that that I that I hope and and and pray will continue to to shape the field of mainstream psychology in directions that will be more holistic and more comprehensive than we've seen so far. 01:14:59.900 --> 01:15:02.880 So, thanks for the opportunity to explain myself better. 01:15:03.020 --> 01:15:07.365 Somebody towards the end brought up Duns Scotus, I think. 01:15:09.665 --> 01:15:10.805 Where was that? 01:15:11.185 --> 01:15:11.685 Yeah. 01:15:12.945 --> 01:15:23.500 Coming from a philosophy background, Eric Johnson's description of man as multiform seems similar to Scotus' understanding of human nature. 01:15:24.520 --> 01:15:28.140 I just wanna read this out because I find this very interesting. 01:15:28.520 --> 01:15:35.745 He posited the existence of many distinct contents, which were formerly distinct from each other within the one form of the soul. 01:15:35.805 --> 01:15:39.565 Have you talked to any Franciscan philosophers about your ideas of man's multiform? 01:15:39.565 --> 01:15:43.185 There's a difference of terminology, but I suspect you would agree with each other. 01:15:43.565 --> 01:15:44.845 And, I have to say, no. 01:15:44.845 --> 01:15:45.425 I haven't. 01:15:46.520 --> 01:15:51.020 I've I've never read a thing by Don Scottis, so no guilt by association. 01:15:51.160 --> 01:16:02.565 But the the, the irony is, I'm I'm a fan of something oh, I'm blanking on on the term. 01:16:02.565 --> 01:16:08.905 John Milbank was a founder of a model of, theology, Anglican theology. 01:16:10.805 --> 01:16:12.585 But I'm blanking on what it's called. 01:16:13.300 --> 01:16:14.680 Can anybody help me? 01:16:16.020 --> 01:16:23.620 Anyway, their telling of the story, they're very Anglo Catholic, you know, and and big fans of the Catholic tradition. 01:16:23.620 --> 01:16:28.115 But, anyway, they're they're telling of the story. 01:16:28.115 --> 01:16:30.855 They're they're also highly critical of modernism. 01:16:31.075 --> 01:16:31.655 You know? 01:16:32.435 --> 01:16:35.475 But but they're telling of the story of West of the western tradition. 01:16:35.475 --> 01:16:38.995 They love Aquinas, and they they despise Duns Scotus. 01:16:38.995 --> 01:16:42.990 And all the evils of modernity are laid at the feet of Dunscotis. 01:16:43.530 --> 01:16:46.350 And that's one of the few things I know about him. 01:16:47.210 --> 01:16:55.390 So this is just very interesting, to to read this, and now I'm I feel convicted about something I I know nothing of. 01:16:55.610 --> 01:16:58.925 But, like, I need to find out more about about this matter. 01:16:59.305 --> 01:17:01.785 And, you know, I love Francis, of course. 01:17:02.345 --> 01:17:04.605 Everybody does and and and bought a venture. 01:17:04.905 --> 01:17:07.225 But, beyond that, I don't know so much. 01:17:07.225 --> 01:17:10.205 So I need to become more well informed about this controversy. 01:17:10.790 --> 01:17:22.890 It sounds to me like there's a controversy there that's been going on in in the in the Catholic tradition that I need to find out more about and make sure I avoid the errors as much as as a a Protestant like myself can. 01:17:24.495 --> 01:17:28.735 So, yeah. 01:17:28.735 --> 01:17:29.235 Okay. 01:17:31.295 --> 01:17:35.075 So let me just, keep reading. 01:17:35.775 --> 01:17:36.515 Shall I? 01:17:39.670 --> 01:17:44.330 There's a question about the self that I don't quite understand, so I'm just gonna move on. 01:17:44.470 --> 01:17:52.745 In Carl Jung's experience, most clients who come to him who came to him came for existential related reasons. 01:17:55.125 --> 01:17:55.605 I'm sorry. 01:17:55.605 --> 01:17:59.865 Existential related questions of meaning rather than to treat specific neuroses. 01:18:01.605 --> 01:18:04.825 Perhaps this prompted him to respond with his teaching on archetypes. 01:18:05.490 --> 01:18:12.070 In this respect, could one see addiction as a maladaptive way of seeking the transcendent? 01:18:13.970 --> 01:18:17.110 Should logotherapy play a greater role in the treatment of addiction? 01:18:18.050 --> 01:18:23.825 Could this provide a justifiable link between spirituality and empirical psychology? 01:18:24.365 --> 01:18:24.865 Wow. 01:18:25.485 --> 01:18:26.365 See, that's what I said. 01:18:26.365 --> 01:18:41.310 What you know, when I said when I opened up and I said, I love these questions, I just, you know, I I, you you know, you're you're you're a group of conversation partners that I know I would enjoy. 01:18:42.250 --> 01:18:45.710 And, that's a question that could take a few hours. 01:18:45.850 --> 01:18:46.510 You know? 01:18:47.370 --> 01:18:48.250 It's so good. 01:18:48.250 --> 01:18:50.605 I I just, yeah. 01:18:50.605 --> 01:18:54.785 I I just started reading the unconscious where is it? 01:18:55.245 --> 01:18:56.445 Oh, I can't even find it. 01:18:56.445 --> 01:19:15.770 But I just came across a book by Frankl called The Unconscious God, and I started I was I'm I'm just entranced by he's you know, he doesn't seem to be a a true theist in the sense that he doesn't posit a god. 01:19:15.770 --> 01:19:21.155 He seems to be agnostic about what's there much like Jung, at least my understanding of Jung. 01:19:21.455 --> 01:19:24.435 But, but, boy, is he open. 01:19:25.215 --> 01:19:26.335 He's really open. 01:19:26.335 --> 01:19:33.395 He really feels that belief in God is is a compelling requirement of human nature, it seems to me. 01:19:33.690 --> 01:19:44.270 And so now I'm newly attracted to logotherapy, and I feel like I gotta go back and read those books that I you know, I only read Man's Search for Meaning, and I didn't read I didn't go into it as much as I I think. 01:19:44.490 --> 01:19:48.010 So so all that to say that I think you're very much onto something. 01:19:48.010 --> 01:19:49.230 This would be a bridge. 01:19:49.605 --> 01:19:51.205 Logotherapy ought to be a bridge. 01:19:51.205 --> 01:19:59.065 I don't see as many people referring to it, of course, now as they were, you know, forty, fifty years ago when it was still around. 01:19:59.685 --> 01:20:08.380 But this, there there are some that refer to it, and and, I think it's a bridge builder for conversation with folks in mainstream psychology. 01:20:09.000 --> 01:20:10.440 So I very much appreciate that. 01:20:10.440 --> 01:20:56.215 And the idea of addiction being a search for meaning, all Augustinians must agree and, you know, and and and bible loving Christians everywhere would agree that, so man so much of our disorderedness as human beings, so many things in the DSM are can be can be more fruitfully more fully, fruitfully understood with a more elaborate anthropology like like you folks are working with the DM TMU, that would help us to see all of the disorders having, an ethical dimension that's completely left out of every disorder that I'm aware of in the DSM, including antisocial personality disorder. 01:20:57.390 --> 01:20:59.470 And and what is it? 01:20:59.470 --> 01:21:02.830 Sadist or sadistic personality disorder? 01:21:02.830 --> 01:21:07.410 Anyway, I I might be getting my categories confused, but you you get the point. 01:21:08.190 --> 01:21:11.250 And and and, certainly, spirituality is left out. 01:21:11.345 --> 01:21:12.625 So can I pose this? 01:21:12.625 --> 01:21:18.325 Can I can I ask a counter question almost in response to this question and and really to you as a community? 01:21:19.745 --> 01:21:21.365 Is there not a okay. 01:21:21.585 --> 01:21:27.970 You're probably all familiar with, the PDM, the psychodiagnostic die I'm sorry. 01:21:28.350 --> 01:21:37.090 Psychodynamic diagnostic manual that the psychodynamic folks put together, you know, maybe fifteen years ago, and now there's a second edition up. 01:21:37.230 --> 01:21:38.670 If you're not, you'll love it. 01:21:38.670 --> 01:21:43.355 And, if you are, you know what I'm talking about here that that it is so valuable. 01:21:43.655 --> 01:21:48.075 And in in in in a number of really important ways, more valuable than the DSM. 01:21:48.295 --> 01:21:52.875 And I love the DSM for its purposes, but it only goes so far because it's so reductionistic. 01:21:53.255 --> 01:21:56.635 And the psychodynamic folks go into a richer realm of meaningfulness. 01:21:57.320 --> 01:22:03.580 They're still and but they even deal with a little bit with with the ethical and spiritual realms. 01:22:04.120 --> 01:22:07.980 So so this is my question that I've that I've thought about for years. 01:22:09.255 --> 01:22:21.915 Is there are there enough resources within the Christian tradition alive today working in the area of psychology and psychiatry to come up with a third diagnostic manual? 01:22:25.150 --> 01:22:31.330 Because we we're not you know, we're psycho a a Christian, it has it has to be psychodynamic, I think, to some degree. 01:22:31.950 --> 01:22:34.510 There's a Christian psychodynamic theory out there somewhere. 01:22:34.510 --> 01:22:37.390 Maybe some of you are familiar with it or you've written on it. 01:22:37.390 --> 01:22:39.885 I I I think Paul has, somewhere. 01:22:40.185 --> 01:22:55.810 But, but but we have enough resources that we could do something that would be fuller and richer, that would encompass in some way the DSM wisdom and and the PDM wisdom, but would be different altogether in in other respects. 01:22:55.810 --> 01:23:03.190 And I think the meta model that you folks have put together points us in that direction in my in in my estimation. 01:23:04.690 --> 01:23:09.365 So that would be my only response to, to that question. 01:23:09.365 --> 01:23:16.505 I I'm I'm, I I really need glasses, to see the time on my, on my screen. 01:23:16.965 --> 01:23:19.465 I I realized we just have a few minutes left. 01:23:20.965 --> 01:23:21.465 Yeah. 01:23:22.550 --> 01:23:25.290 So probably have time for one or two more questions. 01:23:25.750 --> 01:23:26.250 Okay. 01:23:26.950 --> 01:23:33.130 And that that would probably be the outer the outer edge of what we could do as as you prefer. 01:23:33.510 --> 01:23:34.010 Okay. 01:23:37.125 --> 01:23:47.875 Let me let me just go to this last question then because it it touches on effective maturity, which is a really important, theme. 01:23:49.190 --> 01:23:54.410 Can you explain affective maturity, which is mainly used in John Paul the second's apostolic exhortation? 01:23:57.830 --> 01:23:59.050 Forgive my pronunciation. 01:24:00.390 --> 01:24:01.530 I have a doubt. 01:24:02.925 --> 01:24:09.665 Is it emotional maturity or emotional, social, and sexual maturity based in the Imago de Jesus Christ, a form of god in humanity? 01:24:10.445 --> 01:24:10.945 Wow. 01:24:12.845 --> 01:24:21.530 So I I don't even know there if I if I have a response except to say, I gotta check that that apostolic exhortation out. 01:24:21.770 --> 01:24:25.130 I've not I've never heard of it before, but it sounds like it fits in. 01:24:25.130 --> 01:24:32.030 I mean, obviously, John Paul the second was a psychologist in his own right besides for being so many other great things. 01:24:32.835 --> 01:24:40.775 But affective maturity is is what I think you're about at at DMU and and and those of you that are listening. 01:24:42.115 --> 01:24:42.355 Yeah. 01:24:42.355 --> 01:24:49.110 We're we're all interested in affective maturity as a part of of what it means to be a healthy, mature human being. 01:24:49.110 --> 01:24:55.910 There are certainly psychologists that are also, mainstream I I should say mainstream secular psychologists that are also interested in that. 01:24:55.910 --> 01:24:56.890 There's an overlap. 01:24:57.205 --> 01:25:00.105 There's there's commonalities of interest there. 01:25:00.165 --> 01:25:06.425 But I think Christian approach is gonna have a a unique take on emotion affect of maturity. 01:25:06.565 --> 01:25:12.660 And here, I wanna leave with, just a reference to one of, one of my favorite little books. 01:25:15.680 --> 01:25:18.820 Oh, I'm not sure I can remember it, but by by Hildebrand. 01:25:19.760 --> 01:25:20.480 What is it called? 01:25:20.480 --> 01:25:21.360 Just the heart? 01:25:21.360 --> 01:25:22.880 Might be just called the heart. 01:25:22.880 --> 01:25:41.780 Just a a skim little book, a 100 pages, but what a treasure of reflection on affective maturity, that I think probably you all and and I cherish, as a gem of of of philosophical psychology for for for us in our in in the twentieth century. 01:25:42.560 --> 01:25:46.640 Well, I think that probably should be it. 01:25:46.640 --> 01:25:50.580 Thank you so much, all of you, and and to DMU and to father Sikorsky. 01:25:51.275 --> 01:25:55.435 Thank you, Paul, Vince, for doing all that you've done for all of us. 01:25:56.555 --> 01:26:00.415 And, it's been a pleasure to share all of this with you. 01:26:00.715 --> 01:26:03.615 Feel free to write me an email if you if you want. 01:26:04.220 --> 01:26:04.780 Thank you. 01:26:04.780 --> 01:26:07.280 Thank you so much, doctor Eric Johnson. 01:26:07.420 --> 01:26:10.160 This does conclude our Newman lecture for the evening. 01:26:10.460 --> 01:26:15.420 Thank you all for coming, and, please, tell your friends about the Newman lectures. 01:26:15.420 --> 01:26:26.065 I know we'll be posting a recording on our YouTube channel later, so you'll be able to watch it again and, certainly too to share it, with those others who would appreciate it as well. 01:26:26.285 --> 01:26:27.165 Thank you all. 01:26:27.165 --> 01:26:27.825 Good night. 01:26:28.925 --> 01:26:40.030 And we do have, we do have our upcoming lecture, On February 16, doctor Bitz will be lecturing on the analog and digital psychology and the challenge of transhumanism. 01:26:40.490 --> 01:26:47.310 I I would neglect my duties as emcee if I did not point you to the next, installment of the Newman lectures. 01:26:48.205 --> 01:26:59.325 So, again, please, please do, join us again at that time, and, bring a few friends with you and, make a watch party if you like. 01:26:59.565 --> 01:27:02.225 This is we do these things now that we've been through COVID. 01:27:02.591 --> 01:27:04.690 Thank you all again, and good evening.