wenglund wrote:Blixa wrote:Count me in with those baffled by this questionaire.
Other than a very simplistic calculus between childhood and adulthood (fears and disappointments with parents being transfered in later life onto social and cultural leaders in general---a vulgar Freudianism indeed!), I don't see what kind of insights the questions are supposed to produce.
And then there is the leading nature of so many of the questions themselves....I suspect I have the same response to the questionaire that I allegedly have toward "the church," too.
To take questions seriously and answer them in full---perhaps more completely than intended---well, where would that get me, or us?
The value I found in the questionaire (thanks for providing the correct spelling) is the illuminating of the tie-in between beliefs and personal needs--I.e. one's pursuit of beliefs may, to some degree, be a reflection of one's pursuit of personal needs and desires.
Whether it amounts to "vulgar Freudianism" depends upon what one perceives as the driving needs. If sex and aggression are the driving needs, then "vulgar Freudianism" may be behind it. However, if love and respect are the pursued needs, then Choice Theory may be behind it.
I think this tie-in is important, though, because it says more about us than about the beliefs in question. By understanding better what may be driving our belief-pursuits, it may have a positive affect in changing the beliefs we may pursue and the way we may pursue them. By being made aware of the driving need(s), one then may weigh them in relation to other needs, and evaluate whether it/they should be the driving force or not, thus putting one in a better position to change the driving force and thus the change the nature of the beliefs being driven--I.e. it positions one better to direct one's thinking. For example, if one is driven by the need for certainty, that may invariably inhibit one's pursuit of belief or faith in general. It may give rise to extreme skepticism. When made aware of that driving need, one may then evaluate whether the need for certainty is more critical than other needs ( such as the need for love and respect), and if not, then one may change the driving need, which may then better allow for belief and faith in general, perhaps to their benefit.
But, that may be just how I see it. Other are certainly free to reasonably disagree.
Thanks, -Wade Englund-
Wade, I may not have been too clear about "vulgar Freudianism." By that I simply meant the easy equasion of childhood experiences with "authority" and adult experiences of the same. I didn't note, but will now, that my objection is not with the traces of Freud (I hold Freud in fairly high regard, actually) but with the exclusion of other forces of production than the psychological; for example, that there is a politics at work in relations of power which exceeds and transcends the individual and purely "psychological."
That beliefs and needs are deeply entwinned is something I would never argue with, either. However, I think I may understand their relation differently than Ulrich does.
If I have time soon (and I'm not being coy--my husband just had surgery on a hernia and I'm nursing him at home this week. That and some of my own health issues are keeping me from lots I need to be doing on the computer) I will go through the questionaire and write up some answers. That may be the best way to clarify my differences as suggest other ways to make sense of this algebra of belief.
Edit:
I just wrote a draft of my answers to the questionaire. It will take more time to give it a serious response because my "answers" are sincere, detailed and not the ones the questionaire assumes. I'll work on it some more later.