What is it about?
How do we make progress in understanding God and his mysteries? Not just through analysis and argument, but above all through activities that engage our experiential and narrative side. This is my argument, building on Iain McGilchrist's work on the divided brain.
Featured Image
Photo by Pawel Czerwinski on Unsplash
Why is it important?
People working in theology and religion are often divided by their contrasting preferences for analysis versus experience, and for conceptual clarity versus a sense of mystery. My proposal puts these differences into a broader perspective in which each has its place. Contrasting styles need not be in opposition, but can be complementary.
Perspectives
Working on this article made me rethink my own assumptions about research in theology, and indeed in any academic discipline. People with a more analytically rigorous approach can be impatient with research that emphasises experience, narrative and metaphor. I hope that my research helps people to appreciate the limitations of narrow approaches and the value of working together in a wider research community that fosters complementary styles.
Oskari Juurikkala
Pontifical University of the Holy Cross
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: The Paradox of Progress, May 2024, Taylor & Francis,
DOI: 10.4324/9781032646732-11.
You can read the full text:
Resources
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
