This paper examines a ministry article's critique of psychology, arguing that the piece, while raising valid concerns about environmental determinism, oversimplifies the relationship between psychology and spirituality. The author contends that both domains offer legitimate insights into human behavior and that neither should be rejected in favor of the other. Using examples from neuroscience—including chronic traumatic encephalopathy in athletes and post-traumatic stress disorder—the paper demonstrates that biological and environmental factors profoundly shape cognition and behavior, complementing rather than contradicting spiritual perspectives. The author concludes that reconciling psychology and faith requires moving beyond absolutism to recognize that medical, psychological, and spiritual approaches can coexist productively.
This report reviews an article posted on a ministry-related website that critiques the role of psychology in understanding human behavior and decision-making. While the article presents several informed points, it exhibits a pronounced anti-psychology stance that mirrors the anti-religious rhetoric common in some scientific and psychological circles. Although the AWMI article raises legitimate concerns, it represents an overcorrection to the anti-God sentiments found on the opposing side of the debate. A more balanced examination reveals that both psychology and spirituality have valid contributions to make in understanding human nature.
The AWMI article is not without merit. It correctly identifies a genuine problem: the tendency to blame environmental circumstances entirely for human behavior, using difficult upbringings as justification for poor choices. This is a real phenomenon that occurs with troubling frequency. For instance, while someone raised in an economically distressed urban environment might face pressures to engage in illegal activities for survival, this does not adequately explain or justify violent predatory behavior such as robbery, aggravated assault, or gang involvement. These actions represent choices that extend beyond survival and reflect a disregard for the safety and dignity of others.
However, the article's critique does not negate a crucial psychological reality: individuals raised in environments characterized by abuse, violence, and deprivation develop fundamentally different cognitive patterns and emotional responses than those nurtured in stable, supportive settings. This is not excuse-making; it is observable neurobiology. The comparison is apt: suggesting that a person with post-traumatic stress disorder should not be startled by sudden surprises fundamentally misunderstands how trauma affects the nervous system. Likewise, claiming that exposure to combat, active gunfire, or bombs should not measurably alter someone's psychology compared to someone with no such exposure contradicts basic neuroscience (Krause, 2009).
The article's logical flaw becomes apparent when examining its own examples. Its four key points about environmental responsibility are presented as corrections to psychological determinism, yet they simultaneously acknowledge that environment shapes behavior—making the critique self-contradictory rather than defeating psychology's relevance.
The most compelling evidence for psychology's legitimate role comes from documented cases of chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE), a progressive brain condition affecting athletes and military personnel exposed to repeated head trauma. Numerous professional football players, wrestlers, and combat veterans have committed violent acts that resist purely spiritual or moral explanation (Keating, 2012). These individuals did not choose to develop neurological degeneration; the physical damage to their brains altered their capacity for impulse control and rational decision-making in ways that no amount of spiritual exhortation can reverse.
Consider documented cases such as former professional football player Junior Seau, who struggled with depression and made multiple suicide attempts before ultimately taking his own life. He donated his brain to science specifically to advance understanding of CTE's role in depression and suicidality. Similarly, professional wrestler Chris Benoit, later confirmed to have severe CTE, committed acts of violence against his family members before his death. These are not cases amenable to simple moral or spiritual categorization. To classify such behavior solely through a religious lens—invoking demons or spiritual warfare—fails to account for the physiological substrate of behavior and does not withstand empirical scrutiny.
Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) provides another clear example of how environmental trauma creates measurable, lasting changes in the brain's structure and function. Individuals with PTSD experience involuntary physiological responses—hypervigilance, startle reflexes, intrusive memories—that exist beyond voluntary control and require psychological treatment alongside any spiritual practice.
The evidence demonstrates that a false dichotomy between psychology and spirituality serves neither discipline well. Both environmental and biological factors demonstrably affect human behavior, cognition, and emotional regulation. Research increasingly supports the integration of spiritual practices within medical and psychological treatment, suggesting that these domains can reinforce rather than contradict each other. The absolutist position—whether from religious fundamentalism or scientific materialism—fails to account for the complexity of human nature.
Absolutists in both religion and psychology must recognize that these disciplines need not exist in opposition. The author has reviewed numerous studies and articles demonstrating that spirituality can complement medical treatment, including psychological intervention. However, to dismiss modern medicine and psychology as irrelevant to individuals exhibiting unexplained violent or unusual behavior is neither defensible nor accurate. Human behavior arises from an interaction of spiritual, psychological, environmental, and neurobiological factors. Wisdom lies not in choosing one explanation over another, but in acknowledging the legitimate contributions each makes to human understanding and well-being. A middle ground that honors both dimensions of human existence remains the most balanced and evidence-supported approach.
Keating, P. (2012, March 17). After the aftermath. Retrieved January 7, 2015, from http://espn.go.com/nfl/story//id/7930585/nfl-junior-seau-suicide-raises-more-questions-nfl-handling-concussions-espn-magazine
Krause, R. (2009). War and living with PTSD: Vietnam 1969–1970 and the Cambodia incursion in 1970: A grunt in the infantry: Personal reflections of the 60's and how war affects today and the future. AuthorHouse.
Wommack, A. (2015, January 7). Psychology vs. Christianity - Article - Andrew Wommack Ministries. Retrieved January 7, 2015, from http://www.awmi.net/extra/article/psychologychristianity
You’re 98% through this paper. Sign up to read the full paper.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.