The question at the beginning of this text may be surprising to some, but the truth is that it is a doubt that often assails people who study psychology, especially during their first years of university or before deciding on this career. And yes, there is a logic behind these kinds of concerns.
Ultimately, the study of cognition and psychological mechanisms has historically been more related to atheism than other areas of knowledge. For example, the atheism of figures such as Sigmund Freud and BF Skinner is well known despite being rare in their time, and today two of the five great representatives of the absence of faith in the divine are researchers of the mind: Sam Harris and Daniel Dennett.
On the other hand, there are indications that indicate that analytical thinking, necessary in any field of science and therefore also in psychology, weakens faith in God. In more general terms, furthermore, it has been seen that psychologists who teach at American universities are the least religious group of professors. What happen?
Psychology professionals and consistent believers?
Ultimately, one of the great sources of religious faith is the idea that one’s own mind and consciousness exist outside the material world. It is very easy to naturally assume that “the mind” is something separate from the brain, something spiritual or originating in an extraterrestrial reality. Now, psychologists are in charge of discovering how the mind works and what rules guide it, and they do it just as a geologist would study a rock: through the scientific method.
That is to say, for a psychologist no god enters into the equation of how the mind works. Does this mean that you cannot be a psychologist and a believer at the same time? In this article I will not try to resolve the question of whether there is a higher intelligence or not (that depends entirely on what one chooses to believe), but rather I will reflect on the way in which religion relates to the work of psychologists in their professional field and about the way in which this can mix with personal beliefs.
If we look closely at the kind of concern we started from, we will realize that the debate is actually broader. When we ask whether psychologists can be believers, we are really asking whether scientists in general can be believers.
The reason is that One of the pillars of scientific progress is what is known as the principle of parsimony, according to which, other things being equal, the simplest explanation (that is, the one that leaves the fewest loose ends) is better. And, when it comes to religion, belief in a specific god can be tremendously difficult to sustain without raising more questions than it attempts to answer.
Although the idea that the universe, human beings and what some people call “psyche” are the creation of a higher intelligence is not a totally crazy idea and rejectable by science as such, it is practically impossible to defend from science is that this god meets a series of specific characteristics that are written in sacred texts That is why it is considered that scientists, during their working hours, should act as if they were agnostics or atheists.
That is to say, religious belief cannot play a relevant role in the theories and hypotheses with which we work, because Religion is based on faith, not on reasoning derived from deductions about what kind of explanations are most useful to describe reality with what is known and proven. Faith is based on ideas we believe a priori, while in science any idea can be revised or discarded if better explanations appear when contrasting ideas with reality. This also applies to psychology.
According to what we have seen about how science works, if defending the idea that our minds are actually entities created within a simulation carried out by a large computer the size of the universe, it already means committing ourselves, basing the ideas with which working in psychology in the belief that not only does this god exist, but that he is also as described in the Bible (that he watches us to see if we act right or wrong, that he loves us, etc.) is extremely unfortunate.
And it’s unfortunate because, scientifically, assuming very far-fetched ideas about how we behave without having proof Endorsing them is an exercise in intellectual dishonesty. For example, proposing solutions to a patient based on the idea that certain actions will cause a god to reward that person by “healing” him or her is not only a violation of the psychologist’s ethical code, but is also totally irresponsible.
Now, doesn’t believing in a god and getting involved in his religion mean doing so 24 hours a day? For some people this may be true; As I said, everyone lives their religion the way they want. However, the important thing is to keep in mind that religion, being based on beliefs that one decides to embrace by one’s own decision, cannot be imposed on others And science, which is a collective effort to create knowledge that does not depend entirely on faith and belief, cannot be distorted by the influence of religion.
There is no one way to believe
So to the question of whether psychologists can believe in God or not, the answer must be: it depends on how you believe.
For those who believe in God means literally believing religious dogmas and acting accordingly all the time, the answer will be no, because Psychology, as a science, consists of questioning all ideas and not taking any explanation for granted about the functioning and origin of mental processes, all without making value judgments based on religious texts about certain behaviors and tendencies (homosexuality, polygamy, etc.).
For those who, on the other hand, are clear that no action derived from belief in a god can harm others, religiosity does not have to be a problem. It may be that the cognitive dissonance of leave aside some beliefs That they believe they are fundamental and structuring of one’s own identity is uncomfortable, but it is a sacrifice without which progress in this scientific field cannot exist.
The idea, in short, is the following: during working hours psychologists must keep religion (not morality) completely out of it. If you think you can’t do that because it causes great cognitive dissonance in believing that you must always be devout and subject all ideas to faith, psychology is not for you.
