Self-loss in Indigenous and Cross-cultural Psychologies: Beyond Dichotomies?
Much confusion surrounds discussion of cultural and cross-cultural psychology with reference to a sympathetic understanding of indigenous psychologies. In this chapter I focus upon how the work of William James can be used in conjunction with the common core thesis in mysticism to explore how mystic...
| Главный автор: | |
|---|---|
| Формат: | Электронный ресурс Статья |
| Язык: | Английский |
| Проверить наличие: | HBZ Gateway |
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Опубликовано: |
Brill
2017
|
| В: |
Research in the social scientific study of religion
Год: 2017, Том: 28, Страницы: 112-132 |
| Другие ключевые слова: | B
Religion in Asien
B China B Religionspsycholigie B Социология религии B Asien-Studien B Religionswissenschaften B Культуроведение B Общественные науки |
| Online-ссылка: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Итог: | Much confusion surrounds discussion of cultural and cross-cultural psychology with reference to a sympathetic understanding of indigenous psychologies. In this chapter I focus upon how the work of William James can be used in conjunction with the common core thesis in mysticism to explore how mysticism can be used to both substantiate a universal experience common in diverse Eastern and Western cultures yet expressed in experiences, beliefs, and values that respect and demand recognition of the unique expression of mysticism in various cultures and in the dynamic interaction between them. In order to explore this both conceptually and empirically I will divide this paper into three sections. First a distinction between cultural and cross-cultural psychology; second a discussion of why a return to William James might be useful. Finally, I will look at empirical American methods of measurement based psychology to indicate the limits of a cross-cultural psychology of self-loss that we have championed in light of indigenous cultural studies that show both the value and the limits of our previous work |
|---|---|
| Второстепенные работы: | Enthalten in: Research in the social scientific study of religion
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1163/9789004348936_007 |