Skip to content

Methodological Exclusion of the Transcendent? Implications for Theory and Research in Religion, Spirituality and Health.

Alexander Moreira-Almeida, Ralph W. Hood

Journal of Religion and Health August 28, 2023 DOI: 10.1007/s10943-023-01896-3 (opens in new tab)

Study at a glance

AI-extracted from the abstract
Characteristics Theoretical or philosophical paper Peer reviewed
Keywords Humans Spiritual therapies Spirituality Religion Male Method Transcendent Flournoy
Key points Argues that the methodological exclusion of the transcendent (MET), proposed by Theodore Flournoy and rejected by William James and Frederic Myers, is problematic and should be abandoned. Contends that the transcendent should be included in psychological, medical, and other academic research and theory on spiritual experiences, and offers methodological guidelines for doing so.

Abstract

Early in the founding of psychology of religion, a debated issue was the methodological exclusion of the transcendent (MET). While cautiously endorsed by Theodore Flournoy, others, notable William James and Frederic Myers, refused to be limited by this principle. This paper discusses (a) what is MET as proposed by Flournoy and the reasons he provided to adopt it, (b) problems with MET, implications for research and theory in religion/spirituality and health, and why the transcendent should be included in psychological, medical and other academic research and theory on spiritual experiences (SE), and (c) some methodological guidelines perform it fruitfully.

Citations in the library