Re: the Fall of man

From: Dr. Blake Nelson (bnelson301@yahoo.com)
Date: Wed Apr 17 2002 - 15:08:25 EDT

  • Next message: george murphy: "Re: Brachiators On Our Family Tree?"

    > I have heard this claim, that "real love is not able
    > to be coerced from someone
    > through the use of force or threats. Neither is it a
    > mere automatic or robotic
    > response resulting from some sort of previous
    > programming," on many occasions.
    > However, I have never heard a well thought out
    > explanation of this. About the best
    > I've heard is "How could it be any other way?" which
    > is no explanation at all. I'd be
    > curious to hear yours.

    A couple of off-the-top-of-the-head, non-cited points.

    First, real love requires freewill on some level, so
    if the response is a robotic response, over which you
    have no choice, you are not choosing to love. It
    seems to me for any response, love or hate or
    whatever, to be meaningful, there has to be some
    element of freewill in making that response or it
    means nothing in an objective sense. However, as you
    point out, you can be coerced into making certain
    "freewill" choices, and I think think the research
    that I recall having read suggests that this does not
    work for the following reasons.

    The first part of the answer has to do with what kind
    of response do we want here. And the answer seems to
    me, from a Christian standpoint, to be a change of
    heart, rather than merely a certain type of behavior.
    The OT and NT are full of passages that discuss this
    dichotomy between outward appearances of piety or
    actions and the internal condition of a person, with
    the latter, not the former being the important part.
    How then does one achieve an inward turning of the
    heart, especially if that turning is supposed to be a
    turning out of freewill?

    It seems to me that there is a good deal of research
    (thanks to the dominance of the behavioral paradigm
    for several decades in the social sciences) on
    attempts to influence behavior, the efficacy of
    therapy, and other related attempts to modify
    behavior. In the studies of humans (you can't survey
    animals for their subjective sense of things so those
    studies are off the board for our discussion), I have
    not seen any data that suggests that outwardly
    coercive behavior (e.g., electrical shocks, opprobium,
    etc.)by themselves causes an internal changing of
    one's views. I suppose the closest one would get is
    to the "Stockholm Syndrome", where despite the
    life-threatening situation imposed by the hostage
    takers the kindness of the hostage takers is what
    figures prominently in the response of the hostages in
    identifying with the hostage takers (a persuasive love
    of sorts, in a coercive environment). I do not think
    there is any good data supporting the idea that
    compelled behavior by itself leads to internal changes
    in people's views regarding that behavior. For
    example, in addiction situations, interventions and
    imposed treatments are ineffective in and of
    themselves, recovery requires an inward change in the
    view of the addict rather than in the enforced program
    of detoxification, etc.

    The seminal message of popular books on therapy, such
    as "If You Meet Buddha on the Road, Kill Him," is that
    the teacher/therapist can only assist the
    student/patient in finding resources that they already
    have and assisting them in developing those resources.
     They cannot dictate what the person should do or how
    they think, they can only persuade them, if you will,
    to think in new ways based on the resources the
    students already have.

    So, I find the argument for persuasive as opposed to
    coerced love very compelling. Coercive action may
    result in outward behavior modification, but I do not
    believe that it changes hearts or minds. In fact, I
    think good data exist to support the opposite, that it
    breeds anger and resentment in many cases. I think
    one can see this in therapy situations where the goal
    often is to help the person see things in a different
    way so that they can transform how they think.

    It seems to me that the inward working of the Holy
    Spirit within people's lives exemplify how persuasive,
    rather than coercive love can allow amazing
    transformations of how people live and what they
    consider important. I do not see this working of the
    Holy Spirit as coercive at all, but entirely
    persuasive.

    Anyway, that's why I find the argument about
    persuasive love pretty compelling based on Christian
    tradition and data from a lot of social science
    research.

    __________________________________________________
    Do You Yahoo!?
    Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
    http://taxes.yahoo.com/



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 17 2002 - 15:08:44 EDT