 "Good, but boring." | 2008-12-10 |
| - Reviewed By User: A2I2A7N3OCPNW4 |
David Wulff's text, Psychology of Religion: Classic & Contemporary can be a bit dry at times. As a student, I felt at times that the content was difficult to digest -- not because of the difficulty of the material, but more due to the nature of the writing. Although I was very interested in the subject, I found myself having trouble focusing while reading.
Although at times it's dry, it is still a very good textbook for students entering a Psychology of Religion course. Wulff (most times) does a very good job explaining the material. Most of the book is very clear, very detailed and thoroughly researched. I think Wulff did a good job of staying as objective as he could. Although he is a psychologist with his own views, all the other fields seemed to be represented fairly and accurately. |
| |
 "a nearly ideal introduction to the field" | 2006-10-15 |
| - Reviewed By newpersona |
"Disguised as a textbook, this magnificent handbook encompasses the field in twelve chapters of forty to sixty pages. Exposition and insight flourish at every turn. Chapter 1 outlines history of the field; chapter 2 examines biological approaches to bodily states (G. Stanley Hall); chapter 3 presents behavioral theory and comparative studies of ritual behavior (in dogs and apes). Chapter 4 outlines laboratory experimentation, while chapter 5 probes statistical studies. Chapter 6 on Freud leads to chapter 7 on object-relations theory and narcissism (Suttie, Pruyser, Kohut) and thence to chapter 8 on Erikson. All are gems of synthesis and discernment. Chapter 9 on Jung and chapter 10 on James offer masterpieces of exposition and critique. Chapter 11 on the German descriptive tradition explores authors neglected in North America (Otto, Spranger, Girgensohn). Chapter 12 on the American humanistic synthesis expounds Allport, Fromm and Maslow, as well as transpersonal psychology. Case studies from major religions (particularly Jewish, Christian, Buddhist and Hindu) dot the text. An epilogue assesses the field in light of both the humanities and the social sciences....Indexes of persons and concepts are superb.
"David Wulff has written the closest thing to a German-style handbook that North Americans are likely to see. Exhaustiveness, clarity in both organization and explication, and common sense combine to produce a nearly ideal introduction to the field. History of the discipline shines.... [The] bravura pieces on Freud, Erikson, Jung and James are among the best anyone has written on the masters. The same can be said of the chapter on "Object Relations Theory and Religion." Nearly every chapter climaxes with several pages of "Evaluation," in which the author weighs pros and cons. The style is lucid and nuanced but never boring. Until this volume appeared, few would have thought such a handbook to lie within the capacity of a single author. For a single scholar to synthesize literature of the past 125 years while exuding poise, common sense and uncommon insight exceeds all expectations. This work set a standard for handbooks in the social sciences....
"This masterpiece accomplishes something that cries out to be done for sociology of religion and anthropology of religion. Dispensing exposition, critique and hints for further research, Wulff makes the field accessible and attractive. Mastery resounds."
--comments on the first edition of this book, by William M. Johnston, Recent Reference Books in Religion: A Guide for Students, Scholars, Researchers, Buyers & Readers (rev. ed., 1998), pp. 275-276. |
| |
 "May the Generic Transcendent save us" | 2005-09-23 |
| - Reviewed By calmly |
No help supposedly from science, especially not those "rational fundamentalists" who are "absolutizing the scientific method". Wulff says "the behaviorist paradigm has proven inadequate even for the prediction of the behavior of rats and pigeons". Yet behaviorists have worked with severely impaired autistic youths and enabled some to return to public school.
No help supposedly from religious fundamentalism: the "correlational studies" Wulff cites question the relative mental health of religious fundamentalists. Who created the correlation studies? And is it, after all, just a correlation, which could be due to many factors including favorable ones. For example, people who take responsibility may have more anxiety than those who slack off.
No help supposedly from atheism, other "correlational studies" Wulff cite (one with a whopping seven participants) indicate atheists often ended up that way after the loss or parent or an unhappy youth. Missed Sunday school maybe?
Instead seek out the mystics. They wil transcend this world. And in this time of crisis, it's up to psychologists of religion to "give the experience of transcendence the prominance it deserves".
I read the entire book (although much of it seems material a general reader in psychology may well have encountered elsewhere) but the epilogue seemed to make sense of Wulff's way of presenting the earlier survey. In the epilogue, Wulff presents a "summary schema" of 4 fundamental attitudes in the psychology of religion. Conveniently, 3 of them he's able to essentially dismiss due to their expressing literal and/or reductive views. The remaining view is the one conducive to sensitivity to others' transcendent experiences and also the one Wulff cites only positive "correlational study" results for.
Wulff's glossary definitions seem consistent with his evaluations in the main text. Behaviorism is an "ideology". Evolutionism is just a "view", not a scientific theory. Creationism similarly is a "view", not a belief. This levelling may be a result of Wulff's application of postmodernism (which seems not to be applied to itself or to Wulff's special place for transcendence). Wulff favors Transcendence as "the crucial, ultimate dimension toward which all religious expression is directed...". At this point it may not be clear whether one is studying the psychology of religion or Wulff's religion within psycholgy. Is it important whether the Good Samaritan who saves a stranger had a transcendental experience? When that atheist or Fundamentalist or scientist reaches out a helping hand, you may want to take it.
It seems unlikely that those with vested interests about religion will stay away from working within the psychology of religion. The student of the psychology of religion will have to be especially on guard for bias. After all, how likely is it that anyone could be unbiased in this area? |
| |
| "A thorough review of psychology of religion" | 2005-09-02 |
| - Reviewed By borderlinesh |
| This is a great resource for anyone looking for a thorough overview of the psychology of religion literature. Although it's a bit expensive (what textbook isn't these days?), it will pay dividends to both researchers beginning a review of the relevant research in this field and to the casual reader who's interested in the subject, but wants more than the typically trite, overly-simplistic pop-psychology they'll find in most large-chain book stores. |
| |
| "This is the best book on the subject" | 2004-05-19 |
| - Reviewed By fraiberg2 |
| I have looked at all the textbooks on psychology of religion because I teach the subject at the University of Redlands. This is by far the best textbook on the topic. The depth and scope of Wulff's writing is phenomenal. He takes a historical and biographical approach that is very intriguing. My students love the book too. |
| |
| "Comprehensive yet Digestable" | 2001-05-15 |
| - Reviewed By triciau |
| I picked up this book as an amateur both in psychology and in religion, but with a desire to learn more about both. It really hit the spot. It's comprehensive - covering eveything from classic Freudian analysis to the newest brain scan results - and at the same time totally digestable. It was nice to see Wulff extensively quoted in a recent Newsweek article about "neurotheology". I give it five stars for both form and content. |
| |
Expedited Available
