D.J. Acevedo's Archive

I cannot believe I am actually writing my last blog post for this class. It’s crazy to think how time flies….anyway

I like Carl Rogers. He was very well known for using the Humanistic approach. I really liked his approach to psychology. I can relate to Rogers because he saw potential in people and for that I put him with creation. The reason being might be considered a stretch but he wanted people to be fully functional. He saw that in order for people to be fully functional they must be constantly growing and experiencing new things in life. The person would need an increase in experiences, in creativity, in optimism, etc. I love this. I love this mostly because I could not agree more. People, in my opinion, don’t spend enough time just living life. We, increasingly so, spend time at our computers, in our offices, in front of a tv, not outside and getting the creative juices flowing. Again, I love this. It has given me a lot to think about and has given me an opportunity to evaluate myself and really look at how I am approaching things. If I am completely honest, I am only coming to some of these realizations as I am nearing graduation. Carl Rogers saw that when looking at the psychology of a person, one had to focus on the person. He seems to call out those who follow his advice. It is intimidating but overall very beneficial.

As this week as seemed to fly by, I have not been able to stop thinking about who in the world I would write about this week. I have not had the slightest idea. I have finally settled on J.B. Watson, his experiments, no matter how inappropriate they may seem, show us a very interesting side of creation. Watson showed us that our experiences can dictate how we feel about a particular stimulus. I think this is very interesting considering I have never thought about what drives or dictates how we act or feel about anything. As a believer and a human being, I have often wondered what exactly makes me tick or what makes me feel as strongly about one thing over others. Behaviors and reactions can be manipulated. Whether positive or negative, it just goes to show me how we are even more subject to the spiritual war going on around us.

I have had a lot of time, lately, to think about the different theories and how we apply them both in counseling and in our own personal lives. Gestalt is one of those techniques and theories that intrigues me most. It is set as a somewhat confrontational technique that’s about as subtle as a train wreck. It’s quite interesting to think about how it was used when it was first developed, and how it is used now. It’s incredible because it is based on perception. What does a client perceive to be the problem, what is the client saying vs what the client’s body language is saying.

In my personal reflection I would put Gestalt with The Fall. People, especially in our western culture, don’t like to think about death or the cold fact that, just like taxes, it is inevitable. We shy away from this truth as much as possible much like we don’t like to admit when we are wrong or that we are a fallen creation. We have all fallen short of The Glory. The funny thing with Gestalt, much like life, is that it can be so abrupt and “in the face”. Which I think is necessary. I may be alone when I say this but I think we need a little more “in the face” stuff and a little less sugar coating. We must change our perceptions. I am trying not to get on a rant, but…

If we perceive there is nothing wrong with us, then we will never change. If we perceive something that is wrong, we are more motivated to make a change. This is why I connected Gestalt with the fall, it is one of the few theories and techniques that shoves us in the direction of truly coming to grips with what is really the issues in our lives. We are fallen, and the quicker we realize that, the quick we can make a change towards Christ.

It may seem a bit obvious to saddle Darwin with creationism. The fact is, I can’t think of any place I would rather have him associated with. Darwin is most commonly known for his research on The Galapagos islands. His research opened up our imaginations and gave us great insight into a world we were greatly unfamiliar with for much of it’s existence. Darwin is also well known for his theories and ideas on evolution and survival of the fittest.

Adaptation, it seems,  has always been at the forefront of many arguments in evolution vs. creation. This is a very general statement, I am aware, but as this is a blog post I have a point. It would make sense to me we would adapt and in a sense “evolve” to the conditions around us. I have never really landed on one side of the fence or the other, but I have thought a lot about it in the past. I think limiting our capabilities as a creation is another way of putting God in a “box”. I’m not suggesting we made a step as extreme as evolving from monkeys, but I do believe God created them with as much intention as he created everything else.

This, to me, is why I would associate Darwin with creation. I think his theories hold some ground, but I also believe, in all of our research, perhaps we have taken his theories farther than even he might have. I am open to all possibilities, but the fact of the matter is I believe it is possible for us to adapt, it just seems to suggest a limit to our abilities would point to a limit in God’s capabilities.

Rousseau argued that we were all inherently good until we become corrupted by the evils of society. He believed we are born good and that is our natural state. He also wrote in his book The Social Contract:“Man was born free, and he is everywhere in chains” in an expression of his belief we are that we are, indeed, corrupted by society. Rousseau is best described by many to be a Romantic. Rousseau also believed all citizens should participate in the greater good, even if it means even if it meant acting against their personal interests…I wonder what he would think of our government. With all that said, I associate Rousseau best with Redemption.

Rousseau saw a necessity for equality in all mankind. The lifestyle of living for the greater good would promote equality and liberty for all. I was asked a question a while back about the nature of creation. Are we sinners because we sin; or do we sin because we’re sinners? Quite the head-scratcher. I look around and I see a people who are obviously fallen. We’re selfish, greedy, clearly broken. Sometimes I wonder if we will ever truly understand equality. But if you ask me, we’ve got too many blind folds attached to too many pointed fingers with too many problems and not enough sense to look within ourselves. I read Rousseau’s quotes and wonder if there is as much pleading as I imagine. Maybe I’m projecting but it seems we’ve been screaming for equality ever since we were created. Rousseau saw that in order for liberty and equality to truly be strong, we have to put aside our own personal interests. There are pockets of this example all throughout the history of humanity, but that is not enough. We are cursed; destined for a future of self love and self gain. The only cure, of course, is Jesus and his saving grace. We can never truly know good until we know evil just like we can never know light until we’ve been in the darkness. I associate Rousseau with redemption because even though we may be corrupted, we can be saved! We have participated in the greater good when we are able to see the greater good is, indeed, greater! I think there is hope for us. I have confidence in this thought only because of what I’ve seen in my own life. So whether we were born good or bad, we must continue to fight for the fallen to be lifted.

For far too long the church did the thinking for the people. In today’s culture this sounds less and less like a bad idea. What with Miley being Miley (whatever that means) and the constant demand of today’s progressing world for more shock value, to some of us who still retain more conservative ideals, the world needs a little more advice from the church. But as many thinkers during The Renaissance will tell you, even the church doing the thinking for you can be harmful. Before The Renaissance the church had a habit of telling the people what was right and what was wrong. It was very legalistic in its behaviors and standards and often committed unspeakable things in the name of God. Where am I going with this? The Renaissance challenged much of that mindset much like Desiderius Erasmus.

Erasmus challenged the day’s standards and ways of thinking. His opinion was that women should be allowed to be educated, he believed anything created by humans could not be perfect. He challenged exorcisms and alchemy on nonsense as well as beliefs in superstitions. One of the highlighted statements he constantly made was the challenge to take their life lessons from the simple life of Jesus and not rely completely on organized religion. I think it’s safe to say Erasmus would not be a fun man to go fishing with on account of all the boat rocking. With all of this said, I would most associate Erasmus with Redemption.

As humans, we have often had a knack for counting one above the other. We can put people down, and argue to be in the right. We strive to be perfect but as it says in Romans, we all fall short of the glory of God, – we all fall short of true perfection. Legalism is what God’s creation was into when Jesus came to this planet. He challenged common knowledge, challenged societal norms, saw all the flaws that were in this creation, and yet, his ultimate calling was to die for it. He died so that this imperfect creation would know redemption. Erasmus, in my opinion, saw there was a need for a change. He saw that what were considered normal ways of life were not right. Erasmus is responsible for a book entitled The Praise of Folly where he stated that fools were almost better off than the so-called wise persons because they live in accordance with their true feelings and not by superstition or doctrines. Erasmus was so critical of the excess of the Catholic church he practically raised the reformist “egg” that would later be hatched by Luther. (J. Wilson, 1994). He saw the church was doing more harm than good. So why associate him with redemption? I believe it’s safe to say he started us down the road to making faith our own. In the end, faith in Jesus is about having a relationship with him. It’s about grace and love and forgiveness. It doesn’t seem like the church, back then, was very interested in any of that. Erasmus, I believe, helped bring about a voice of conviction and change. He saw all was not well and did what he could to redeem it, did what he could to teach and share that we will not get everything right all the time. Redemption is necessary and I think Erasmus saw there was a need for that which is why he challenged.

Plato and Aristotle have always been those great thinkers I have never really studied much about. I knew about both of them for a long time but to really say I thought about them a lot, is something I cannot say. It is hard to put into few words what these two men have done in me in just a short amount of time. The impact of their theories mixed with the impact of The Lord in my walk as of late is a very exciting and peculiar mixture. A good example of this would be to point out some of both Aristotle and Plato’s main philosophical contributions. Plato’s allegory of The Cave for instance; proving that man can only know so much until something comes along being alien in notion. The freed man saw many things that were beyond his expression. It was hard to picture and hard to explain. Aristotle acknowledged the existence of souls. He argued everything has a soul. One big exclamation point sticks out to me, though these men believed and argued different things, there is consistency within their notions and theories. The consistency lies with The Creator. Those who believe in The Lord believe there is a way to be in his presence both in  body and in soul. Plato believed the end goal of true happiness, as I understand it, was to finally relieve the soul from the influence of the flesh. As followers of Jesus, that is our goal as well. To rid the soul of the sin of the flesh and eventually have eternal life in Heaven. Aristotle knew that contemplation was important, not only for man, but for the soul as well. Knowledge is freedom in a sense that it frees us from agitation and unpleasantness.

The consistencies lie in the fact we come from a creator. Man has always contemplated and believed there is something beyond this realm of time and self. There is something far greater than us at work whether we believe it to be a god or a cycle of evolution. We want to know more, we want to be free of the evils of this world and we know we have an ultimate purpose. We don’t know as much as we think we know, for instance we know nothing about what it means to be outside of the concept of time. It speeds up, slows down, stops, but is always moving no matter how we perceive it and we will be chained to it while on this earth.

These are the things Aristotle and Plato have contemplated and wondered, giving us free reign to do the same; which is why I believe they resonate with people to this day.

I hope I am on the right track with this particular assignment so if this blog is off topic I apologize.