Psychological Models of Health

Psychological Models of Health Module Title: Sociology and Psychology and Public Health Part 1 Literature Review Health behaviour can be described as behaviour aimed to prevent or detect disease (Kasl and Cob, 1966). Models of health behaviour have been developed to understand how people make decisions about their health and predict the likelihood that health behaviour change will occur. This essay will aim to review a number of established health behaviour models focusing on Cognition Models, Social Cognition Models and Stage Models in relation to public health and health promotion interventions. Cognition Models The Health Belief Model (HBM) is a cognition model originally developed by Hochbaum in the 1950’s with later versions of the model being added in the 70’s (Rosenstock 1966; 1974) (cited by Conner and Norman, 2008/2005). The HBM is based on the probability that individuals are influenced by a threatened disease or illness based on a belief that they are vulnerable to a condition; there would be consequences of the condition if no action was taken; that they can prevent a condition developing by taking action; or the benefits of reducing risk of developing a condition are greater than the cost of taking action (add reference). This model was originally developed to predict the participation in screening tests and vaccination programmes with the focus on single preventative behaviours, more recently it has been used in areas of lifestyle behaviours which may sometimes involve life-long behaviours (Baranowski, Cullen, Nicklas, Thompson, Baranowski, 2003) various studies su ch as Abraham and Sheeran (1994) have questioned the appropriateness of using the HBM as a perceived threat to motivate behaviour with some groups, for example, groups of children and adolescent who assume they will live forever (Baranowski et al., 2003). Other critiscisms of the HBM are that it is too focused on the individual and does not consider social, economic and emotional factors (Strecher et al, 1997). In response to criticism the HBM has been adapted to include self-efficacy and health motivation (Ogden, 2012). The Protection Motivation Theory (PMT) developed by Rogers 1975/1985 (cited in Ogden, 2012 pg 50), expands on the Health Belief Model with the addition of emotional factors such as, introducing an element of fear. The framework of PMT is based on using the appeal of fear to influence attitudes and behaviours. The research for the model was centered on the fear-drive model which sees fear as a force by which to motivate trial and error behaviour (Conner Norman, 2008/2005). A study (Wu, Stanton, Li, Galbraith, Cole, 2005) that used PMT to establish health motivation and risk involvement, was successful in using PMT to predict behavioural intention in a variety of behavioural areas such as, smoking cessation, exercise and diet, cancer prevention and condom protection to name but a few. PMT has not received the same level of criticism as HBM however, many criticisms of the HBM also relate to PMT, largely in that it does not allow for social and environmental factors (Ogden 2012, pg 52) Social Cognition Models The Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) (Fishbein and Ajken, 1975) or in its extended form Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) (Ajken, 1988) are formed based on the idea that the greatest predictor of behaviour is of behavioural intention (Ogden, 2012). The TPB model is used widely in health fields (Armitage and Conner 2001; Taylor et al. 2007). In addition to attitudes, for example, exercise is fun and will improve my health, the TRA added subjective norms, using the perception of social pressure to perform a behaviour, for example, a desire to please others and gain approval. The TPB adapted the TRA model by adding a concept of perceived behavioural control, which is the individuals perception as to whether the behaviour will be easy or difficult, the concept is similar to Bandura’s (1982) concept of self-efficacy (Conner and Norman, 2008/2005). Both models are used in many areas of health promotion in relation to behaviour change, in current UK policy setting they can be found in exercise intentions; weight gain prevention and eating behaviour; addiction related behaviours; HIV prevention and condom use (Taylor, 2006). The TRA model has been used to show patterns of behaviours such as fat, salt and milk intake whereas the TPB model was used to give details of attitudes and beliefs about starchy foods in the UK (Stubenitsky Mela, 2000). The TPB and TRA differ from the HBM and PMT models in that they have added an element of social and environmental factors by including normative beliefs. Criticisms of the TPB and TRA focus on methods used to test theory and the extent at which they can predict behaviour (Ogden, 2012). Stage Models Transtheoretical Stages of Change Model and Precaution Adoption Process Model The Transtheoretical model (TTM) was developed in the 1980’s by a group of researchers at the University of Rhode Island. TTM was first used in smoking cessation in studies carried out by DiClemente and Prochaska (1982), and is often referred to as simply the stages of change model. The model suggests that health related behaviour change occurs through five stages know as: Pre-contemplation; contemplation; preparation; action and maintenance (Conner and Norman, 2008/2005). Movement or transition through the stages is driven by self-efficacy (the confidence in oneself to change behaviour) and decisional balance (weighing up the costs or benefits to the behaviour), relapsing backward and forwards through the stages is also common (Morris, Marzano, Dandy and O’Brien, 2012). Since 1985 application of the TTM has influenced service planning, provision and training agendas at local, regional and national levels (Bunton, Baldwin, Flynn, Whitelaw, 2000). Bunton et.al, (2000) r emarks on the rise in popularity of the TTM. Examples of areas where TTM has been used include studies in the area of dietary changes, exercise and activity promotion, sexually transmitted disease and pregnancy prevention (cited in Morris, Marzano, Dandy and O’Brien, 2012). Limitations of the model have been suggested by Conner and Norman (2008, pg 247) in that fundamental problems with the definition and measurement of the stages are present. Precaution Adoption Process Model (PAPM) First suggested by Weinstein (1988) and further refined by Weinstein and Sandman (1992) the Precaution Adoption Process Model (PAPM) specifies seven stages ranging from ignorance to maintenance of the behaviour. The first stage is, unawareness of issue; second, unengaged by issue; third, deciding about acting; fourth, deciding not to act; fifth, decided to act; sixth, acting; and finally seventh, the maintenance stage. Although similar in some ways, the difference between the PAPM and the TTM is the extra stages, PAPM has 2 additional stages which includes the decided not to act stage which makes a clear distinction between having never thought about adopting a precaution before and having thought about it but deciding not to act (Conner Norman, 2008/2005). Other advantages of the PAPM are that it allows for messages to be tailored at each stage of the model which is helpful in situations where resistance to change is high and its simple questioning method makes it suitable for both individual and group settings, Weinstein Sandman (2002), (The Free Library, 2014). In summary each model has its own unique aspects References Abraham, C., Sheeran, P. (1994). Modelling and modifying young heterosexuals HIV-preventive behaviour; a review of theories, findings and educational implications. Patient Education and Counseling, 23(3), 173-186. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0738-3991(94)90033-7 Armitage, E, C.J. Conner, M. (2001). Efficacy of the Theory of Planned Behaviour: a meta-analytic review. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 471-99. Baranowski, T., Cullen, K. W., Nicklas, T., Thompson, D., Baranowski, J. (2003). Are Current Health Behavioral Change Models Helpful in Guiding Prevention of Weight Gain Efforts? Obesity Research, 11(S10), 23S-43S. doi: 10.1038/oby.2003.222 Becker MH. The health belief model and personal health behavior. Health Education Monographs. 1974;2:324-473. Bunton, R., Baldwin, S., Flynn, D., Whitelaw, S. (2000). The ‘stages of change’ model in health promotion: Science and Ideology. Critical Public Health, 10(1), 55-70. doi: 10.1080/713658223 Morris, J., Marzano, M., Dandy, N. O’Brien, L. (2012). Theories and models of behaviour and behaviour change. Forest Research, Theories: Behaviour Change Report Rosenstock IM. The health belief model: explaining health behavior through expectancies In: Glanz K, Lewis FM, Rimer BK, eds. Health Behavior and Health Education: Theory, Research, and Practice. Stretcher, V., Rosenstock, I.M. (1997). The Health Belief Model. In K. Glanz, F.M. Lewis, B.K. Rimer (Eds.) Health Behaviour and Health Education: Theory, Research and Practice (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Stubenitsky K, Mela DJ (2000) UK consumer perceptions of starchy foods. British Journal of Nutrition 83: 277-285. Taylor, D., Bury, M., Campling, N., Carter, S., Garfield, S., Newbould, J. Rennie, T. (2007). A Review of the use of the Health Belief Model (HBM), the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA), the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) and the Trans-Theoretical Model (TTM) to study and predict health related behaviour change. Taylor, D., (2006). Review of the use of the Health Belief Model (HBM), the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA), the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) and the Trans-Theoretical Model (TTM) to study and predict health related behaviour change. The Department of Practice and Policy. The School of Pharmacy, University of London The Free Library, Precaution Adoption Process Model: need for experimentation in alcohol and drug education.. (n.d.) >The Free Library. (2014). Retrieved Jan 15 2015 from:http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Precaution+Adoption+Process+Model%3a+need+for+experimentation+in-a0169677077 Wu, Y., Stanton, B. F., Li, X., Galbraith, J., Cole, M. L. (2005). Protection Motivation Theory and Adolescent Drug Trafficking: Relationship Between Health Motivation and Longitudinal Risk Involvement. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 30(2), 127-137. doi: 10.1093/jpepsy/jsi001 Part 2 Case Study This case study is based on Chris, a 40 year old man. Chris is aware he has some health issues. However, recent marital breakdown has resulted in a disruption to his home and family life and he is lacking the motivation and self confidence to make positive changes which he knows will benefit his health. I will look at how applying health psychology can be used to motivate and change Chris’s behaviour. The notion of motivation and self-efficacy can be found in most models of health behaviour (Ogden, 2012). Since Chris is already aware of his health situation and has made some steps i.e. visiting the doctor, to discuss his symptoms and circumstances, therefore, the Transtheoretical Stages of Change Model will be what I am focusing on during this case study. Based on the five stages of change of the Transtheoretical change model Chris would be between stage 1 Pre-contemplation and stage 2 Contemplation. The main aim will be to get Chris from the Contemplation stage to the Preparation stage and beyond. At this Pre-contemplation-Contemplation stage motivational interviewing may be helpful. Chris has children whom he sees at the weekend, children are a great excuse for exercise. Talk about the health behaviours that impact the children exercise/diet, they have a sedentary lifestyle when they visit, this would be an ideal time to engage with Chris and get him to address the lack of exercise, poor diet by using the time he spends at the weekend with the children. Questions such as, what other activities would you and the children enjoy? Encourage and motivate through listening to Chris’s own motivations for change. By working through decisional balance, helping Chris to see how the pros of lifestyle behaviour change can outweigh the cons. With each stage self-efficacy will improve helping to motivate Chris to abstain from unhealthy patterns. What needs to be changed? Setting the agenda – there are several factors that Chris faces, many which could be improved by diet, exercise and smoking, but social and emotional factors must be taken into consideration. Through motivational interviewing Chris can identify what his priorities are. This is also a good time to provide advice based on health statistics, for instance combining smoking with a healthier diet and more exercise will reduce his risk of coronary heart disease (NHS Choices). Adopting an exercise pattern into daily life can reduce blood pressure, (Blood Pressure UK) easier to start off with small exercise sessions and build up gradually. Areas for management Plan to include: Exercise: Suggest exercise plan which includes family activities, swimming, cycling (NHS.UK/livewell/fitness), (NHS.uk/letsgetmoving) Diet: Cut down on takeaways, suggest alternative treats to replace the usual weekend takeaway food, and cooking together with the children a great way to learn and motivate, provide nutritional information/guidelines for salt, fat and sugar intake and suggest ways to set achievable targets Smoking: Cutting down on smoking to reduce major health risks Social: To join fitness clubs based on interests and ability References Blood Pressure UK http://www.bloodpressureuk.org/BloodPressureandyou/Yourlifestyle/Beingactive NHS Choices. Coronary Heart Disease Prevention http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Coronary-heart-disease/Pages/Prevention.aspx 1

Miracles and Science Essay

1. Introduction: Miracles as violations of the laws of nature Unbelievable, isn’t it, that there are still students at this university who believe in stories from the Bible, said Martin, an older colleague, at one of the formal dinners around which the traditional life of Oxford University revolves. But Martin, I answered, their faith probably doesn’t differ much from mine. I can still see his face go pale while he nearly choked on his glass of St. Emilion Grand Cru Classà ©: How can you believe in such things nowadays – Walking on water, a resurrection from the dead? Those are miracles, and aren’t you a scientist? Oh, how interesting, say John and Ruth, a couple that I have just met at the end of a church service. You are a scientist. They look a bit unsure of what to say next and John blurts out, I read recently that we still don’t understand how birds can fly so many miles to the south and yet return to exactly the same place each summer. Scientists can’t explain this; it is a miracle, don’t you think? I never quite know what to say next in such conversations. Perhaps nine years of living in Britain have made me too sensitive to that most cardinal of English social sins – causing embarrassment. But there is more to it than that. Behind these statements lies a tangle of complex intellectual issues related to the definition and scope of science, the nature of God’s action in the world, and the reliability and interpretation of the Bible. These have exercised many of greatest minds in history: The debate between atheism and religious belief has gone on for centuries, and just about every aspect of it has been explored to the point where even philosophers seem bored with it. The outcome is stalemate. 1 So says my Oxford colleague Alister McGrath. Although these subtleties are well known to philosophers and historians of  science, public discourse on science and religion often seems blissfully unaware of them. 2 Everyone brings a set of presuppositions to the table. To make progress, these should first be brought out into the open. Without time for an honest conversation in which we can listen to each other in depth, I won’t know exactly what Martin, John, or Ruth’s presuppositions are. But, for the sake of this essay, I will be a bit presumptuous and venture a guess. My guess would be that, although both seem to be on opposite sides of a vast divide, they are in fact influenced by a similar perspective on science and miracles, one first laid down by the great sceptical Scottish philosopher David Hume, who wrote: A miracle is a violation of the laws of nature, and as a firm and unalterable experience has established these laws, the proof against a miracle, from the very nature of the fact, is as entire as any argument from experience can possibly be imagined. This language of â€Å"miracles as violations of the laws of nature† has framed the debate ever since. Martin, John and Ruth, perhaps without realizing it, are living under the long shadow of David Hume. Martin may think that science is the only reliable route to gaining knowledge about the world, and that, since belief in miracles is obviously unscientific, such belief must ipso facto be false. John and Ruth may feel a similar tension between science and miracles, and are therefore encouraged by any natural process that seems inexplicable. Weakening the power of science would seem to strengthen the case for God acting in the world: If we know that today God miraculously steers a bird back to its original habitat after a long return flight to the south, then it is easier to believe that 2000 years ago he turned water into wine at a wedding in Cana. Now, as a Christian scientist who believes in the miracles of the Bible, I take issue with both of the views above. But to explain this better, I need to first take a step back and answer two critical questions: What do I mean by science, and what does  the Bible say about miracles? 2. Defining Science The problem of deciding where to draw the lines around science has vexed generations of philosophers. Like many unsolved issues, it has been given its own name—â€Å"the demarcation problem.† Although one can determine with some degree of consensus what the extremes of the science/non-science continuum are, exactly where the boundary lies is fuzzy. This doesn’t mean, however, that we cannot recognize science when we see it4, but rather that a watertight definition is difficult to create. The old fashioned idea (still taught in many schools) that scientific practice follows a well-defined linear process—first make an observation, then state a hypothesis, and then test that hypothesis—is certainly far too simple. Science as a tapestry Rather than attempt to come up with a careful and precise definition of science or scientific practice, I will instead resort to a favorite metaphor of mine. It originates with one of my former teachers at Cornell, the p hysicist David Mermin, who describes science as a â€Å"tapestry† woven together from many threads (experimental results, interpretations, explanations, etc.).5 It is only when one examines the tapestry as a whole that it will (or will not) make a convincing pattern. Creating scientific tapestries is a collective endeavor building on mutual trust and the communal experience of what kinds of arguments and evidence are likely to stand the test of time. In part because the skill of weaving reliable scientific tapestries relies on subtle judgements, a young scientist may work for years as an apprentice of older and more experienced practitioners before branching out on his own. In this process there are many parallels with the guilds of old. I am fond of this metaphor because it describes what I think I experience from the inside as a scientist. Moreover, it also emphasizes the importance of coherence and consistency when I weave together arguments and data to make an â€Å"inference to a best explanation.†6 The strong communal element inherent in scientific practice has at times been seized upon by sociologists of science to argue that s cientific knowledge is just one more type of human construct with no greater  claim on reality than any other form of knowledge. But scientists as a whole have reacted to this proposition in a negative way.7 Although they agree that all kinds of economic, historical and social factors do play a role in the formation of scientific theories, they would argue that, in the long run, the scientific process does lead to reliable knowledge about the world. The view of nature embraced by most scientists that I know could be described as critical realism. They are realists because they believe that there is a world out there that is independent of our making. The adjective â€Å"critical† is added because they recognize that extracting knowledge about that world is not always straightforward. Thus, the primary role of the collective nature of the scientific process is to provide a network of error-correcting mechanisms that prevent us from fooling ourselves. The continual testing against nature refines and filters out competing scientific theories, leading to advances in the strength and reliability of our scien tific knowledge tapestries. Although there are many commonalities in the ways that scientists in distinct fields assemble their tapestry arguments, there can also be subtle differences. These differences are foisted on us in part by the types of problems that each field attempts to address. For example, as a theoretical physicist I’ve been trained in a tradition of what the Nobel Laureate Eugene Wigner called â€Å"the unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics:† The miracle of the appropriateness of the language of mathematics for the formulation of the laws of physics is a wonderful gift which we neither understand nor deserve. We should be grateful for it and hope that it will remain valid in future research and that it will extend, for better or for worse, to our pleasure, even though perhaps also to our bafflement, to wide branches of learning.8 We believe, based on a history of spectacular success, that mathematical consistency among threads is a key indicator of strong tapestries.9 These days, I spend much of my time interacting with biologists who tend to view my confidence  in the ability of theoretical models to extract knowledge about the physical world with great suspicion.10 I, on the other hand, am often instinctively sceptical of the huge error bars that can afflict their data.11 To a large degree, these cultural differences are forced on us by the kinds of questions we study. My reaction above arises because physics is self-limiting. As a community we simply don’t deal with problems of the same level of complexity that biology does. If an experiment is too messy we will often define it away by declaring â€Å"that isn’t physics,† and move on. Similarly, molecular biologists can afford to be more selective about their data than medical scientists or psychologists can.12 But, despite these cultural differences, which can lead to heated and sometimes frustrating discussion, we do agree on a number of ground rules for defining what makes a tapestry strong. For example, what we either predict or measure should be repeatable. If I claim to see an effect in an experiment, someone else in a different lab should be able to reliably measure the same effect.13 That simple requirement has many ramifications for the types of problems we are able to address The limits of science There are many questions that simply are not amenable to purely scientific analysis. A very lucid discussion of this issue can be found in the book The Limits of Science by Nobel Prize winner (and atheist) Sir Peter Medawar, who wrote: That there is indeed a limit upon science is made very likely by the existence of questions that science cannot answer and that no conceivable advance of science would empower it to answer†¦ It is not to science, therefore but to metaphysics, imaginative literature or religion that we must turn for answers to questions having to do with first and last things. and Science is a great and glorious enterprise – the most successful, I argue, that human beings have ever engaged in. To reproach it for its inability to answer all the questions we should like to put to it is no more sensible than to reproach a railway locomotive for not flying or, in general, not performing any other operation for which it was not designed.14 Science’s great power derives from its self-imposed limits. It is wrong to ask it to pronounce on issues outside its jurisdiction. In fact, the most important decisions in life cannot be addressed solely by the scientific method, nor do people really live as if they can. In the words of Sir John Polkinghorne, former professor of Mathematical Physics at Cambridge and Anglican priest: We are entitled to require a consistency between what people write in their studies and the way in which they live their lives. I submit that no-one lives as if science were enough. Our account of the world must be rich enough – have a thick enough texture and a sufficiently generous rationality – to contain the total spectrum of human meeting with reality. But just because we don’t live life by the scientific method doesn’t mean that the only alternative is irrationality. For example, if I were to decide to get married, a truly irrational approach would be to pick a random woman off the street. Instead, assuming I find a potentially willing partner, it is wise to go through a period of courtship during which we get to know each other. We may also ask for the opinion of wise friends. There are helpful counseling programs with compatibility lists, etc. that, in fact, often use knowledge that scientific techniques have extracted from our collective experience and wisdom. But at the end of the day I can’t demand scientific certainty before deciding to marry someone. Nor is it wise to perform repeatable experiments! I need to make a volitional step because there are aspects of marriage that I can only see from the inside.15 Another example of a method used to obtain knowledge is the legal process which, although it is a tightly organized system, is not strictly scientific. Similarly, a historian will use a combination of evidence (e.g. manuscripts) and understanding about the thinking patterns of a particular era to make informed judgements about what happened in the past. Clearly, this big question of how to extract reliable  information about the world, how to separate fact from mere opinion, is indeed a very difficult and important one. 3. Miracles and the Bible How can we then judge whether or not the miracles of the Bible are reliable? Since the word miracle has taken on so many different meanings, it is important to first examine the biblical language. The New Testament predominantly uses three words for miracle: ï‚ ·teras, a wonder ï‚ ·dunamis, an act of power ï‚ ·semeion, a sign Sometimes it combines all three, as in Acts 2:22: Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles (dunamis), wonders (teras) and signs (semeion), which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. The word teras (wonder) is almost always used together with one of the other words, emphasizing that the main point of biblical miracles is not to merely elicit amazement but rather to serve a higher theological purpose. For this reason, biblical miracles cannot be understood outside of the theological context within which they occur. They are not anomalous events. This principle provides a key to the proper assessment of their validity. Nature is what God does Miracles happen against a backdrop. In this context, it is illuminating to see how the Bible describes God’s action in the natural world. For example in Psalm 104, that great poem about nature, we read, He makes springs pour water into the ravines, it flows between the mountains The first part of this verse refers to God’s direct action while the second part suggests that water flows through its own natural properties. Read the Psalm for yourself and notice how fluidly the point of view changes back and forth between what we might call the laws of nature and the direct action of God. Such dual descriptions can be found throughout the Bible. The New Testament is even more explicit: The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. (Hebrews 1:3)  and He is before all things, and in him all th ings hold together (Col 1:17) In other words, if God were to stop sustaining all things by his powerful word, the world would stop existing. That is why, when describing nature, the Bible so easily switches perspectives depending on whether it is emphasizing the regular behavior of natural phenomena, or their origin in God’s providential sustenance. So, as St. Augustine might say, Nature is what [God] does.16 Augustine doesn’t mean that nature is the same as God (pantheism), for, as he also argued, God operates outside of space and time. Nevertheless, and this is a very subtle point, 17 a case can be made for ascribing some independent causal power to the laws of nature. On the other hand, there is no room within a robust biblical theism for the opposite deistic notion that God started the world and then left it to run on its own, completely independently, because descriptions of God’s continuous care for creation are found throughout Scripture: Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground apart from the will of your Father. And even the very hairs of your head are all numbered. (Matthew 10:29,30) As Christian thinkers throughout the Middle Ages wrestled with the questions of miracles and God’s action in the world, the following ideas emerged: if the regularities of nature are a manifestation of the sustenance of God then one would expect them to be trustworthy and consistent, rather than capricious. The regular behavior of nature could be viewed as the â€Å"customs of the Creator† as it were. Christians glorify God by studying these â€Å"laws of nature.† A strong case can be made that such theological realizations helped pave the way for the rise of modern science.18 By the time the Royal Society of London, the world’s first scientific society, was founded in 1660, Christian thinkers like the metaphysical poet John Donne, then dean of St. Paul’s Cathedral in London, could write: the ordinary things in Nature, would be greater miracles than the extraordinary, which we  admire most, if they were done but once†¦ only the daily doing takes off the admiration.19 God of the gaps A similar sentiment lies behind a famous exchange between those old adversaries, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz and Sir Isaac Newton. The latter noticed that the orbits of the planets did not appear to be stable when calculated over long periods, and postulated that the solar system needed occasional â€Å"reformation† by God. Leibniz objected that,  if God had to remedy the defects of His creation, this was surely to demean his craftsmanship. 20 In other words, the regular sustaining activity of God, as evidenced by natural laws, should be sufficient t o explain the regular behaviour of the solar system, without the need for additional ad-hoc interventions. Making it right the first time is more glorious than having to fix it later. In the same context, Leibniz also emphasised the theological nature of miracles: And I hold, that when God works miracles, he does not do it in order to supply the wants of nature, but those of grace. Whoever thinks otherwise, must needs have a very mean notion of the wisdom and power of God.21 A more modern version of Leibniz’s general objection can be found in a famous statement by Charles Coulson, the first Oxford professor of Theoretical Chemistry who wrote, When we come to the scientifically unknown, our correct policy is not to rejoice because we have found God; it is to become better scientists.22 He popularized the phrase â€Å"God of the gaps† for those who, perhaps like John and Ruth, think that God is found primarily in the lacunas of our scientific understanding. Two sorts of miracles Science, as well as tools from historical disciplines, can be brought to bear on biblical miracles. For example they can be split into those that are examples of providential timing (type i miracles) and those that can only be viewed as directly violating physical cause-effect  relationships (type ii miracles). An example of a possible type i miracle would be the crossing of the river Jordan by the people of Israel: Now the Jordan is at flood stage all during harvest. Yet as soon as the priests who carried the ark reached the Jordan and their feet touched the water’s edge, the water from upstream stopped flowing. It piled up in a heap a great distance away, at a town called Adam in the vicinity of Zarethan, while the water flowing down to the Sea of the Arabah (the Salt Sea) was completely cut off. So the people crossed over opposite Jericho. (Joshua 3:15,16) Colin Humphreys, Cambridge professor of material science, has studied this miracle in great detail 23 and notes that the text supplies a number of unusual clues, including the fact that the water was blocked up a great distance away at a particular town. He has identified this with a location where the Jordan has been known to temporarily dam up when strong earthquakes cause mudslides (most recently in 1927). For many scientists, the fact that God is working through natural processes makes the miracle more palatable: The scientist, even when he is a believer, is bound to try as far as possible to reduce miracles to regularities: the believer, even when he is a scientist, discovers miracles in the most familiar things.24 Of course this doesn’t take away from the fact that there was remarkable timing involved. Perhaps the attraction of this description comes in part because there is a direct corollary with the very common experience of â€Å"providential timing† of events, which believers attribute to God’s working.25 There are also miracles in the Bible that defy description in terms of current science. Perhaps the most significant of these is the resurrection of Jesus Christ. If anything, science has strengthened the case for this not being a type i miracle. For example, in John 19:34 we read: Instead, one of the soldiers pierced Jesus’ side with a spear, bringing a sudden flow of blood and water. Modern medicine suggests that this is clear evidence that the pericardium, a membrane around the heart, was pierced, confirming that he was in fact dead. The more we know about the processes of decay that set in after death, the less likely it appears that Jesus could have risen from the dead by any natural means. Rather, science strengthens the case that if Jesus did indeed rise from the dead, the event must have occurred through a direct injection of supernatural power into the web of cause and effect that undergirds our physical world – it was a type ii miracle. Of course the resurrection is central to Christian teaching: And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. (I Corinthians 15:14) Given that almost every great Christian thinker in history has emphasized the fact that miracles must be understood within the context of a theological purpose, perhaps one could invert this argument and say that it is not surprising that the central eve nt in history would be miraculous. 26 So where has this argument brought us? I have argued that the precise relationship between miracles and science has been the subject of a long and unresolved debate with strands reaching back to the early Church fathers. Theologians wrestle with questions that concern the differences between God’s regular sustaining action and His special non-repeating actions, i.e. miracles, and how these fit in with redemptive purpose. There is a link to the question of demarcation in science, since within a robust biblical theism the regular working of God’s action, the â€Å"customs of the Creator† (or natural laws) are, almost by design, amenable to scientific analysis. Biblical miracles, in contrast, are always linked to special theological purpose and are therefore, almost by definition, non-repeatable and a-scientific. 4. The decisive significance of worldviews If Martin and I would have time to get this far in conversation, I’m sure we would have swiftly passed th e red herring of natural science being the touchstone upon which to examine biblical miracles. But Martin could point out that Hume made a number of other arguments against miracles, namely: Witness testimony is often suspect. ï‚ ·Stories get exaggerated in the retelling. Miracles are chiefly seen among ignorant and barbarous people. ï‚ ·Rival religions also have miracle stories, so they cancel each other out. These arguments are substantial, and I refer to footnote 3 for an introduction to the voluminous literature they have inspired. However, we can take a little stab at the first two objections. It is true that witness testimony cannot always be trusted and that stories change with time. But these are the same problems that face legal systems and historians. Nonetheless, we can employ the tools of these professions to examine biblical miracles. Take, for example, the resurrection of Jesus Christ. There is significant extrabiblical historical evidence that he indeed lived. Much has been written about the general trustworthiness of the Gospels. For example, there is much internal evidence, in both the style and content of the narratives, that the writers themselve s were convinced that Jesus did indeed rise from the dead. Tradition holds that 11 of the 12 original apostles were martyred for this belief that turned a group of cowards into a people who â€Å"turned the world upside down.† Although it is well beyond the scope of this essay, a very strong case for the plausibility of the resurrection can be made.27 Similar analysis can be brought to bear on other miracle claims, including those of other religions. After all, every meaningful system of thought must be open to careful scrutiny. But I suspect that often, underneath the surface, it is really the third argument that carries the most persuasive force. In part because history is littered with claims for the miraculous that seem bizarre, or smack of superstition, and in part because the incredible advances of modern science and technology inspire awe, we can intensely feel the attraction of identifying with the latter and not the former. This disposition is exemplified in the following quote by the theologian Rudolph Bultmann, a man famous for his attempts to de-mythologize the New Testament: It is impossible to use electric light and the wireless and to avail ourselves of modern medical and surgical discoveries, and at the same time to believe in the New Testament world of spirits and miracles.28 By getting rid of the miracle stories in the Bible,  Bultmann and his followers hoped to make the Christian story more palatable to modern man. Although I recognize the emotional weight of this sentiment, I am not convinced that it is an intellectually coherent approach, mainly for reasons of self-consistency. If the New Testamentitself asserts, both directly and indirectly, that the historicity of the resurrection is foundational to Christianity, then it would seem to stand or fall by that fact. As a physicist, I have a natural penchant for wanting to see how an idea relates to more basic principles. And to analyze the validity of a quote like the one above, we must take a cold hard look at our fundamental presuppositions. In the words of John Polkinghorne: If we are to understand the nature of reality, we have only two possible starting points: either the brute fact of the physical world or the brute fact of a divine will and purpose behind that physical world.29 Where does each of those two fundamental starting points take us? When we use them to construct a worldview, what kind of sense does it make of experience, morality, truth, beauty, and our place in the world? These are not easy questions. There is so much mystery around us. Perhaps the best way to move forward would be to borrow Mermin’s tapestry analogy and carefully investigate whether the different threads of historical evidence, philosophical consistency, and personal knowledge can be woven together into a worldview that is robust. In particular, does our tapestry posses those qualities of coherence and (surprising) fruitfulness that characterise the best scientific tapestries? If I start from the brute facts of nature, I personally am unable to construct a tapestry that is both rigorous and rich enough to make sufficient sense of the world. By contrast, if I assume a divine will and purpose behind the world I believe that I can construct a much more compelling tapesty that incorporates all of the threads of human  existence. Within that purposeful world, the case for Christianity is much more persuasive. To use a famous quote from C.S. Lewis: I believe in Christianity as I believe that the Sun has risen-not only because I see it, but because by it, I see everything else.30 It is the sum total of all those arguments that convinces me of the veracity of biblical miracles. Nevertheless, I recognize that no matter how cogent, say, the historical evidence for the resurrection is, if I start from a different worldview, as Martin and Rudolph Bultmann do, then it will be virtually impossible to accept the existence of biblical miracles. (In the end I think this is what Hume is really saying). Miracles cannot be interpreted independently from the theological context in which they function. They are part of a package deal. I don’t know what Martin would make of all that. We would surely need more than one glass of wine to complete this discussion (but wouldn’t it be fun?). 5. Conclusion Finally, what would I say to John and Ruth? If they are like many Christians I know, they might feel a slight uneasiness with science, a subconscious fear fed by the pontifications of some popularizers who seem keen to equate science with atheism.31 So perhaps I would first point out the obvious limits of science. But then I might tell the story of Leibniz and Newton’s exchange, and point out that Newton was a good enough theologian not to turn the alleged instability of the planets into a God of the gaps argument. Similarly, if it is true that we don’t yet understand how birds can navigate so accurately over large distances, then surely it would bring more glory to God to search for the mechanisms by which such remarkable feats are accomplished: It is the glory of God to conceal a matter; to search out a matter is the glory of kings. Proverbs 25:2 Perhaps because evolution has been a particularly favorite bludgeon of the science = atheism cabal, a Christian mini-industry has sprung up to debunk it. Unfortunately, this only feeds the public misperception that the core of the conflict between science and faith concerns scientific mechanism (evolution did or did not occur) rather than one of the philosophy and interpretation of science. God could, of course, have regularly used miracles to create throughout the time-span of natural history. He is free. But whether he did so in natural history is fundamentally a question of Biblical interpretation. 32 Surely it is even more glorious if God could design a physical system that creates itself through the regularities of his sustaining action. Like many of my Christian scientific colleagues who hold to a high view of Scripture, I believe the biblical text allows itself to be interpreted in this way, that sentient beings arose primarily through the ordinary â€Å"customs of the Creato r,† and that moreover it glorifies God to seek to understand these patterns.33 John and Ruth might then ask: if I emphasize the integrity of the regular action of God in sustaining the universe, and even in creating us, then why should miracles occur at all? Can they occur today? Rather than answer that theological question directly, let me resort to a musical analogy borrowed from Colin Humphreys. Suppose you are watching a pianist play a classical piece. You will notice that there are certain notes that he plays, and certain ones that he never does. The choice of notes is constrained because the music is being played in a particular key signature. But then, occasionally he may break this rule and play an unusual note. Musicians call these accidentals, and a composer can put them in wherever she likes (although if there are too many the music would sound strange). As Humphreys puts it, If he is a great composer, the accidentals will never be used capriciously: they will always make better music. It is the accidentals which contribute to making the piece of music great. The analogy with how God operates is clear: God created and upholds the universe but, like the great composer, he is free to override his own rules. However, if he is a c onsistent God, it must make more sense than less for him to override his rules.34 Notes 1. 2. 3. Alister McGrath, Dawkins’ God: Genes, Memes and the Meaning of Life, (Blackwell, Oxford 2005) p 92. A good example of this is Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion, (Bantam, London 2006) David Hume, Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding and Concerning the Principles of Morals, (1748). Hume’s argument has often been criticized for being self-referential. He at first presupposes that no reasonable person can believe that the laws of nature can be violated, and then concludes that miracles cannot occur because he defines them as violations of the laws of nature. Note that this analysis is not accepted by all commentators. Colin Brown, Miracles and the Critical Mind, (Paternoster, Exeter, 1984) provides a lucid overview of the debate. See also John Earman, Hume’s Abject Failure. The Argument against Miracles (Oxford University Press, Oxford 2000) for a critical view, and Peter Harrison, â€Å"Miracles, Early Modern Science, and Rational Religion†, Church History 75 (3) pp. 493-511 (2006) for an interesting historical perspective. I am reminded of a famous quote by US Supreme Court judge Potter Stewart who, when asked to distinguish between art and pornography, noted that although it was hard to define: â€Å"I know it when I see it† (Jacobellis v. Ohio (1964)). N. David Mermin, â€Å"The Golemization of Relativity†, Physics Today 49, 11–13 (1996) Peter Lipton, Inference to the Best Explanation, (Routledge, London, 2004) In the 1990’s this tension between sociologists and the scientific community erupted into the so-called ‘Science Wars’. For a good overview, see e.g. J. A. Labinger and H. Collins (eds), The One Culture? A Conversation about Science, (University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 2001). Quote from Nobel Prize winner E. Wigner, â€Å"The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences†, Communications in Pure and Applied Mathematics, vol. 13, No. I (February 1960). An iconic example would be Paul Dirac’s 1928 prediction of anti-ma tter, which he showed to be necessary to satisfy the mathematical consistency constraints  imposed by combining quantum mechanics and special relativity for electrons. See P.A.M. Dirac, Proc. Roy. Soc. A, 117, 610 (1928). The cultural differences between more mathematically minded physical scientists and more empirically minded biological scientists are discussed by Evelyn Fox Keller, in a fascinating book: Making Sense of Life: Explaining Biological Development with Models, Metaphors, and Machines, Harvard University Press, Boston (2002). Such instinctive reactions are what make interdisciplinary research so difficult. Clearly biology has been incredibly successful despite its differences with my scientific culture. I also suggest that as the questions we ask become difficult (often the case for applied subjects like medicine), the tapestries, by necessity, become more fragile. I realize that this is more subtle for historical sciences like geology and cosmology (we have, for example, only observed one universe). Nevertheless, even in these fields, parallel concepts apply. P.B. Medawar, The Limits of Science, Oxford University Press, Oxford (1987) . There are interesting analogies here to making a religious commitment. Christians would argue that important aspects of the Christian life can only be understood and experienced from within a relationship with Christ. That is not to say that a step of faith is just a blind leap in the dark. It should be a decision that is informed by careful thinking and weighing of evidence. But it is more than just that. Augustine, Literal Commentary on Genesis, c AD 391 See e.g. C. J. Collins, Science and Faith: Friends or Foes? (Crossway, Wheaton, 2003) ch 11. See e.g. R. Hooykaas, Religion and the Rise of Modern Science, (Eerdmans, Grand Rapids,1972) John Donne (Eighty Sermons, #22 published in 1640) John Hedley Brooke, Science and Religion , CUP, Cambridge (1991), p147. Leibniz, as quoted by C. Brown, Miracles and the Critical Mind, (Paternoster, Exeter, 1984), p 75. Charles Coulson, Christianity in an Age of Science, 25th Riddell Memorial Lecture Series, Oxford University Press, Oxford, (1953). Colin Humphreys The Miracles of Exodus: A Scientist’s Discovery of the Extraordinary Natural Causes of the Biblical Stories, (Harper Collins, San Francisco, 2003). R. Hooykaas, op cit One could argue that God must nevertheless employ divine action to set up the conditions necessary for a type i miracle to occur at the right time. In that sense both kinds of miracles may involve violations of normal physical cause-effect relations, but in type i this is more hidden. Note that I am not arguing that miracles  break ultimate cause-effect relationships. Within a divine economy, they may make perfect causal sense. Language like â€Å"violation of physical cause-effect† reflects our limited access to the mind of God.

Managing Homework

The point of view in managing homework focused on teaching strategy used by the teacher, to convey students to learn subject matter that has been discussed in class. When motivating students to learn, there’s likely to be to be a few students, if not many, do not understand the subject matter. Likewise, effective teaching can be measured by amount of learning the students get. Teachers should find means to let students have greater learning acquired through teaching and learning process. Teaching strategy is one of the factors to consider in determining the degree of learning that takes place. One of the tasks of the teacher’s lesson plan is giving assignments or homework to students. Effective teacher corporate and plan well lesson and incorporate there in the lesson plan the quality homework to ensure thorough learning. Also, a good homework is the one that is structured in the planning ahead of time.  The role of the teacher in the classroom is a good planner and a manager of his or her own class. The teacher should see to it that giving homework would be a part of the teaching strategy that is imparted to students. A good teaching strategy is the one that includes to ensure students homework that are well and properly planned. A good homework reflects teacher’s effective means of managing the student learning process. Thus,† homework should contain consolidated skills†(Newsam, Peter, Teaching and Learning) already taught by the teacher and the students has a wide knowledge of the skills needed to make the homework accomplished. That skill that has been learned and mastered by students is the one to used in the making of the homework. It’s just a sort of applying those skills in real situation outside classroom, that is, the home. So that in they’re respective house, the parents acts as the substitutes in the absence of the teacher. There is still continuous learning that takes though there is absence of teacher’s guidance and motivation. Let us take for example skills acquired in learning counting numbers in mathematics subject. In the classroom teacher in math teaches the students how to count by using four operation skills. Objectively, students have mastered all those acquired skills in the teachers teaching in the classroom. But students of course don’t apply yet thoroughly those skills that have been acquired. Definitely, students should continuously learn at home by applying in real situation. These aspects, of continuous learning at home by making homework will help lessen errors, when the teacher gave the time of assessment to students. So definitely effective learning takes place on the students. There is no hard time for the teacher to teach the students when proper instruction in classroom is given. It is important that you let the students know that you believed on him or her and recognized the effort they’ve done. These statements addresses, â€Å"She needs to see you’re â€Å"in her corner† –they’re to listen, provide support and guidance, and seek help for her† (www.proteacher.com, cited by Speer, 2005), giving importance to the student’s homework. Also the assignment is in line with the present lessoning that teacher taught in the class. This reminds the students that homework should be accomplish since its important. References: 1. Newsam, Peter, Guest Essay. Retrieved October 1, 2006. Teaching and Learning. Retrieved from Microsoft Encarta Premium Suite 2005. 2. Speer, Pat, Editor in chief. July 1, 2005. Managing Change Requires Diligence, Homework and Systematic Approach to CEO’s Office. Retrieved October 1, 2006, from htt//www.proteacher.com/cgi-bin/dispitem.cgi? item=36893&norate=up.            

The Israeli Palestinian Conflict And The Jewish Movement

Starting in the late 19th century, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been a long standing clash between the Israeli Jews and Palestinian Arabs due to several significant events. The Israeli-palestinian conflict is one that goes way back to the time of the Old Testament. The land known as Israel, was given to the jewish people by God through Abraham. God Promised to give Abraham s descendants the land eternally. Throughout the thousand of years, thousands of Arabs have moved to those lands which they called Palestine. When it comes to whom should own the land, both sides have credible arguments. The Jews say that it is written in the Bible while the Palestinian Arabs say that they have ruled the land for thousand of years. The Palestinian Arabs are also the majority of the population in that region. In the late 19th century, Theodor Herzl founded a group of Jews called the Zionists. According the the Encyclopedia Britannica, Zionism is the Jewish nationalist movement that has had as its goal the creation and support of a Jewish national state in Palestine, the ancient homeland of the Jews. The Zionist immediately began to relocate european Jews to four main c ities in Palestine. These cities were Jerusalem, Hebron, Safed and Tiberias. During this time, Palestine was part of the Ottoman empire and under direct control of the Ottoman Capital. Fast forwarding a couple of decades to WWI, the Ottoman Empire began to weaken. In 1917, the British announced the Balfour DeclarationShow MoreRelatedOppression Is The Driving Force Behind The Violence1376 Words   |  6 Pageschanges for Palestinian Arabs, who were already living in the area. Many of these changes were oppressive and intrusive to the Palestinian Arabs’ way of life. As can be expected, wherever there is oppression, violence and fear normally follow. Both sides have suffered losses amidst this violence. Jews claim they fled to Palestine to avoid persecution and that establishing Israel as a Jewish state would be the only way to ensure their safety. Yet their safety, and now the safety of Palestinian Arabs, areRead MoreThe Arab-Israeli Conflict1427 Words   |  6 PagesThe Arab -Israeli dispute is among the centermost issues facing the Middle East today. The conflict itself has spawned a number of wars, myriad militant skirmishes, and several embargos, as well as a lasting peace between Israel and a number of its former opponents. The conflict today is waged primarily between Israelis and the Arab Palestinians that inhabit Israeli territory. The Arab-Israeli dispute is rooted in the separate movements of Zionism and Arab-nationalism. Zionism is an historical movementRead MoreThe First Two Uprisings Of The West Bank, Gaza And East Jerusalem1341 Words   |  6 Pagesin this literal sense the first two uprisings in 1987-1993 and 2000-2003 failed to achieve the goal of Palestinian autonomy or eventual independence. The First Intifada took place on the 8th of December 1987. This protest was against Israeli’s occupation of the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem. At the crowded checkpoint Israeli truck swerved and killed four The Palestinians. Palestinians in revenge swept across the Gaza Strip, spread to the World Bank and set into motion a blaze of nationalistRead MoreConflict In Israel, Israel And The Arab War925 Words   |  4 Pagesas an ancient conflict that has been going on for centuries, fueled by religious hatred. In reality the current conflict has less to do with religion than the conflicting claims of two groups to the same region. These claims were made in the early 20th century, anticipating the fall of the Ottoman Empire, with the backing of British promises of an independent state for both sides. These claims stoked nationalism on both sides. The regional arabs began to see themselves as Palestinian before arabsRead MoreThe Israeli Palestinian Conflict : A Long And Storied History1241 Words   |  5 Pages The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has a long and storied history. Israel was created in response to European anti-Semitism, with the ethno-nationalist vision of a Jewish territory of their own. By 1948, approximately 522,000 Jews had migrated to Palestine, most arriving during Hitler’s reign of terror that against Jews. Largely, Palestinians resented being expelled from their lands and bearing the burden of the persecution of European Jews. Consequently, the 1947 UN partition sparked aggression betweenRead MoreThe Partition Of Israel And Palestine966 Words   |  4 PagesSince the UN partition of Israel and Palestine in 1947, Israel has been placed in many instances of conflict between the Jewish migrants to the region and the Palestinian natives. Several conflicts resulted in open, declared war, such as the First Arab-Israeli War of 1948-1949, and the Yom Kippur War of 1973. In addition, Israel has been involved in the occupation of the West Bank and the blockade of the Gaza Strip. After the last open war, Israel’s occupation of the West Bank has been marked byRead More The Israeli and Palestinian Conflict Essay1126 Words   |  5 PagesThe Israeli and Palestinian Conflict - Many Questions, Few Answers Unless the Israelis and Palestinians could not compromise, negotiate and come to an agreement, peace is impossible in the Middle East and even the security fence that Israel is now building will not solve the conflict nor stop terrorist actions by Palestinian extremists. The Israelis and Palestinians need to compromise and negotiate, as suggested by the words written on that wall, â€Å"Peace comes (with) agreement not separation.†Read MoreMiddle East Conflict Blood Feuds Essay851 Words   |  4 PagesMiddle East Conflict Blood Feuds The knowledge and understanding of blood feuds helps in the develop understanding of the current conflicts in the Middle East. The Middle East conflict started after World War II when the United Nations handed the Jewish people land once owned by the Palestinians. A conflict has occurred with the Palestinians who live together with Israelis that has led to terrorism and tyranny. Israelis believe they must control the Palestinians to stop their terrorism; whileRead MoreThe State of Israel and The BASEL System1579 Words   |  6 Pageswould break Great Britain’s Palestinian mandate into separate Jewish and Arab states. The religious areas neighboring Jerusalem would remain under international control according to this resolution. This was refused by the Palestinians. They thought that this favored the Jews and was unfair to the Arabs that would inhabit the Jewish territory that would be under the partition (The Arab-Israeli War†¦). This United Nations resolution triggered conflict between the Jewish and Arabs communities in PalestineRead MoreThe Conflict Of The Arab Israeli Conflict1420 Words   |  6 PagesArab-Israeli conflict; all of which seek to discern the culprit and contrive a remedy. The story behind this age old conflict is, as quoted by Israeli historian Illan Pappe, â€Å"the simple but horrific story of the ethnic cleansing of Palestine† (qtd. In â€Å"The Catastrophe†). As such, thorough review of the causes behind this ethnocentric conflict is vital in understanding the tumultuous power struggle in Israel and the violent instability of the region as a whole. While many believe the conflict is of