OK, I’ll start with a concrete situation in order to illustrate the promise of “tranversal rationality.”<\/p>\n
[UPDATE: This is a hypothetical<\/span> You’re a youth pastor, and you get <\/p>\n A week later, you show up for the meeting; in the conference room at As the conversation gets underway, you realize that each of these And you, the youth pastor, what do you say? What do you think the Tranversal rationality takes into account one of the premises of a Would you tell the pediatrician that she is wrong in bringing And you too, the youth pastor, you are the theological\/biblical So transversal rationality acknowledges the many rationalities at Writing about the promise of this method, J. Wentzel van Huyssteen<\/a> (For more on transversal rationality, read this<\/a> and this<\/a>.)<\/p>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" OK, I’ll start with a concrete situation in order to illustrate the promise of “tranversal rationality.” [UPDATE: This is a hypothetical situation; the “boy” is meant to represent a concrete situation or problem. Another analogy could be, for instance, all the people who together had to decide what to build on the site of the…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":134,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[7],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-287","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-theology"],"yoast_head":"\n
\nsituation; the “boy” is meant to represent a concrete situation or
\nproblem. Another analogy could be, for instance, all the people who
\ntogether had to decide what to build on the site of the World Trade
\nCenter.]<\/p>\n
\na call from the guidance counselor at the local public high school; she
\nwants you to come to a consultation. There’s a boy in your youth group
\nwho is really struggling in school — and in life — and the school is
\ncalling together a group of people to brainstorm about what can be done
\nto help him.<\/span><\/p>\n
<\/span><\/p>\n
\nthe high school are gathered the boy’s mother and father (divorced),
\nguardian ad litem, court-appointed social worker, psychologist,
\npediatrician, guidance counselor, school nurse, and homeroom teacher.<\/span><\/p>\n
\n“experts” knows the boy in a very different way, yourself included. In
\nfact, each of you is an “expert” on the boy, but your expertises are
\nquite different. The pediatrician speaks from her expertise as someone
\nwho has worked with many adolescents, she uses medical-scientific
\nlanguage, and she wonders if she should adjust his Ritalin
\nprescription. The (Jungian) psychologist talks about the therapy
\nsessions he’s had with the boy, with the progress they’re making, and
\nabout the boy’s deep, internal conflict over his parents’ divorce and
\nhis own learning disability. The guidance counselor wonders if he
\nshould be moved into special ed. classes, the homeroom teacher says he
\nneeds to find better friends, the mom says he’s depressed at home and
\nhe listens to music that scares her, the dad wonders if the two of them
\nshould take a vacation to watch some spring training games, etc., etc.,
\netc.<\/p>\n
\nboy needs? Is part of his problem a spiritual problem? Is it entirely
\nspiritual? Is he afflicted by demons? Has he been the object of
\nspiritual abuse? Is your youth group a place where he feels welcomed
\nand loved?<\/p>\n
\npluralistic, postmodern, globalized world: there are many different
\n“rationalities” at work in society. And as professionalization and
\nspecialization increase, the rationality in one field of knowledge or
\ndiscipline is that much harder for non-specialists in that discipline.<\/p>\n
\nmedical\/scientific\/pharmacological reasoning to bear on the boy’s
\nproblems? Probably not. Nor would you question the guidance counselor’s
\nunderstanding of when to place a student in special education classes.
\nNor would you question the mother’s claim to be an expert on the
\nsubject of her own son.<\/p>\n
\nexpert in the room. You bring a distinctively Christian rationality to
\nbear on the situation of this boy’s problems. Happily, in a truly
\npostmodern setting, you can respectfully and sensitively articulate
\nthat rationality, and you will be shedding light (“truth”) on the
\nsituation that no one else can or has.<\/p>\n
\nplay in a pluralistic environment. As a method, it proposes that we
\nlook for intersections between rationalities — “transversal” means “to
\nlie across” — and enter into dialogue at those concrete, situated
\nmoments (like around the case of our hypothetical boy). We must do so,
\nhowever, with “epistemic humility;” that is, we need to be open to
\ntheoretical correction. And our results will be judged in moments of
\n“praxial critique,” in which the practical wisdom that comes out of the
\nsituation is tested in future, real-life situations.<\/p>\n
\nwrites, “the fact that rationality lies across and links diverse
\nreasoning strategies will also mean that we can step forth into
\ncross-contextual discussion with personal convictions that we find
\nrationally compelling, and at the same time be rationally compelled to
\nopen our strong convictions up to critical evaluation in
\ninterdisciplinary conversation.”<\/p>\n