Happiness and Being Human: The Tension between Immanence and Transcendence in Religion/Spirituality

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Summary and overall impression:

This article explores the concept of happiness in an essayistic way. It argues that happiness is a broad construct, encompassing many elements, like mastery, self-enhancement, sasisfaction, and other elements. Religion in this perspective has (line 268) 'to facilitate a sense of being in which both immanence and transcendence find expression in experiential reality without negating or compromising the other.' It concludes by stating some 'principles' that could guide a good use of religion to (line 384) 'contribute towards greater well-being and the experience of subjective and general forms of happiness.' Strength of this easy-reading article is its explorative nature on a broad concept like happiness, and its linking of different religious perspectives together and integrating them with use of relevant scientific articles to a helpful perspective on happiness and religion. Weakness is its impressionistic style on elementary notions needed for this integration, lacking detail or references sometimes. A major review is recommended before acceptation.

Discussion of specific areas of improvement:
- The article makes some impressionistic steps, like (line 200): 'Irrespective of context, the ‘self’ desires hedonistic pleasure. It is Freud’s ‘Id’ at work.' or (line 288): 'One of the buzz-words that expresses this notion, is ‘Mindfulness’.' For example this notion of 'Mindfulness' is essential to the article, and therefore needs some elaboration before it is used as a bridging concept between happiness and religion.
- The article is partly written from a first person perspective. When it aims to be an essay, this is fitting with that goal. A more descriptive article, without 'I' and 'my' would create a more objective exploratory text.

- The text has a few spelling and grammar faults, like several double spaces (e.g. line 23) and incorrect interpunction (e.g. lin 175, where split in two sentences would be helpful) 'In Hinduism, for instance, atman (the self) and Brahman (ultimate reality) are in essence the same; In the veiled truth of experienced reality, the purpose of the self is to strive for and towards the integration of both the atman and Brahman.' 

Author Response

Thank you very much for your review. I have made the following changes in accordance with your comments:

1. Mindfulness and mindfulness-based therapies are discussed in lines 294-314. I feel that it suffices in giving clarity on the use of this term.
2. The use of "I" and "my" throughout the article altered.4
3. Footnote in prior version incorporated into the text.
4. Line spacing in line 23 corrected
5. Punctuation in line 175 fixed. Two sentences instead of semi-colon.

Kind regards

Reviewer 2 Report

 

 

Thank you for the opportunity to read this amazing and necessary study!

I have thoroughly reviewed the article on the relationship between happiness and religion/spirituality through the lens of immanence and transcendence. The paper provides a comprehensive reflection on this topic, which is highly valuable. In general, empirical studies that demonstrate such a relationship often fail to engage in a scientific discussion about the possible reasons behind this connection. It is primarily due to the limited space available for discussion within the format of articles. However, by explicitly focusing on this aspect, the author has significantly contributed to understanding the relationship between happiness and religion/spirituality. Furthermore, the author has provided elements that deepen the current concepts of religion and spirituality (used in many studies), which serve as the foundation for most empirical studies. Particularly noteworthy is the author's perspective on harmonizing the meaning of the terms "transcendence" and "immanence."

Considering the importance of the topic and the author's ability to synthesize the discussed theme. I want to highlight only three minor issues to be considered:
1) Bearing in mind that the author discusses the tension between immanence and transcendence in the realm of happiness and human being, and he/she "argues that religion/spirituality has a role to play in facilitating well-being/happiness in terms of the tension held in their understanding of immanence and transcendence", "religion" or "spirituality" seems to be central. Thus, I am wondering about the adequacy of the title. Shouldn't the term "religion" or "spirituality" appear for more consistency and accuracy?

2) The referencing style in the body of the text should be revised (format and place).

3) The article mentions "footnote 1"- which does not exist. Nonetheless, the definitions of immanence and transcendence should be included in the text's body rather than presented as footnotes.

Overall, this article presents valuable insights into the relationship between happiness and religion/spirituality, significantly contributing to the existing literature.

In sum, this reflection represents a valuable addition to the field.

 

 

Author Response

Thank you for your review. I have made the following changes in accordance with your suggestions:

1. Altered the title to include religion/spirituality.
2. Referencing style is in accordance with the style sheet provided.
3. Footnote 1 incorporated into the text.

Kind regards

Reviewer 3 Report

The author uses the terms transcendent and transcendental. Are they synonymous (transcendent aspect or transcendental aspect) or with different meanings? It would be good to equalize/standardize the usage of transcendent/transcendental or to explain the difference.

Line 112: “What is evident…” Where comes that evidence from since the transcendent aspect is to be made evident in Chapter 3? Please, think about possible reformulation.

Line 206: In the text Footnote 1 is mentioned, but I can’t find any footnote.

Author Response

Thank you for your review. I have made the following changes to the article:

1. Transcendent and transcendental are used synonymously, but respectively as grammar requires.
2. Line 112 altered according to suggestion.
3. Footnote 1 incorporated into the text.

Kind regards

 

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The adaptation from a 'first person' perspective to a more objective perspective gives the article a more reasoning.

The line of argumentation has not been revised by the authors. With regard to mindfullness, the explanation in lines 294 and on can suffice.

With regard to the passage on the self and 'id', no adaptation has been made. This part of the article is not clear. Freud 'self' or 'ego' includes psychic functions like judgment and reality testing. This is another self than 'self' used elsewhere in this article. The 'id' as referenced here is directly linked to hedonistic pleasures, as is the 'self' (lines 202-203). What is meant with this 'self' here? How does this relate to the 'id'? In its current form this passage is not clear and revision is needed here.

Author Response

Dear reviewer

Thank you for the comments. I do not see the need to alter the line of argument. If so, can you please be more specific as to how you would like the argument to flow?

The paragraph on mindfulness suffices in my opinion. It iterates the manner in which mindfulness-based therapies are being used in treating mental health disorders. It is not central to the greater argument and therefore, I respectfully wish to keep it in its format. Is there anything specific that needs to be added in your opinion?

In psychoanalysis, Freud's Id is directly linked to hedonistic pleasures/drives/desire. Here also, I would respectfully keep the text in its current format, unless there is something specific that needs to be added/altered?

Thank you again for your thorough reading of this article. I have found your comments to be constructive and helpful.

 

Kind regards