Courses
In the field of linguistic anthropology, researchers examine the nature of human languages within the cultural contexts that shaped them. Scholars aim to understand the social and cultural foundations of language, while also exploring how these cultural and social structures are embedded in linguistic practices. Language plays a crucial role in shaping both individuals and societies, creating subjective realities for people. As one author famously put it, we are "verbivores"—our identity is characterised by the language we consume. The words we use influence our thought processes, shape how we express ourselves, and, to some extent, determine or more precisely influence our behaviour. Language also is often used ideologically and theologically by different groups and individuals.
One significant shift in this area occurred within the realm
of psychology and mental health. For example, there was a time when 'sin' was
commonly used to explain certain types of abnormal behaviour. However, during
the humanistic developments of the 1960s and 1970s, the discourse began to
change. Menninger (1973) observed that the language of sin was gradually
replaced by the language of either crime or illness. In other words,
discussions of criminal behaviour and mental illness became far more common than
those of sinful behaviour or sin as a condition. This change coincided with the
transfer of authority from religious institutions and the personal values
taught at home to a more secular state framework.
This shift was not only a legislative change but also a
transformation in the broader social and cultural framework, including
education, social philosophy, and moral codes. The emergence of contemporary
Western and secular approaches to mental health and illness mirrored these
changes. New social philosophies were reflected in methods such as hypnosis
(initially used by Freud), psychoanalysis, behaviourism, psychopharmacology,
and a generally secular, scientific methodology. Behaviour that was once labelled
as sinful began to be described as symptomatic. This shift implied a move away
from concepts like repentance and forgiveness toward therapeutic interventions
aimed at achieving 'adaptive behaviour' or 'personal well-being.'
Thus, language has evolved (and continues to evolve)
alongside political and cultural shifts within society. In "After
Virtue," Alasdair MacIntyre discusses the culture of emotivism, which
suggests that moral judgments are merely expressions of personal preferences.
According to this view, concepts of right and wrong lack true significance.
This perspective is evident in the discourse surrounding "woke"
culture, where language is often used in specific ways to silence critics. For
example, the term "violence" is frequently employed to describe the
discomfort experienced when encountering opposing viewpoints. Within woke
discourse, there is a perceived right to avoid dissenting opinions altogether.
These linguistic shifts have had a significant impact on diagnoses within the field of mental health. Many diagnoses are inherently subjective, shaped by arbitrary and interpretive criteria, and are thus influenced by sociocultural trends.
For instance, what is now known as antisocial personality
disorder was once referred to as 'moral decay.' This change in terminology
reflects a societal effort to reduce the stigma associated with such labels.
Behaviours that were once seen as moral failings or sins are now categorised as
symptoms of a disorder.
In Muslim discourse, we often see how certain language from
the fields of mental health and psychology—which is derived from specific
theologies, worldviews, and ideologies that are often antithetical to religious
perspectives on human nature and behaviour—is increasingly being adopted. It is
not at all surprising that Muslims are being influenced by these pervasive
worldviews, which are present in education, media, politics, economics, arts,
and entertainment. Even the religiously learned
sometimes find themselves confused, using terminology and concepts that
attempt to impose secular frameworks onto religious discourse, and even onto
the understanding of the lives and experiences of the Prophets. Some interpret
the stories of the Prophets and the Qur’an through the lens of these modern,
secular frameworks, which can have negative and harmful consequences for how we
approach religious texts and how God intended to frame human suffering, for
instance.
In many cases, these frameworks strip the divine and religious
teachings from the psyche of individuals and from society, effectively creating
a secular religion. I have explored this in various articles and posts,
discussing how psychology has, in many ways, become a surrogate religion with
its own dogma, belief system, texts, figures of authority, and teachers.
This is why it is particularly concerning when learned
Muslims use certain psychological language without fully understanding its
nuances and complexities; this can be extremely short-sighted and ultimately
harmful.
One term that has gained popularity in the past 20 to 30
years is "trauma."
Firstly, it is essential to acknowledge the diverse opinions in society regarding the relatively new discourse surrounding trauma. Over the past two decades, the concept of trauma has become a focal point in the mental health field and has, to a large extent, entered our everyday vocabulary.
English is a relatively rich language when it comes to
emotionally charged descriptions of human experience. The term
"trauma" has many synonyms, each with its own subtle differences in
both literal and implied meanings. The words such as atrocity, cataclysm,
ordeal, or tragedy, and less intense, more familiar terms like disaster,
distress, or unfortunate circumstances. English offers a wide range of words
with overlapping meanings that vary from mild to intense, with differing
emotional connotations.
It is worth asking whether the word "tragedy" has lost its impact and become "diluted by overuse." While the devastation caused by a tsunami is undoubtedly tragic, the closure of a favourite restaurant due to bankruptcy does not quite qualify. True tragedies provoke deep questions about life and death, the nature of the world, and ultimately about faith, God, suffering, and redemption.
But what exactly is trauma? What distinguishes a challenging
situation from a genuinely traumatic experience? To be clear, trauma is not
merely a bad day, it is argued. We recall reading to our young sons the story
of Grover from the Muppets and his “bad, awful day” (Dickson, 1986). This story
is a valid attempt to introduce children to the idea that unfortunate events
are a part of life. Our days can be filled with incidents like rain, losing a
boot, or stepping in puddles, both literally and metaphorically. However,
defining trauma, as some authors do, as "anything that is less than
nurturing" (Mellody, Miller, & Miller, 2003; Rosenthal, 2014)—even
when the definition includes "that changes your vision of yourself and
your place in the world"—risks, as argued by some, trivialising the
seriousness of ‘trauma’. This broadening of the term beyond its intended scope
is also evident in book titles like "The Trauma of Everyday Life"
(Epstein, 2014). Indeed, ‘trauma’ affects us all—whether through death, chronic
illness, accidents, or natural disasters—but these events alone, it is argued,
do not constitute trauma; it is said that trauma involves the personal
experience of physical, emotional, or relational harm.
To better understand trauma, let's consider the case of
Gabor Maté, a prominent figure in this field. Gabor Maté, who was born in
Hungary and immigrated to Canada at the age of 12, became a family physician
and practiced in Vancouver for many years. Although he is not a licensed mental
health clinician and has not published any research articles on psychological
topics, Maté has become a leading voice in trauma studies. He has authored four
books, three of which are best-sellers, and offers over 70 hours of video
content from his presentations and courses. At 80 years old, Maté is highly
sought after as a trauma expert, with numerous interviews available online and
a busy international speaking schedule.
In his writings and interviews, Maté makes a number of
assertions that he claims are settled science over the years.
The following is a small portion of them, but these include some of his core assertions that reflect his general views:
• There are two types of trauma— big T and little T. Big T
is life-threatening events, what conventional researchers consider to be real
trauma. Little T traumas are everyday stressors, like parents who are stressed
out or have normal marriage difficulties.
• Childhood trauma (both big and little T) is the root cause
of a wide range of physical diseases, including chronic pain, asthma, and
addiction.
• Childhood trauma is the root cause of fundamental
personality traits.
• Childhood trauma is the cause of mass killers.
• The mechanism of how childhood trauma alters all these
things is through the immune system and the stress hormone cortisol.
• Infants can remember trauma events as implicit memory, and
these embedded memories shape their fundamental personalities their entire
lives.
Maté’s evidence for this is a story he’s told many times: At 11 months
of age, he was “abandoned” when his mother put him in the care of a stranger to
save his life during the Holocaust. When he saw her again, after five or six
weeks, he didn't look at her for several days. As evidence that this scarred
him for life, at the age of 71, he would not look at his wife when she
neglected to pick him up at the airport.
• These traumas and little stressors get instantaneously
wired into neural circuitry of the brain.
• Society is the cause of our small T stress.
• Whenever he has examined his pain and setbacks, he has
always found a meaning from his past, which allowed him to move forward more
powerfully in life.
Gabor Maté's claims about trauma and stress are widely
criticised as inaccurate. He equates life-threatening events with minor
stresses, suggesting they have similar psychological impacts, which is
incorrect. Contrary to his assertions, trauma and stress do not cause permanent
damage to the brain or body—claims about cortisol, immune responses, or
epigenetic changes as mechanisms of damage remain unproven. The idea that
infants store implicit memories that affect their behaviour throughout their
lives is not supported by evidence. Maté's suggestion that society is the
primary source of stress overlooks the significant role of inherited individual
differences in how stress is perceived.
Unlike many psychiatrists and psychologists who also make
similar controversial claims, Maté does not attempt to back up his theories
with original research, a common criticism of his work. His authority is
derived from personal anecdotes and lived experience rather than empirical
evidence.
Why is Maté so popular despite these criticisms? His appeal
may lie in his distinctive presence—he appears to embody deep, ascetic
contemplation, with his penetrating eyes, soft-spoken manner, and compassionate
demeanor.
Maté’s message resonates with progressive liberal
philosophies that claim to diagnose societal problems and offer solutions.
These ideologies often advocate for societal and self-improvement and seek to
identify a clear source of oppression responsible for personal issues. Maté's
work resembles a performance that asserts a known path to a better future,
suggesting that understanding and finding meaning in our traumas—whether
consciously remembered or not—is key to achieving it.
Another related concept.
The concept of "toxic stress," popularised by Jack
Shonkoff from Harvard University, suggests that child development can be
significantly disrupted by environmental stressors. Shonkoff introduced a
hierarchical classification of stress—positive, tolerable, and toxic—arguing
that toxic stress can have severe impacts on children’s development. However,
before this framework, there was no substantial evidence linking psychological
stress in childhood directly to developmental derailment. The term "toxic
stress" itself was initially used in biological studies to describe
animals, like fish and shrimp, harmed by pollutants.
This idea closely parallels the "adverse childhood
experiences" (ACE) movement, which claims that childhood stress and trauma
lead to permanent brain damage and a host of medical issues, despite these
claims being based on weak, cross-sectional studies. It also resembles the
narrative in Bessel van der Kolk's 2014 bestseller, The Body Keeps the Score,
which argues that trauma has lasting impacts on the body and mind.
Proponents of toxic stress and ACE research often dismiss
criticism by insisting that there is a scientific consensus and that the debate
is settled. As Shonkoff stated in 2000, "The scientific evidence on the
significant developmental impacts of early experiences, caregiving
relationships, and environmental threats is incontrovertible...The overarching
question of whether we can intervene successfully in young children’s lives has
been answered in the affirmative and should be put to rest."
However, Shonkoff's reliance on ACE research, which is
entirely cross-sectional and unable to establish causality, is a significant
oversight. Longitudinal studies, which assess individuals before and after
trauma, largely fail to support the toxic stress theory, and the few that
suggest a link have not been replicable. No clear mechanism has been found to
explain how ACEs could lead to a wide range of mental and physical dysfunctions
from psychological stress, including those caused by everyday stressors.
These ideas are increasingly being promoted, reflecting a
cultural trend toward portraying individuals as fragile. Recently, a $100
million marketing campaign was launched to further popularise these concepts.
There is much more that could be discussed, but here are a few concluding points:
The Qur'an describes Prophets and other figures as facing
extreme challenges. However, labelling these experiences as "trauma"
could lead to various interpretations, such as viewing them through the lens of
childhood dysfunction, biology, or genetics. Instead, it is more appropriate to
frame these events as life struggles without imposing contemporary
psychological classifications, thereby avoiding theological and textual
complications.
It is undeniable that human beings, including Prophets, go through normal human difficulties. The Prophet ﷺ experienced sadness when he lost his son—a normal human reaction. He also faced immense hardship when he was expelled from Taif, which he described as the most challenging experience he endured. To reframe these events using psychological classifications can be problematic.
Some might argue that even if the term "trauma" is
avoided, describing similar experiences using the language of trauma could
still lead to the same misunderstandings. In a society where psychological
interpretations are prevalent, extra caution is necessary when employing such
terminology.
Courses
