A Contemporary Approach to Spiritual and Theological Reflection from the Perspective of Kahneman’s System Thinking

Abstract

This article explores Daniel Kahneman’s concept of system thinking from his book Thinking Fast and Slow (2013) in the context of contemporary spiritual and theological reflection. The question studied here is: What does the intentional use of emotions, dreams and intuition described by Daniel Kahneman as System 1 thinking look like in contemporary spiritual and theological reflection? According to Kanheman, System 1 thinking includes emotions, dreams and intuition. The method for answering the research question is hermeneutical. This means gathering texts that fit Kahneman’s description of System 1 thinking and integrating these concepts into some form of spiritual and theological reflection. Hermeneutical research is text-based. Fifty-three (53) texts were found in a search of various databases. These texts are analyzed noting the impact of System 1 thinking on spiritual and theological reflection. Findings include the following: First, there is a rise in the number of texts using System 1 thinking in spiritual and theological reflection. Second, disciplines outside of theology are practicing spiritual reflection as part of their spiritual care. Third, these non-theological disciplines are also using System 1 thinking in their spiritual reflections. Fourth, there is an awareness and utilization of diverse cultures and faith experiences in spiritual reflection. Fifth, these texts indicate the growth of the demographic of people who are spiritual but not religious and a connection to dreams, emotions and intuition in spiritual and theological reflection. Sixth, there is also a developing overlap between spiritual and theological reflection. Cautions and gaps in the textual analysis are noted as well as future applications.

1. Introduction

Conceptual Case Study: Caroline

Caroline has an MA in psychology and has a private practice in psychotherapy. She receives regular consultation for her clinical work. In the last few years, Caroline has experienced a spiritual yearning and has taken several courses in spirituality. Caroline does not belong to any particular faith group but sees herself as spiritual but not religious. She is convinced from research that spirituality can be a help to clients. She also realizes that in some cases it can be detrimental. She likes the research of Ken Pargament and Julie Exline on the influence of spiritual and religious struggles on mental health. Caroline spends time each day using mindfulness to reflect on herself, her family, friends and clients. She wants to learn more about spiritual reflection and wonders if her dreams, emotions and intuition have any role in spiritual reflection. She has sought out a spiritual companion and did a weekend retreat under the direction of her spiritual companion. She found the retreat helpful. Caroline wants to learn how to do spiritual reflection.

The above case outlines a growing curiosity and desire to explore spiritual and theological reflection in ways that move outside of traditional theological reflection methodology. This article explores how Kahneman’s (2013) System 1 or “fast” thinking can be encouraged more intentionally in spiritual and theological reflection to enhance or develop the process in a contemporary, interfaith context beyond System 2 analytical approaches of the more recent past. The field of neurotheology offers a growing area of research that looks at how brain processes work in connection with theological reflection and identifies that the human mind has different ways of thinking and experiencing spiritual and theological concepts (Newberg 2010). We recognize that reliance on and cultivation of System 1 processes such as emotions, dreams and intuition have been part of traditional spiritual practices across cultures and are curious about how System 1 processes of thinking might look if reintegrated more intentionally into contemporary spirituality. We will explore the needs of contemporary spiritual and theological reflection and existing research on emotions, dreams and intuition as elements of Kahneman’s System 1 thinking in the context of spiritual and theological reflection and apply the findings to the case of Caroline to determine the possible impact on reflective processes.

2. Method

The method used in this study to answer our research question is hermeneutical, a form of theoretical research. Hermeneutical research is similar to a review of the literature and often compares one text with another, noting similarities and differences. This method is often used in theology and the humanities (O’Connor 2003). Such an analysis of relevant texts generates more ideas (O’Connor 2003; Rediger 1996). Like quantitative and qualitative research, hermeneutical research seeks to answer a research question. The question studied here is: What does the intentional use of emotions, dreams and intuition, described by Daniel Kahneman as System 1 thinking, look like in contemporary spiritual and theological reflection?

In the gathering of relevant texts, several search engines and databases were used: ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials (using EBSCOhost databases), PubMed, PubPsych, PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES, and Google Scholar. The search terms included combinations of the words “emotions”, “dreams”, and “intuition”, as well as “spiritual reflection”, “theological reflection”, and “neurotheology”. The texts searched represent different fields of study, including multi-faith, social sciences, spiritual/pastoral care and psychotherapy. To help in the identification of relevant texts, the researchers also consulted Greg Sennema, the Martin Luther University librarian at the Wilfrid Laurier University Library. In total, 53 relevant texts were identified. The researchers analyzed the texts and developed a shared annotated bibliography that became the database for this hermeneutical research process. The researchers compared the analyses of the texts and discussed emerging themes, integrated themes into a collective evaluation of “System 1 and 2” functions in relation to spiritual and theological reflection, and compiled their analyses to develop a hypothetical, composite case study as a practical example of the intentional use of system thinking in spiritual and theological reflection for demonstrative purposes in this paper.

In terms of standpoints, the four authors all practice spiritual and theological reflection within different contexts in Ontario, Canada. One is now retired. These contexts include congregational ministry, private practice and supervision of students in spiritual care and psychotherapy and teaching in post-secondary institutions. All authors are open to multi-faith, diversity within gender and spiritually diverse approaches and are personally anchored in religious and spiritual traditions. These traditions include Christian, Muslim and spiritual but not religious. All four have taken a graduate course in empirical research. One member has taught graduate research courses at both the master’s and doctoral levels. Every member values spiritual and theological reflection while recognizing some of its limitations.

3. Literature Review

3.1. Contemporary Spiritual and Theological Reflection

In this section, twenty-two (22) texts were examined: Brouillard-Coyle et al. (2025); Cadge and Sigalow (2013); Frankl (1965); Gabriel and Bidwell (2022); Gerkin (1990); Hays and Hays (2024); Killen and de Beer (1994); Kahneman (2013); Kinast (1996, 2000); Koning and O’Connor (2000); Kost and Gregoris (2024); LaMothe (2016); O’Connor et al. (2013); O’Connor et al. (2002); O’Connor et al. (2024); Pargament et al. (2014); Stone and Duke (2006); Waters (2016); Whitehead and Whitehead (1995); and Wiseman (2022). Given the development in spiritual and theological reflection, some texts go back more than 40 years. However, most have been published within the last 25 years.

The field of contemporary and spiritual reflection in pastoral theology is undergoing great change (LaMothe 2016; Brouillard-Coyle et al. 2025; O’Connor et al. 2024). LaMothe (2016) describes contemporary theological reflection as madness and chaos and O’Connor et al. (2024) sees it as evolutionary. In the late 1980s and into the early 2000s, there was a search for method and structure in Western theological reflection in Christian pastoral theology (Brouillard-Coyle et al. 2025). Whitehead and Whitehead (1995), Killen and de Beer (1994), Kinast (1996), Gerkin (1990), Koning and O’Connor (2000) and Stone and Duke (2006) offered various structures for performing theological reflection. Kinast (2000) summarized some of the methods for theological reflection in “What Are They Saying About Theological Reflection”.

For many of these methods, the structure or model involved the use of personal and corporate experience, sacred texts, social sciences and culture. Each outlined a model and method for drawing on the various sources. The methods focused on the use of a rational and logical approach to theological reflection. The emphasis was on System 2 thinking (Kahneman 2013). It meant starting with a question, issue or experience and then drawing on interpretations of the various sources. The sources included sacred texts and theology, social sciences, and culture, which were used to answer the question and/or gain insight and meaning from an experience. Sacred texts and theology were significant in this method. Experience was significant. There was little mention of spiritual reflection (Brouillard-Coyle et al. 2025).

O’Connor et al. (2013) differentiate between spiritual and theological reflection. They summarized various methods and models of spiritual and theological reflection and did a qualitative study of practitioners on their experiences of the practices of spiritual and theological reflection. This study interviewed 75 chaplains, spiritual care providers, theological students involved in a practicum, pastors and pastoral counsellors. In addition to these 75, the study also interviewed 20 non-theological practitioners: social workers, physiotherapist, medical doctors, psychologists and recreational therapist who did spiritual care as part of their scope of practice. These practitioners used spiritual reflection to understand their spiritual care practices. O’Connor et al. (2013) describe theological reflection as being done by a practitioner who have a formal theological degree. Theological reflection usually includes theological terms. Spiritual reflection is done by a professional whose degree is not in theology but in another professional discipline. These professionals whose degree is not in theology believe and practice a spiritual life. The spiritual life is important to them and to the clients they serve. Such professionals believe that spiritual care is part of their scope of practice and engage in spiritual reflection as part of their practice. According to O’Connor et al. (2013), spiritual reflection and theological reflection are not synonyms nor are they antonyms, but they overlap with some similarities and some differences. In their study, O’Connor et al. (2013) note that spiritual reflection is growing amongst non-theological professionals but that the literature, as noted above, is dominated by theological reflection.

In their analysis of 32 texts written within the last ten years using either spiritual or theological reflection or both, (Brouillard-Coyle et al. 2025) note five themes (see

Table 1. Data from Brouillard-Coyle et al. (2025).

	Emerging Themes in Contemporary STR (Brouillard-Coyle et al. 2025)
1	Experience is the dominant force of reflection
2	Meaning making is the way of understanding the purpose of reflections
3	Growth in the number of texts using spiritual reflection and the overlap between spiritual and theological reflection
4	No emphasis on methods in the text reviewed
5	Rise in spiritual reflection is connected to the rise in people who identify as spiritual but not religious

). First, experience was the dominant source for reflection. Back in the 1980–2000 period, sacred texts and theology dominated theological reflection even though experience was one of the sources. In the current literature, experience as a primary source is stronger. In cases where experience disagreed with sacred text, some groups like 2SLGBTQI+ went with their experience and ignored sacred texts. Second, meaning making emerged as a way of understanding the purpose of these reflections. People who identify a spiritual experience seek to make sense of it and derive meaning from it. Meaning making was emphasized by the psychiatrist Frankl (1965). Frankl saw meaning making as part of the spiritual life. Meaning making is not a theological term and the growth in texts using this term indicates a stronger emphasis on spiritual reflection. This leads to the third theme which is the growth in the number of texts using spiritual reflection and the overlap between spiritual and theological reflection. Fourth, there is no emphasis on method in these texts. While texts like that of Whitehead and Whitehead (1995) emphasized using a method and describing it in writing a theological reflection, current texts do not emphasize methods and most do not describe how they came to their conclusions. The outcome is most important; the method is not. Fifth, the rise in spiritual reflection is connected to the rise in people who identify as spiritual but not religious. In addition to these themes, there is also a growth in the use of the arts in spiritual and theological reflection. This includes visual and music arts (Waters 2016; Kost and Gregoris 2024).

Various factors have influenced this shift in spiritual and theological reflection. The first is the growth and inclusion of multi-faith and multiculturalism into chaplaincy and spiritual care practice in the last 20 years (Cadge and Rambo 2022). Cadge and Sigalow (2013) observed chaplains working in a multi-faith setting in an American hospital. These two sociologists observed that the chaplains did not try to convert patients to the chaplain’s faith tradition but rather supported the patient in the patient’s faith tradition. Support included listening to the patient’s faith story, encouraging the patient in their faith tradition and connecting the patient to leaders from the patient’s faith group if the patient wanted that. In terms of conversation with a patient of a different faith tradition, the chaplains used two strategies. One is neutrality, where the chaplain seeks a common ground between the chaplain’s faith tradition and the patient’s faith. For example, if a Muslim chaplain is visiting a Christian patient, both share a common belief in the God of Abraham. This God of Abraham is a common ground and can be a joining point in conversation. The other strategy that Cadge and Sigalow (2013) noted was code switching. The chaplain switched to the spiritual practices of the patient. In the above example this might mean that the Muslim chaplain reads from the Christian Bible to the patient. Gabriel and Bidwell (2022) give an example of multi-faith chaplains. A Buddhist chaplain visits a Christian patient and supports the Christian patient in their faith journey. This multi-faith approach has impacted spiritual and theological reflection. It has broadened the process, offering different sacred texts that were not present in Christian theological reflection. It has also offered connection to different faith traditions as opposed to disconnection. Theology Today is an example of this broadening of theological reflection. Previously, Theology Today was a Christian Journal. Now it caters to the Abrahamic faiths: Judaism, Islam and Christianity.

Another factor is the presence of the 2SLGBTQI+ community and their impact on theological reflection. Many of the 2SLGBTQI+ community have felt ostracized by Christian traditions because of gender orientation. Many have left Christian denominations. Some Christian faith groups have been welcoming and inclusive (Hays and Hays 2024). Many members of the 2SLGBTQI+ community have felt that the sacred texts, especially the Christian Bible, have been critical of their lifestyles. The Christian Bible has been interpreted by some in a way that excludes members of the 2SLGBTQI+ community. However, the exclusion and criticism have not made these people anti-spiritual. Some in the 2SLGBTQI+ community have refashioned their spirituality based on their experience rather than the sacred text. The experience of love and care indicates the presence of the Divine lover. Here personal experience of the Divine overrides the sacred texts. In contemporary culture, personal experience has become a stronger source for spiritual and theological reflection.

A third factor is a stronger bridge between science and religion. In contemporary spiritual reflection more and more articles are being written by professionals from disciplines different from chaplaincy and theology. For example, Kost and Gregoris (2024) wrote an article on music therapy and spiritual care. Briana Gregoris is a music therapist who addresses how she deals with the spiritual in her clinical work. A music therapist provides spiritual care. Researchers like Ken Pargament, a clinical psychologist, along with a variety of scholars from different disciplines (Pargament et al. 2014) study and research the sacred in psychotherapy. Pargament et al. (2014) did a quantitative study that involved investigating non-theological practitioners and their awareness of sacred moments in psychotherapy. The study found that these professionals found sacred moments in about 30% of their interactions with various clients. The spiritual reflection that emerged from this study is that sacred encounters do happen in psychotherapy. The authors suggest (Pargament et al. 2014) that there is a need for further spiritual reflection on what to do in these moments. The rise in research indicating that spiritual and religious care can be helpful to patients has impacted spiritual and theological reflection (O’Connor et al. 2002). Most of this research is not being done by chaplains or theologians.

In contemporary spiritual and theological reflection, there is little mention of Kahneman’s System 1 and 2 thinking. Wiseman (2022) suggests a third way of knowing along with Kahneman’s System 1 and 2. We find it surprising that Daniel Kahneman’s work is seldom mentioned given that spiritual and theological reflection are about thinking. Two ways of thinking are the focus of Kahneman’s research. However, even though Kahneman is not directly cited, the elements of System 1 that Kahneman describes do appear in the texts of contemporary spiritual and theological reflection. Emotion, dreams and intuition, which are part of System 1, do appear, especially in spiritual reflection in current texts. These could potentially be used more intentionally in contemporary reflective practices by increasing conscious awareness of their value and meaning and through specific reflective exercises and/or creative practices as will be demonstrated in the case of Caroline.

3.2. System Thinking in Spiritual and Theological Reflection

3.2.1. Kahneman’s System Thinking

This article is based on an analysis of Kahneman’s Thinking Fast and Slow (2013). The following section reviewed the concept of system thinking and evaluated the following (7) sources with similar approaches to thinking in systems, and in relation to spiritual and theological reflection: Wald (2008), Newberg (2010), Hall and Hall (2025), O’Connor et al. (2013), Willis et al. (2022), Scott (2022), and Manzotti et al. (2024).

Daniel Kahneman’s Thinking Fast and Slow (Kahneman 2013) describes two systems of thinking: “System 1” and “System 2”. System 1 is recognized as fast, automatic and intuitive. System 2 demonstrates a slower, more analytical and intentional thought process involving logic and reflection. Looking at spiritual and theological reflection from the perspective of “fast” and “slow” thinking can provide valuable insight into how relationships with the Divine may develop in contemporary society in a more experiential way.

3.2.2. Separate Systems

In his doctoral dissertation, “Minds Divided: Science, Spirituality, and the Split Brain in American Thought” (Wald 2008), Wald looks at advancements in the 1960s for managing epilepsy that revealed information about the right and left hemispheres of the brain, when surgically “splitting” the two helped improve extreme symptoms in epileptic patients. This procedure revealed how the brain’s thought processes and actions differ from one side to the other, with the left brain controlling the analytical and the right brain demonstrating association with more emotional, intuitive, artistic and creative thinking (Wald 2008). Kahneman’s “fast and slow” thinking processes (Kahneman 2013) look at the speed of thought as well as the type of thinking and describe these processes with similar qualities to the hemispheric thinking of the “split brain”. From a neuroscience perspective, split brain research identified hemispheric activity as being like having two minds in the same body (2008), and similarly, Kahneman identified the two systems of thinking as “a distinction between two selves” (Kahneman 2013, p. 14). Both examples recognize that humans have the capacity for thinking in different ways and using different systems of thought interconnectedly to process information and for decision making and reflection.

While theology may sometimes struggle with the scientific views of biology as a component of spiritual and religious experiences, and science may insist only on biological explanations for these experiences, the field of neurotheology “walks a line somewhere between these two perspectives” (Newberg 2010). Kahneman’s system thinking supports a neurological approach to different ways of thinking that Hall and Hall (2025) also recognize as the inclusion of two systems, implicit processes relying on biological systems for thinking and processes that use explicit data for reflection. Qualitative evidence shows that System 1 thinking in spiritual and theological reflection has been present throughout history, as observed in art forms that emulate emotion, demonstrate visual connection, and present stories told of dreams and oral traditions as a way of experiencing Divine connection (O’Connor et al. 2013; Willis et al. 2022). In Christian theology, this is evident in recorded accounts of mystics such as Julian of Norwich (Scott 2022) who had visions, dreams, and intuitive and deeply emotive encounters with the Divine that led to an experience of the embodiment of the Divine. Brouillard-Coyle et al. (2025) specify that methods of theological reflection developed into processes that involve some attention to experience, but evolved to focus mainly on slower, more rational and analytical reflections, an example of Kahneman’s System 2 thinking.

3.2.3. Systems Working Together

Despite acknowledging that two separate systems exist, Kahneman notes that the systems interacting are the focus of the book: System 1 “generates suggestions” (Kahneman 2013, p. 24) for System 2, and System 2 then takes the information offered and processes “intuition into beliefs and impulses into voluntary action” (Kahneman 2013, p. 24). He describes the systems as a team, which if working well, is a functioning system of processing. However, he also identifies that although both systems have their strengths, there is a need to be cognizant of any biases either system holds and recognize that either one may need to rely more heavily on the other when those biases are present or one system is impaired in any way. Critique of system functioning could recognize that under stress, the capacity of either system may be diminished. Kahneman identifies that System 1 thinking can “jump to conclusions” too quickly based on previous data that may be outdated (Kahneman 2013, p. 25). An example of this could be viewed through the lens of modern psychotherapeutic perspectives such as Polyvagal Theory. Although there are some recent criticisms of Polyvagal Theory which argue against the physiological relevance of the theory (Grossman et al. 2026), Porges emphasizes PVT as a “systems-level” understanding of “functional integration” and “regulatory organization” of trauma responses and the impact on decision making and emotional regulation under stress (Porges 2026). Polyvagal Theory is based on the idea that stress and trauma lead to nervous system dysregulation, and we can get stuck in defensive nervous system states like fight or flight (Manzotti et al. 2024). Linking it to System 1 thinking, trauma can prompt System 1 to learn trauma-related information, which can be easily accessed through fast thinking or intuition. Thus, our intuition may then be based on past trauma-related responses and not grounded fully in the present, and/or in our intuition’s connection with balanced wisdom and a grounded experience.

Seeing the systems’ reflective processes not as separate or “split brain” functions of spiritual and theological reflection but as working in an integrative way to develop a connection with the Divine together may be less a way of “thinking” and more an intentional way of “knowing” as a contemporary approach to reflection. Wiseman (2022) present the concept of a third way of thinking that they describe as “slow knowing”, which is a deeper, more conscious and ongoing process. This takes both systems into perspective and focuses on finding depth and meaning in the process of spiritual reflection by oscillating between the two systems with a multidimensional awareness of thinking that moves into “slow knowing” as a way to nurture spiritual intelligence. It is a deliberate use of System 1’s instinctual knowing, mixed with the slower analytical process of System 2, that becomes a slow reflective process of the intuitive, emotional experience of reflection. Hall and Hall (2025) confirm that developing systems to work together in balance and reciprocity, and in relationship with each other, is needed to stay in relational presence with oneself and others as a spiritual practice. This, done with conscious intention, could lead to deeper reflection and meaning that contemporary interfaith practice seems to be craving.

The analysis above reveals that Kahneman’s Thinking Fast and Slow (2013) shares similarities in concept to other system thinking processes, including multicultural and multi-faith approaches to understanding different ways of thinking, feeling and knowing. This is demonstrated across the texts reviewed and in relation to spiritual and theological reflection.

3.3. Emotions in Spiritual and Theological Reflection

In studying the impact of emotions on spiritual and theological reflection, thirteen (13) texts were gathered and analyzed: Fuller (2009); Goleman (2006); Hall and Hall (2025); James (1884); Kahneman (2013); Lomax et al. (2011); O’Connor and Meakes (2008); Pargament et al. (2014); Van Cappellen et al. (2013); Voss Roberts (2015); Waterman and Cooper (2024); and Willis et al. (2022). These texts were written in the last twenty (20) years with the exception of William James’ work, published in 1884. James is considered the father of the psychology of religions and has written about emotions and religion. Here is what we found in these texts.

Emotions are part of the fast, intuitive thinking processes (Goleman 2006), and are becoming increasingly involved in contemporary practices for spiritual and theological reflection. One significant aspect of System 1 thinking that Kahneman (2013) identifies is that System 1 involves instinctual, emotional responses. Emotions are a complex subject, and the study of emotions ranges across disciplines (Goleman 2006); thus it makes sense to try to understand them and build a relationship with them in spiritual and theological reflection.

As a System 1 function, emotions are recognized as the brain’s response to stimuli that acts on both the reaction to the present situation and memory from previous responses to influence the action and decision making of System 2 (2013). Emotions can provide an intuitive sense of what is “right” or “not right” in any of the above capacities or more. Fear, for example, can be a quick, intuitive response to danger or threat, perceived or real. The body can respond physically to fear with increased heart rate, “gut” feelings, tension, crying or skin tingling (Kahneman 2013), which can then produce a quick response to maintain safety. The fast thinking based on an emotional response can be viewed as a protective function humans experience biologically as part of our nature to survive (Hall and Hall 2025).

How emotions are experienced is as varied as we are individual (Goleman 2006). Experiencing one’s emotional responses is the initial step in a reflective process that is still part of the System 1 function. William James wrote “What is an Emotion” in 1884 and recognized then what we still acknowledge today: biology plays a part in emotions and behavior. He proposed that a physiological body response comes first, and we recognize and feel the emotion next, which then motivates action. This is reflective of System 1 functioning, including fast or reactive action if it is not slowed down with intentional reflection. Kahneman and James both view emotions as quick, instinctual responses. Both identify that there is a process of first experiencing and feeling what is happening, and then acting/reacting on that experience. And both acknowledge that choices and reactions can be quick (System 1 thinking) or slow (System 2 thinking) when there is an intentional slowing down of the experience to reflect and then make decisions about action (James 1884; Kahneman 2013). Kahneman (2013) also recognizes that it is the experience of the emotion that contributes to the meaning we assign to it and whether or not it becomes a positive or negative memory (2013).

Previous research on emotions in relation to religion and spirituality has recognized that emotions play a part in the reflective experience, that positive emotions can lead to an increase in mental health and wellness, and that spiritual reflection can lead to an increase in positive emotions (Van Cappellen et al. 2013). It is also recognized that positive emotions, what Pargament et al. (2014) identify as “spiritual emotions” such as “experiences of uplift, awe, humility, mystery, gratitude, joy, peace, and serenity.” (Pargament et al. 2014, p. 4), can lead to “sacred moments” in spiritually oriented helping relationships where reflection processes are present and can be experienced as strong feelings of connection with the Divine. Lomax et al. (2011) also note that this connection to deeper meaning through experiencing emotions and reflection of them can enhance purpose and meaning in life and lead to an overall sense of wellness. Hall and Hall (2025) describe this process in relation to Bowlby’s attachment theory in their book Relational Spirituality and note different factors in developing relationships with spirituality itself, not just in a spiritually oriented human relationship, that are deeply emotive. Continuing the theme of dual-processing systems, Hall and Hall (2025) recognize both implicit and explicit contemplative forms of theological reflection and note that implicit processes of the past moved away from mindful awareness of emotions in the 16th and 17th centuries in favor of more explicit “scientific objectivism” (Ch. 8, 50:47 2025). They describe a return to an experience of balance and awareness of spiritual emotions as a healthy attachment to spirituality when it is conscious, grounded, and balanced with what Kahneman’s (2013) System 2 process explains as rational and reflective thought.

One final note of importance around emotion and reflection is art and creativity. O’Connor and Meakes’ (2008) study on the role of emotion and imagination in theological reflection identified, through qualitative data, that “participants believe that emotions and imagination are important sources of information and are needed for guidance” or even that they are “God’s gift” (O’Connor and Meakes 2008, p. 138). This study emphasized emotions as being an important part of reflective processes and recognized that several models of theological reflection (Killen and de Beer 1994; Kinast 1996) involve emotions as one of the key components to have in a deeper, richer process of reflection. This demonstrates the use of emotions in a System 2 process of reflection, and the study also identifies the role of creativity in reflection, which can be a way to directly access emotions in their System 1 state.

An example of this is portrayed in Willis et al.’s (2022) auto-ethnographical study that, in the title Listening with the heart, shows the emphasis on emotion in reflective processes. The Wandiny, meaning “gathering together”, was an event held for the purpose of reflection for the Indigenous Kabi-Kabi Country on the Sunshine Coast in Australia, bringing people together in a non-linear, creative gathering to express feelings and thoughts around lost and stolen land. The gathering’s intent was to foster creative expression for the purpose of connecting and being in presence with others and the land as a spiritual experience (Willis et al. 2022). We can see that the System 1 or “fast” thinking here shows up in the body as a sense of visceral response when in spiritual community with others and when directly accessing emotion through creative flow. Participants were invited to share what they experienced, felt, and created, and finally the meaning they found in the whole experience. As a method of reflection, we can see Kahneman’s System 1 thinking evident in this practice, combined with System 2 processing and reflecting, which resulted in many participants experiencing a deepening relation with the Creator, with others and with the land (Willis et al. 2022).

The texts that we analyzed included a multi-faith approach to emotions. Hindu, Christian, Indigenous and Islamic views on the role of emotions in spiritual/theological reflection were offered (Voss Roberts 2015; Waterman and Cooper 2024; O’Connor and Meakes 2008; Willis et al. 2022). In Canada and some other Western countries there is a growing openness to multi-culturalism that includes a respect for multi-faith (Canadian Multiculturalism Act, R.S.C. 1985). In these texts, there is also an openness to wonder, awe, peace, love and gratitude in spiritual and theological reflection. These positive emotions are often identified as spiritual emotions (Van Cappellen et al. 2013; Voss Roberts 2015; Fuller 2009). In summary, these texts on emotion and spiritual/theological reflection indicate a greater openness to and integration of System 1 thinking.

Case: Intentional Reflection of Emotions

Caroline, recognizing that there are different ways of thinking and reflecting on spiritual experiences, begins to focus on noticing her emotions as they arise, and on what her body responses are when she feels things or even leading up to a feeling, and she sits with these feelings for a moment before acting on them. She gradually learns to reflect on what they mean for her and consults with her spiritual companion sometimes to help with her process of reflection. She also begins to put more emphasis on including emotions and “felt senses” with her clients and allows space for them to work through reflective processes with her that include more spiritual components when they are interested in this type of reflection.

3.4. Dreams in Spiritual and Theological Reflection

Ten (10) texts were collected on dreams that involved spirituality and theology. These are Al Areqih (2023); Bulkeley (2000); Coholic and LeBreton (2007); Droll (2019); Nell (2012); Robinson and Vasile (2023); Schredl and Mönch (2023); Schredl et al. (2016); Stranahan (2011); and Ward (2024). The texts go back 25 years. They were analyzed and the impact on spiritual reflection was noted.

Dreams stem from our System 1 thinking as they involve fast thinking and bring forward our unconscious belief system. As suggested by Stranahan (2011), Freud believed that dreams contained our repressed desires, whereas Jung believed that dreams contained guidance from our psyche that could support our personal and spiritual growth. Bulkeley (2000) indicates that dreams can help us connect with our deepest fears and our highest aspirations. He also suggests that the experience of having a dream can be a spiritual incident itself. Furthermore, most religions of the world view dreams as holding the potential of being a source of communication from the Divine. Thus, it is important to explore the ways dreams impact contemporary spiritual and theological reflection.

Robinson and Vasile (2023) posit that people with diverse ethnic backgrounds may share common spiritual beliefs regarding dreams. For example, dreams are intrinsically linked to people’s spirituality as they are viewed as holding spiritual knowledge, in the form of intuition and emotions, and people believe that dreams bring the unconscious into the conscious mind, which can then be processed through reflection on dreams and can lead to personal growth. Additionally, dreams are also viewed as holding communication from loved ones who have died and can become a source of continued connection in bereavement (Nell 2012). Lastly, people with diverse religious traditions around the world are aligned in their belief that dreams may contain messages from the Divine, in the form of warning or information or about upcoming events in people’s lives. This makes reflection on dreams appealing for people with varying spiritualities as they seek a deeper understanding of their past, present, and future.

Schredl and Mönch (2023) and Schredl et al. (2016) indicate that dream recall increases through spiritual and religious practices like prayers and meditation, possibly due to the mindfulness aspect of these practices. This implies that people who engage in mindfulness-based religious or spiritual practices may recall dreams more vividly and may benefit from exploring them. Most religions of the world see dreams as a channel through which people can get Divine communication, in the form of guidance, warnings, or predictions. Thus, people who engage in religious or spiritual practices may have a higher recall of dreams and may prefer to explore them to enhance their spiritual growth and transformation.

The importance of dreams in the Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) is indicated through the story of Joseph, which is present in the Torah, Bible, and Quran. The story sheds light on the power given to Joseph of dream interpretation, and the way God communicated with Joseph through his dreams (Al Areqih 2023). Furthermore, other religions and cultures (e.g., Hinduism, Buddhism, and religions of China, Africa, Oceania, and the Americas, etc.) similarly value dreams as an important source of information and agency, and place spiritual importance on reflection on dreams, which can lead to personal and social action (Bulkeley 2008, as cited in Droll 2019).

In Canada’s present multicultural society, people ascribe to many different religions and spiritual beliefs. Thus, interfaith collaboration is of utmost importance to enhance interaction and connection between people belonging to different theological and spiritual backgrounds. As suggested by Droll (2019), people will not usually go to other religious traditions to seek theological answers; however, there is a much greater chance of people seeking and accepting reflection on dreams from other religious traditions. She suggests that dreams can provide a neutral ground where people with different religious orientations can come together and share their feelings or wisdom regarding dreams. Coholic and LeBreton (2007) also elaborate on the benefits of dream reflection groups. They suggest that art can be incorporated within group exercises, e.g., encouraging participants to make a dream collage and allowing for personal and group reflections based on participants’ dreams represented through art. Furthermore, they suggest that dream reflections are deeply spiritual as they involve participants’ religious and spiritual meaning making and can enhance a sense of connection within the group as well, which can be therapeutic on its own.

As we discuss the importance of dreams in contemporary spiritual reflection in Canadian society, it is essential to elaborate on Indigenous beliefs regarding spiritual reflection on dreams. As indicated by Ward (2024), Indigenous people view dreams as a way to connect with ancestors, the spirit world and communal wisdom. There are practices like dream weaving, with the guidance of Elders, that allows for healing and a sense of connection with ancestors passed. He also suggests that reflection on dreams can support Indigenous people’s healing of their intergenerational colonial trauma, with the felt presence of their ancestors through the dreamer’s connection with the spirit world. There is also a recommendation for a two-eyed approach, which may include Indigenous people working with Elders’ guidance, along with choosing to incorporate Western approaches like narrative inquiry to enhance healing and meaning making linked to dreams.

As we have seen above, dream reflection holds great potential and significance in contemporary spirituality; however, there are also some negative views linked to it. As suggested by Bulkeley (2000) dreams may be mere wish fulfillment or people may hold the belief that dreams are sent from the devil. Furthermore, some people may view dreams as meaningless stories generated by a sleeping mind. All things considered, dreams may still be a valuable resource for spiritual reflection as they allow people to feel connection with the sacred, find meaning and inspiration linked to their deepest fears and anxieties and enhance personal and spiritual transformation.

One of the most popular methods for reflection on dreams was proposed by Bulkeley (2000) and can be used for individual reflection, as well as group reflection, on dreams. He recommends the following seven-step method be used in pastoral counselling. His offering is a method for spiritual reflection on dreams. He notes:

(1) Create a quiet, safe place (pp. 96–97)

(2) describe the dream in the present tense (p. 97)

(3) ask questions about specifics (pp. 97–98)

(4) explore the most extraordinary elements (pp. 98–99)

(5) explore the dream’s root in the past (p. 99)

(6) explore the dream’s vision for the future (pp. 99–100)

(7) honestly contemplate resistance (pp. 100–101).

Bulkeley warns that dreams may contain wish fulfillment that can be falsely attributed to messages from the Divine (Bulkeley 2000). He then recommends a process to check the validity of the reflection that is done on dreams using the following questions: Does the dreamer agree to the interpretation? Are many elements of the dream utilized in reflection? Does the dream make many connections with waking life? Does it yield new and surprising insights? This ensures that reflection on dreams is relevant, beneficial, and transformative, holding an accurate understanding of the inner world, as well as connection with the dreamer’s spirituality or the Divine.

Another method for reflection on dreams is Hill’s Cognitive–Experimental Dream Interpretation Model, as suggested by Stranahan (2011). She also recommends using Bulkeley’s above-mentioned questions for assessing whether dream reflection was helpful.

Hill’s method involves:

(1) Reconstructing the dream, with a focus on images and emotions; (2) getting insight into the dreamer’s spiritual values and principles and their meaning of the dream; and (3) identifying a plan or changes based on insights from the dream

(Stranahan 2011).

A number of findings emerge from our analysis of these texts on dreams and their impact on spiritual and theological reflection. First, given Hill’s method, perhaps the most important takeaway is that reflection on dreams can help people uncover concerns tucked away in their psyche, as well as help them feel connection with the spirit world, and the Divine. This can lead to personal and spiritual growth and transformation. Second, the texts point out that dreams may also hold the potential for interfaith connection between people with diverse spiritual and religious beliefs. Sharing dreams and dream interpretations in a group can lead to interfaith collaboration. Third, the methods for dream analysis can also be viewed as new evolving methods in spiritual and theological reflection. Fourth is a caution. It is important to follow the above-mentioned methods for reflection on dreams to reduce chances of false attributions and to understand the unique, genuine, and personal meaning of dreams for dreamers. Dreams that are part of Kahneman’s System 1 thinking impact contemporary spiritual and theological reflection.

Case: Intentional Reflection of Dreams

Caroline learns about and researches Bulkeley’s seven-step process of dream reflection and tries this out after having a really vivid dream one night. She walks herself through the steps of reflection and identifies ways the dream provided guidance about her experience, and her aspirations for the future. She discusses her reflection with her spiritual companion, and further refines her goals based on the dream. She finds this very meaningful for her own spiritual processes and decides to offer this method to her clients for dream reflection when they are interested.

3.5. Intuition in Spiritual and Theological Reflection

Exploration of the role of intuition in spiritual and theological reflection included an annotated bibliography of eight (8) articles, including Sturm (2014), Liao et al. (2018), Ferreira Vasconcelos (2009), Francis et al. (2018), Francis and Ross (2022), and Greene (2017). We analyzed and integrated relevant information from six (6) of these articles on how the use of intuition may impact reflection processes, and included reference to Kahneman (2013), Bulkeley (2000) and Wiseman (2022) from previous sections where there was overlap in themes.

Kahneman’s System 1 thinking is described not only as fast and automatic, but as an intuitive process of taking in information from the surroundings. He notes that there can be several forms of intuition, one of which is “expert intuition”. This is a way of knowing that combines data with knowledge already attained to come to conclusions. He explains that this type of intuition is an adaptation of learning to process quickly, and “the psychology of accurate intuition involves no magic”. He includes the words of Herbert Simon, stating that “intuition is nothing more and nothing less than recognition” (Kahneman 2013, p. 11). Kahneman also explains that intuition can be informed by emotional data mixed with previous knowledge to create fast, automatic responses, and explains that intuition is something that we all do automatically as part of our thinking processes. He also notes that we can be “wrong” due to bias in our intuitive decisions or conclusions. This caution is similar to Bulkeley’s (2000) notes on the risk of dream interpretation being a process of wishful thinking. We may think or feel that we intuit something, or think and feel that a dream means something specific, and make decisions for action based on false or biased information. He recognizes that careful reflection involving System 2 is needed to allow for more accuracy and efficacy of relying on intuition.

Intuitive thought processes have been studied in varying capacities from quantitative analysis to perspectives that allow for ways of knowing that do not have a rational explanation. Sturm (2014) explores the history of intuitive processes related to rationality and brings in the Latin root of the word to mean “to look at/into, to consider” (p. 258) but identifies that many concepts of intuition point out that the process is more of an unconscious one, similar to Kahneman’s explanation of fast thinking. Sturm recognizes Kahneman and Tversky as researchers of intuition who, although offering similar identification of the process being fast and automatic, see it as a “fast retrieval of familiar” and “fast or ‘illusionary’ beliefs” (Sturm 2014, p. 258), which questions the reliability of intuitive reasoning as being effective.

This could raise the question of whether relying on intuition for moral and ethical decision making is reasonable, or, if Divine connection is felt intuitively, there are any risks associated with relying on it too heavily. Spiritual reflection often involves a process of thinking to make a decision about something, to reflect on how one feels about something, to understand an issue or experience from a spiritual perspective, or to reflect on a moral issue or dilemma. Liao, Chung and Huang identify several approaches to moral decision making involving intuition: rationalist, non-rationalist, and integrated (Liao et al. 2018). The integrated approaches “suggest that the two systems (reason rationalization and intuition-emotion) operate together and are both involved in moral judgments” (p. 3). This process of reflecting using intuition mirrors Kahneman’s system thinking and highlights a dual-system process of reflection. However, they propose that there may be a leveled approach to relying on intuition for ethical decision making (EDM), and that capacity, cognitive ability and “ego strength”, for example, can affect the outcome of decisions. They note that rational approaches (System 2) for EDM work best for more right/wrong-based intuitive decision makers who may lack capacity for the complexity of moral reasoning, and dual processes can be applied when more capacity is present to hold nuance in thinking. Their study recognized that only those with the capacity for a higher consciousness of collective universal intuition, or high moral reasoning, may more effectively rely on System 1 intuition as a way of knowing for EDM (Liao et al. 2018). This demonstrates that the ability to understand and hold, as well as integrate, intuitive knowledge with empirical knowledge is important for making decisions. The researchers did recognize potential bias in intuitive decision making, specifically that intuition is affected by culture, personal experiences, and the collective unconscious.

Ferreira Vasconcelos (2009) indicates the importance of integrating intuition and prayer in organizational decision making. He suggests that professionals tend to overly focus on rational thought processes (Kahneman’s System 2) and consider intuition (Kahneman’s System 1) irrational. However, intuition can be a great resource as it allows them to connect with their inner experience, based on their past learning, as well as seek guidance and connection from the Divine. There are factors that can impact the effectiveness of intuition, e.g., stress, emotional dysregulation, and limited time to practice slow thinking. Even in these situations, he indicates that prayer can be used as a coping mechanism as it has many psychological benefits.

Similar to the above author, who suggests the importance of integrating prayers and intuition into rational decision making, Francis et al. (2018) also recommend the benefits of integration, by focusing on collaboration between people who have different approaches to biblical interpretation. They use the Jungian SIFT (sensing, intuition, feeling and thinking) approach to identify differences between people’s personality types. People who are more sensing (e.g., using concrete sensory information) and thinking (e.g., using logical analysis) types may prefer Kahneman’s System 2 way of thinking. On the other hand, people who are a more intuitive (e.g., focus on abstract) and feeling (e.g., focus on values and impact) type may prefer Kahneman’s System 1 way of thinking. Francis et al. (2018) suggests that theological reflection can be holistic and all-encompassing when these different personality types work together as they each have their own strengths and weaknesses. Thus, group theological reflection is recommended to ensure that different perspectives are entertained, increasing the overall effectiveness of the application of such reflection for diverse groups.

Other research by Francis and Ross (2022) expanded on the concepts of sensing, intuiting, feeling and thinking personality types by adding in the introversion/extraversion dimension, which further distinguishes thinking processes between the above-mentioned personality types. They explore the impact introversion/extraversion has on theological reflection conducted in groups composed of people who are introverted–intuitive and extroverted–intuitive. They suggest that biblical hermeneutics findings shift between the same personality type (e.g., intuitive) as introverted–intuitive focus more on internal reflection, resulting in care- and nurturance-based reflections, whereas extroverted–intuitive focus more on societal impacts, resulting in social justice-based reflections. This adds to the importance of group theological reflections, incorporating System 1 (intuitive/feeling) and System 2 (sensing/thinking) and including people who identify as introverted and extroverted to increase the richness of the reflection, as well as enhance the effectiveness of reflection for diverse groups.

An integrative or “dual-process” model of intuitive thinking is recognized across several studies and articles. Sturm’s exploration of Kahneman and Tyversky’s work and Kahneman’s own identification point out that both systems must work together for optimal thinking to be effective. Greene (2017) also identifies the importance of the “dual process of intuition” and notes that “one without the other is not ‘full’”. He brings forward the recognition that intuitive thought processes are fast and automatic, often sophisticated, and agrees that these responses can be so fast that they are reflexive and can hold bias or judgment based on past experience or knowledge that is held within internal data banks and acted upon reactively if not combined with slower more reflective thinking.

Understanding the need for balance in relying on intuition in spiritual and theological reflection supports Kahneman’s belief that both systems working together is ideal for grounded reflection that is integrative. This may allow for a rich experience of reflection while also being cognizant of bias and judgment that can impede the morality of experience and decision making during these reflective processes. Awareness of how reflections, decisions and behaviors impact others is a slower, more conscious or System 2 process that can take data from intuitive experience and think it through to allow for ethical decision making and processes of reflection that are indicative of the “collective universal intuition” and a collective higher consciousness (Liao et al. 2018) that is perhaps what Wiseman’s (2022) “slow knowing” process is aiming for as well.

Analysis of the texts on intuition, as well as overlap in themes from previous sections, recognized that intuition is, has been, and can be an important part of spiritual and theological reflection, if used wisely and in combination with Kahneman’s (2013) concept of System 2 thinking and/or high levels of capacity for ethical decision making.

Case: Intentional Reflection of Intuition

Caroline notices one day during a session with a client that she has a very quick, intuitive feeling of knowing a specific question to ask. When she does, the client is able to see a link between something they have been trying to figure out for a while, and they experience a breakthrough in their therapy process. Caroline feels surprised at herself for “knowing” what to hone in on, and explores more about intuition. She finds in her research that she experienced a form of “expert intuition” and was able to trace back how all her training and life experiences helped her “know” what was needed in the session to help her client work through their issue. She decides to practice paying attention to her “felt sense” more often in everyday life as a spiritual practice itself and finds this to be helpful in her professional work as well. Her intuitive sense begins to work more effectively to tell her when she is off-course and needs to realign herself, and when she is working in good professional balance, and is in balance with herself and others, including her clients. At the same time, Caroline is aware of the skepticism in the research about intuition being wish fulfillment. She proceeds slowly with intuition in clinical work and brings this to her supervision sessions for feedback and support.

4. Answer to the Research Question

What does the intentional use of emotions, dreams and intuition described by Daniel Kahneman as System 1 thinking look like in contemporary spiritual and theological reflection?

In the analysis of the literature reviewed, the authors noted several themes that aid in answering our research question (see

Table 2. Themes identified by authors from above literature review.

	Themes Found in Literature Review
1	Methods of reflection in the more recent past tended to focus more on System 2 (analytical) processes of thinking but now seem more open to System 1 thinking
2	System thinking is recognized across disciplines as a dual process that requires both for a balanced human/spiritual experience
3	Emotions, dreams and intuition are recognized to have purpose and enrich the human experience across disciplines and cultures
4	Creative expression is present and valued for spiritual and theological reflection
5	Intentional use of System 1 thinking in spiritual and theological reflection speaks to the contemporary needs for a wider experiential, flexible and “spiritual not religious” exploration of spirituality

). (1) Methods of reflection in the more recent past tended to focus more on System 2 (analytical) processes of thinking but now seem more open to System 1 thinking. There is a growing body of literature indicating this. (2) System thinking is recognized across disciplines as a dual process that requires both for a balanced human/spiritual experience. (3) Emotions, dreams and intuition are recognized to have purpose and enrich the human experience across disciplines and cultures. Continued emphasis on openness to multi-faith and multi-culturalism could help with and encourage this development. (4) Creative expression is present and valued for spiritual and theological reflection and (5) intentional use of System 1 thinking in spiritual and theological reflection speaks to the contemporary needs for a wider experiential, flexible and “spiritual not religious” exploration of spirituality which is listed in our literature above.

The texts reviewed recognized the overlap in System 1 processes of thinking with recognized processes of reflection that in many cases have existed in different cultural spiritual and practical contexts, from Christian mystical practices to Indigenous and interfaith beliefs around connection to the Divine/Creator, and inclusive of Western approaches to understanding psychology and biology. The authors also recognized the five themes of contemporary spiritual and theological reflection (Brouillard-Coyle et al. 2025) present in examples of System 1 processes of thinking, and how these are present across time, culture and disciplines that recognize fast, emotive and intuitive processes of reflection. System 1 thinking is a highly experiential process on a somatic, emotive and intuitive level. Through recognition of experiential reflection in this way, the growth and overlap of spiritual vs. theological reflection processes is expanded to include multicultural approaches to spirituality that recognize things like felt sense (emotion, body sensations), dreams (day/awake dreams or night/sleep dreams) and both personal and expert intuition based on traditional ways of knowing that recognize ancestral wisdom as an intuitive and creative form of spiritual and theological knowledge.

The literature shows an increase in research on the “spiritual not religious” identity while also demonstrating evidence of System 1-oriented practices that naturally fall within the scope of this identity. Meaning making as key is evident across the literature, and meaning making through creative processes also arose as a theme present in review. Creative processes of reflection include art in both individual and community-oriented methods such as the Wandiny in Kabi-Kabi Country in Australia (Willis et al. 2022).

One final theme observed through our study of the literature revealed that system thinking works best if done in balance with, rather than independent of, each system. Kahneman (2013) and Bulkeley (2000) both recognize that bias, such as wishful thinking, can occur if one system dominates another or if systems are separated from communicating with one another, as was the case in the “split brain” research in the 1960s (Ward 2024). Several sources identified the potential for “false” information from either system operating without the grounding influence of the other and the dual-process approach is noted consistently as being important to prevent bias of one system over the other.

We see many examples in literature where System 1 processes of thinking, which are more emotive and intuitive, are valued across cultures, over time, and in different disciplines. Fields of science have recognized that different functions of the brain have different purposes to maintain physiological balance. Both Kahneman (2013) and James (1884) identify the importance of emotions in our internal systems and that they have a place in biological regulation and thought processes for decision making. Intuitive reactions are also acknowledged on a scientific level as being a needed function for survival, including for protection and connection. Dreams are recognized above as ways to process information, serving functions for the brain such as emptying out and reorganizing while we are sleeping, maintaining connections with ancestors, and providing deeper spiritual insight into events or problems one is facing.

On a social level, contemporary multicultural and interfaith community involves recognition of varying practices and beliefs that all recognize the presence and importance of System 1-type functions in traditional spiritual and religious practices. Beyond just awareness of diverse beliefs around dreams, emotional and intuitive experiences, there is a need for encouragement of welcoming these experiences into reflective processes as a holistic approach to modern spiritual practice.

5. Limitations of the Research (Cautions)

Recognizing emotions in System 1 thinking for spiritual and theological reflection seems to have a lot of benefits, but there is a need for balance. The review of the literature identified possible challenges and the importance of working responsibly with these challenges when exploring different ways of offering spiritual and theological reflection. Some of the benefits might include an immediate, quick connection with Divine presence and/or meaning in an experience. Connecting with others through shared emotional experiences, as we saw with the Wandiny (Willis et al. 2022), can potentially create a more connected society based on values such as empathy and compassion, which are common aspects of spirituality across cultures. This can work to unite different faith groups and beliefs by creating access and relatability to one another. Also, emotions can help us deepen our sense of faith within ourselves on an individual level, strengthening our own connection with the Divine, however we each choose to experience it.

Some of the challenges of relying only on fast thinking and emotional, intuitive and dream responses involve the possibility that these areas, without reason, take charge of decision making and responses. Kahneman (2013), van der Kolk (2015), James (1884), Sturm (2014), Francis et al. (2018) and Bulkeley (2000) are some examples of authors who recognize that fast responses can be impulsive in a negative way when impulse and/or false interpretations of emotions, dreams and/or intuition are based on protection rather than clear and grounded awareness. Kahneman recognizes that System 2 allows us the balance needed to stay curious and in wonder when using System 1 for reflection, and he is not alone in strongly encouraging a balance of systems for any thought processing model.

6. Gaps

Some gaps in the applicability of incorporating System 1 thinking in spiritual and theological reflection in a more substantial way include a lack of research and literature on System 1 thinking as part of the process of reflection in this context. Currently, emphasis on system thinking appears to be mainly on leadership decision making and applications to business models. Another gap in this search is the lack of research and literature on the reliability of intuition, emotions and dreams associated with positive outcomes individually and/or collectively. This review did not explore what is meant by contemporary spiritual and theological reflection in depth; more research is needed to evaluate the immediate and changing needs of contemporary society that seeks reflective experiences.

Finally, Brouillard-Coyle et al. (2025) noted the need for flexibility of approach to contemporary spiritual and theological reflection, but a lack of structure or methodology currently creates some ambiguity in knowing what people are looking for, what is found to be helpful, and how methods can be taught to those who may be guiding others in reflective processes. To ensure embodied ethical approaches, further development of a structured methodology may be advisable. Without some guidelines on the intentional use of System 1 concepts in practice, risks of misapplication, misappropriation, and unbalanced emphasis on only one system may occur.

7. Conclusions and Future Applications

Wiseman (2022) looks at a third way of thinking, slow knowing, that takes both system processes into consideration for spiritual reflection in a way that is mindful of the process itself, ongoing, and fluid, changing with time and wisdom gathered from reflection and experience. They move away from a single event or problem to be worked through in a reflective process and instead view spiritual reflection, through system thinking, as a way of being that is integrated as a life-long process of reflection.

To build on the research question of what System 1 thinking looks like in contemporary spiritual and theological reflection, we can see a glimpse of potential through the example of Caroline woven into the article. Combining Kahneman’s system thinking and Wiseman’s “slow knowing” within the contemporary and fast-changing culture could potentially allow for a more holistic approach to spiritual and theological reflection in current and future contemporary reflection. A variety of methods developed to suit different perspectives, experiences and interpretations would likely benefit the diversity of contemporary needs noted in the Introduction Section on contemporary spiritual and theological reflection, and we recognize that further exploration of contemporary needs and the development of methodology is required. One potential benefit of developing a model is the possible application of reflection methods as a way of integrating contemporary spirituality into other disciplines, especially into counselling and psychotherapy, which could also to be explored in more depth in future research.