Mobayed Tamim
Wolfson College, The University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Front Psychol. 2024 May 13;15:1373443. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1373443. eCollection 2024.
Despite being of undisputed importance, there is no consensus on what emotions are, with the majority of research that constructs ideas about them being colored by a particular worldview. This conceptual article examines the case for conducting an Islamic analysis of emotion. It might seem a peculiar area to examine; what would be the need to analyze such a universal psychological concept through the lens of a particular religion? Three points are used to argue for this endeavor. To begin with, this article highlights the relative instability of the term; there is yet no universally agreed upon definition of what emotions are, and which human processes they contribute to. As the concept is still being defined, there is merit in engaging with the discussion, particularly given the relative absence of metaphysics from the debate. Secondly, specificities relating to emotions and how they have conceptualized are considered. This section delves into the way in which variable factors, such as culture, language, and worldview, influence how emotions manifest. The overarching point argued for here is that how emotions are experienced, and even which emotions are experienced, are shaped by factors that are not consistent across time and space. Accordingly, different worldviews will formulate different "emotional palates" and "emotional ideologies"; different groups of people will understand and engage with emotions differently. Thirdly, a broader discussion ensues pertaining to the nature of science, psychology, and their relationship with secularity. This discussion includes critique of the idea that forces such as secularism and scientific materialism have been "discovered" and are therefore value-neutral. Accordingly, understandings of emotions to have emerged from the Academy, and contemporary psychology, are value-laden. This section also looks at the origins of science in order to determine whether it is inherently atheistic or areligious, and therefore antagonistic to a religious worldview. The section also challenges the apparent secularity of psychology and key psychologists. A range of other facets pertaining to how the emotions have been conceptualized, such as their relational core, their interaction with moral faculties, and their enmeshment with what is important to individuals and groups, are also considered.
尽管情感具有无可争议的重要性,但对于情感是什么却没有达成共识,大多数构建情感观念的研究都受到特定世界观的影响。这篇概念性文章探讨了对情感进行伊斯兰分析的理由。这似乎是一个奇特的研究领域;为什么需要通过特定宗教的视角来分析这样一个普遍的心理概念呢?本文从三个方面论证了这一努力的必要性。首先,本文强调了该术语的相对不稳定性;对于情感是什么以及它们涉及哪些人类过程,尚未有普遍认可的定义。由于这个概念仍在定义之中,参与相关讨论是有价值的,特别是考虑到辩论中相对缺乏形而上学的内容。其次,考虑了与情感及其概念化方式相关的具体情况。本节深入探讨了诸如文化、语言和世界观等可变因素如何影响情感的表现方式。这里所主张的总体观点是,情感的体验方式,甚至所体验到的情感种类,都受到时空不一致的因素的塑造。因此,不同的世界观会形成不同的“情感偏好”和“情感意识形态”;不同群体的人对情感的理解和体验也会不同。第三,随之展开了关于科学、心理学的本质及其与世俗性的关系的更广泛讨论。这场讨论包括对世俗主义和科学唯物主义等力量已被“发现”且因此价值中立这一观点的批判。因此,来自学术界和当代心理学的对情感的理解是充满价值的。本节还审视了科学的起源,以确定它是否本质上是无神论或无宗教信仰的,从而与宗教世界观相对立。本节还对心理学和关键心理学家表面上的世俗性提出了质疑。还考虑了与情感概念化相关的一系列其他方面,例如它们的关系核心、与道德能力的相互作用以及与个人和群体重要事物的交织。