پژوهشنامه فلسفه دین (نامه حکمت)

دین‌پژوهی شناختی و دشوارۀ تبیین

نوع مقاله : پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشیار گروه فلسفه و کلام، دانشگاه اصفهان، اصفهان، ایران.

2 دانشجوی دکتری فلسفۀ معاصر، دانشگاه بین‌المللی امام خمینی(ره)، قزوین، ایران.

چکیده

تا چه میزان الگوهای دین‌پژوهیِ حاصل از تحقیقات شناختی موفق بوده‌اند؟ هدف مقاله پاسخ به این پرسش است. مطالعۀ شناختیِ دین حوزه‌ای است که روش‌ها و نظریه‌های علوم شناختی را برای فهم چگونگی ایجاد و انتقال افکار، باورها و رفتارهای دینی به کار می‌گیرد. انگارۀ اصلیِ مقاله آن است که اگر الگوهای شناختی مسئلۀ تبیین را حل نکنند، عملاً طرح و برنامۀ مطالعۀ شناختیِ دین با تردید مواجه خواهد شد. تبیین‌های شناختی از چند جهت قابل نقد و بررسی‌اند و از این رو تا رسیدن به الگوهای خوب فاصله دارند. (1) مبانی نظری: شناخت سوم‌شخصی و بیگانه با تجربۀ زیستۀ دیندار دارند. بر خلاف ادعای این تحقیقات، شناخت تأملی و شهودی در دینداران توأمان است. این تبیین‌ها تأکید صرف بر طبیعت‌گراییِ روش‌شناختی دارند که این با چندتباری بودنِ مسائل دین همخوانی ندارد. (2) نگاه حذف‌گرایانه: این تبیین‌ها مؤلفه‌های مهم در شکل‌گیری، تداوم، تقویت و رواج باورهای دینی همچون جریان وحی و نبوت، تربیت، اجتماع و فرهنگ را نادیده می‌گیرند. (3) شواهد علمی: تکرار و همانندسازیِ تجربۀ دینی با تبیین‌های علمیِ عصبی‌شناختی در محیط آزمایشگاهی دشوار است. نتایج برخی تحقیقات با نظریۀ ابزار بیش‌فعالِ کشف عامل همسویی ندارد. افراد اوتیستیک خلاف ادعای نظریۀ اطلاعات اجتماعیِ راهبردی را نشان دادند. ضمن بحث از دشواری‌های تبیین در الگوهای شناختی، پیشنهادهایی برای اصلاح و تکمیل آنها ارائه شده است: توجه به نگرش اول‌شخص نسبت به دینداران، ضرورت تأکید بر شناخت آگاهانۀ باورمندان، تمرکز بر کثرت‌گراییِ روش‌شناختی در تبیین پدیده‌های دینی، توجه به زمینه‌های شکل‌گیریِ ادیان، و لزوم برخورداری از نگاه واقع‌بینانه نسبت به رشد خداباوری.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

The Cognitive Study of Religion and the Problem of Explanation

نویسندگان [English]

  • Ahmad Ebadi 1
  • Mohammad Emdadi Masouleh 2

1 Associate Professor, Department of Philosophy and Theology, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran.

2 Ph.D. Candidate of Contemporary Philosophy, Imam Khomeini International University (IKIU), Qazvin, Iran.

چکیده [English]

This article evaluates the success of cognitive models of religion derived from empirical research. The cognitive science of religion (CSR) is a field that uses methods and theories of cognitive science to understand how the human mind creates and transmits religious thoughts, beliefs and behaviors. The article's main point is that the success of CSR hinges on the explanatory power of cognitive models. We demonstrate that cognitive explanations encounter several limitations that cast doubt on their validity as good models. (1) Theoretical foundations: cognitive explanations rely on a third-person perspective and neglect first-person experience of the religious. They fail to recognize the interdependence of reflective and intuitive knowledge in religious people. They presuppose methodological naturalism, which is incompatible with multidimensional nature of religious phenomena. (2) Exclusionist view: They disregard crucial factors in the emergence, maintenance, enhancement and diffusion of religious beliefs such as revelation and prophecy, education, society and culture.  (3) Scientific evidence: it is challenging to replicate the religious experience by neuroscientific explanations in a laboratory setting. The findings of some researches contradict the hyperactive agency detection device; Autistic people exhibit the opposite of the theory of strategic social information. This article, while discussing the challanges of explanation in cognitive models, proposes some suggestions for improving and completing these models: paying attention to first-person stance of religious agents, highlighting the role of conscious cognition in believers, adopting methodological pluralism in studying religion, considering the historical and cultural contexts of religions and having a realistic view on development of theism.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • cognitive science of religion
  • methodological naturalism
  • scientific explanation
  • methodology of religious studies
  • methodological pluralism
زاهدی، محمدصادق، و روح‌الله حق‌شناس. 1392. «بررسی رویکرد علوم شناختی در مطالعۀ دین»، پژوهشنامۀ فلسفۀ دین، 11(2): 145-162.
طباطبایی، محمدحسین. 1374. تفسیر المیزان، ج. 2. قم: دفتر انتشارت اسلامی.
فرامرز قراملکی، احد. 1388. روش‌شناسی فلسفۀ ملاصدرا. تهران: بنیاد حکمت اسلامی صدرا.
Aaen Stockdale, C. 2012. “Neuroscience for the Soul”, The Psychologist, 25: 520-523.
Atran, S. 2002. In Gods We Trust: The Evolutionary Landscpe of Religion. Oxford University Press.
Azari, N. P. 2006. “Neuroimaging Studies of Religious Experience, A Critical Review.” In Where God and Science Meet, Vol. 2, edited by P. McNamara. London: Praeger.
Barrett, J. L. 2004. Why Would Anyone Believe in God? Altamira Press.
Barrett, J. L. 2009. “Why Santa Claus is not a God.” Journal of Cognition and Culture, 8: 149-161.
Barrett, J. L. and I. M. Church. 2013. “Should CSR Give Atheists Epistemic Assurance? On Beer-goggles, BFFs, and Skepticism Regarding Religious Belief.” The Monist, 96: 311-324.
Beauregard, M., and V. Paquette. 2006. “Neural Correlates of a Mystical Experience in Carmelite Nuns.” Neuroscience Letters, 405: 186-190.
Bering, J., J. Piazza, and G. Ingram. 2011. “Princess Alice is Watching You: Children's Belief in an Invisible Person Inhibits Cheating.” Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 109: 311-320.
Bering, J., D. H. Blasi, and D. F. Bjorklund. 2005. “The Development of 'Afterlife' Beliefs in Religiously and Secularly Schooled Children.” British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 23: 587-607.
Bering, J., and D. Johnson. 2005. “O Lord… You Perceive my Thoughts from Afar: Recursiveness and the Evolution of Supernatural Agency.” Journal of Cognition and Culture, 5(1-2): 118-142.
Booth, J. N., S. Koren, and M. A. Persinger. 2005. “Increased Feelings of the Sensed Presence and Increased Geomagnetic Activity at the Time of the Experience during Exposures to Transcerebral Weak Complex Magnetic Fields.” International Journal for Neuroscience, us: 1053-1079.
Boyer, P. 2002. Religion Explained: The Human Instincts That Fashion Gods, Spirits and Ancestors. Vintage: London.
Brown, Warrens. 2003. “Neurotheology”, In Encyclopedia of Science and Religion, J. Wentzel Huyssteen (eds.). New York: Macmillan Reference USA.
Churchland, P. S. 2002. Brain-wise: Studies in Neuro-philosophy. MIT press.
Clark, K. J., and J. Barrett. 2010. “Reformed Epistemology and the Cognitive Science of Religion.” Faith and Philosophy, 27: 174-189.
Darwin, Ch. 1898. The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex. London: John Murray.
Dawkins, R. 2007. The God Delusion. London: Black Swan.
Dennett, D. C. 2006. Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon. Penguin.
Ekblad, Leif, and Lluís Oviedo. 2017. “Religious Cognition among Subjects with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD): Defective or Different?.” Clinical Neuropsychiatry 14: 287–296.
Everitt, N. 2003. The Nun-existence of God. London: Routledge.
Farias, Miguel, et al. 2017. "Supernatural Belief Is Not Modulated by Intuitive Thinking Style or Cognitive Inhibition." Scientific Reports 7: 15100.
Freud, S. S. 1961. The Future of an Illusion; Civilization and Its Discontents and Other Works. London: Hogarth Press.
Gervais, W. M., and A. Norenzayan. 2012. “Like a Camera in the Sky? Thinking About God Increases Public Self-Awareness and Socially Desirable Responding.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48: 298-302.
Granqvist, P., M. Fredrikson, P. Unge, S. Hagenfeldt, S. Valind, D. Larhammar, and M. Larsson. 2005. “Sensed Presence and Mystical Experiences Are Predicted by Suggestibility, Not by the Application of Transcranial Weak Complex Magnetic Fields.” Neuroscience Letters, 379: 1-6.
Guthrie, S. E. 1993. Faces in the Clouds: A New Theory of Religion. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Henig, Robin M. 2007. “Darwin's God.” New York Times, March 4.
James, William. 2004. The Varieties of Religious Experience. Digireads.com Publishing.
Kelemen, D. 2003. “Are Children ‘Intuitive Theists’? Reasoning about Purpose and Design in Nature.” Psychological Science, 15: 295-301.
Klemm, W. R. 2020. "God Spots in the Brain: Nine Categories of Unasked, Unanswered Questions." Religions, 11(9): 1-14.
Launonen, Lari. 2017. “Cognitive Science of Religion and the Debunking Debate.” In The Origin of Religion: Perspectives from Philosophy, Theology, and Religious Studies, edited by Hanne Appelqvist and Dan-Johan Eklund. Helsinki: Luther-Agricola Society.
Miller, T. 2008. “US Religious Landscape Survey Religious Beliefs and Practices: Diverse and Politically Relevant.” Available online: https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2008/06/01/u-s-religious-landscape-survey-religious-beliefs-and-practices/.
Murray, M. J. 2008. “Four Arguments that the Cognitive Psychology of Religion Undermines the Justification of Religious Belief.” pp. 365-370, in The Evolution of Religion: Studies, Theories, and Critiques, edited by J. Bulbulia, R. Sosis, E. Harris, R. Genet, C. Genet, and K. Wyman. Collins Foundation Press.
Numbers, R. L. 2011. “Science without God: Natural Laws and Christian Beliefs.” Pp. 62-81, in The Nature of Nature, edited by Bruce L. Gordon and William a Dembski. USA: ISI Books.
O'Nuallain, S. 2009. “Zero Power and Selflessness: What Meditation and Conscious Perception Have in Common.” Cognitive Sciences, 4(2).
Oppy, G. 2006. Arguing About Gods. Cambridge University Press.
Oviedo, Lluís. 2020. “Challenges, Opportunities, and Suggestions for a Renewed Program in the Scientific Study of Religion." Zygon, 55: 93-96.
Peterson, Gregory R. 2005. “Neuroscience and Religion: Neuro-Epistemology”, In Encyclopedia of Religion, Vol. 10. Edited by L. Jones. Hills: Thomson Gale.
Pigliucci, M. 2003. “Neuro-Theology, A Rather Skeptical Perspective.” In Neuro-Theology: Brain, Science, Spirituality, Religious Experience, edited by R. Joseph. Cniversity Press California.
Plantinga, Alvin. 2011. Where the Conflict Really Lies: Science, Religion, and Naturalism. Oxford University Press.
Ramachandran, V. S., W. Hirstein, K. C. Armel, E. Tecoma, and V. Iragui. 1998. “The Neural Basis of Religious Experience.” Society for Neuroscience Abstracts, 23: 519.1.
Riekki, Tapani, Marjaana Lindeman, Marja Aleneff, Anni Halme, and Antti Nuortimo. 2013. “Paranormal and Religious Believers Are More Prone to Illusory Face Perception than Skeptics and Non-believers.” Applied Cognitive Psychology, 27(2):150-155.
Sperber. D. 1997. "Intuitive and reflective belief." Mind and Language, 12: 67-83.
Stenger, V. J. 2007. God: The Failed Hypothesis. Prometheus.
Thurow, J. C. 2013. “Does Cognitive Science Show Belief in God to be Irrational? The Epistemic Consequences of the Cognitive Science of Religion.” International Journal for the Philosophy of Religion, 74: 77-98.
Van Eyghen, Hans. 2022. “CSR and Religious Belief: Epistemic Friends or Foes?.” Pp. 371-388, in The Oxford Handbook of the Cognitive Science of Religion, Edited by Justin Barrett. Oxford University Press.
Van Inwagen, P. 2009. “Explaining Belief in the Supernatural. Some Thoughts on Paul Bloom's Religious Belief as an Evolutionary Accident.” Pp. 128-138, In The Believing Primate: Scientific, Philosophical, and Theological Reflections on the Origin of Religion, edited by Michael J. Murray & Jeffrey Schloss. Oxford University Press.
Visala, Aku. 2022. “Philosophical Foundations of Cognitive Science of Religion.” Pp. 27-47, in The Oxford Handbook of the Cognitive Science of Religion, Edited by Justin Barrett. Oxford University Press.
Visala, Aku. 2008. "Religion and the Human Mind: Philosophical Perspectives on the Cognitive Science of Religion." NZSTh, 50(2): 109-130.
Wallace, B. 1952. “The Estimation of Adaptive Values of Experimental Populations.” Evolution: 333-341.
White, Claire. 2022. An Introduction to the Cognitive Science of Religion: Connecting Evolution, Brain, Cognition and Culture. Routledge.
پژوهشنامه فلسفه دین (نامه حکمت)
دوره 22، شماره 1 - شماره پیاپی 43
خرداد 1403
صفحه 153-176