Dini Bağlamda Robot Kullanımı: Budist Robot Rahip Mindar Örneği Üzerinden Tutumların Niteliksel Analizi

Öz

Farklı inançlar ekseninde geliştirilen çeşitli dini sosyal robot örnekleri bulunmakta, bu robotlara yönelik tutumlar kullanıldıkları toplumun inanç ve kültüründen etkilenmektedir. Çarpıcı örneklerden birisi Budist Robot Rahip Mindar’dır. Bu çalışmada Mindar’ı ele alan üç farklı haber videosuna Türkçe, İngilizce ve Japonca yapılan yorumların niteliksel desende ve doküman analizi tekniğiyle dini robotlara karşı tutumlar ekseninde analiz edilmesi amaçlanmıştır. Çalışma sonucunda bu robotlara yönelik olumlu ve olumsuz tutumlar, kaygı ve hayranlık duyguları, din ve maneviyatın dönüşümüne dair içerikler tespit edilmiştir. Türkçe yorumlarda mevcut din hizmetlerine duyulan memnuniyetsizlik üzerinden robotlara olumlu tutum sergilenmesi ayırt edici bulgulardandır. Animist değerlendirme Japonca yorumlarda kendisini gösterip Türkçe ve İngilizcede mevcut değildir. İnsan merkezci düşünmeye ise üç dilde farklı ağırlıklarla olsa da rastlanmıştır. Sosyal robotlar günlük hayat işleyişinde daha fazla görünür olmaya başladıkça dini robotiğe yönelik tutumların da farklılaşması olasıdır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Din Psikolojisi
• Din-Robotik Etkileşimi
• Sosyal Robot
• Dini Robot

The Use of Robots in the Religious Context: Qualitative Analysis of Attitudes on the Cases of Buddhist Robot Priest Mı̇ndar

Öz

There are various examples of religious social robots developed on the axis of different beliefs, and attitudes towards these robots are influenced by the beliefs and culture of the society in which they are used. One striking example is the Buddhist Robot Priest Mindar. This study aims to analyze and compare the comments made in Turkish, English, and Japanese on three different news videos about Mindar in terms of attitudes toward religious robots. As a result of the study, positive and negative attitudes towards these robots, feelings of anxiety and admiration, and content about the transformation of religion and spirituality were identified. In Turkish comments, the positive attitude towards robots through dissatisfaction with the current religious services is one of the distinctive findings. As social robots become more visible in the functioning of daily life, attitudes towards religious robotics may also differentiate.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Psychology of Religion
• Religion-Robotic Interaction
• Social Robot
• Religious Robot

Kaynakça

1. Ahmed, Habib - La, Hung Manh. “Evaluating the Co-Dependence and Co-Existence Between Religion and Robots: Past, Present and Insights on the Future”. International Journal of Social Robotics 13/2 (Mart 2021), 219-235. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-020-00636-x
2. Akın Robotics. “Sosyal Robot Mini Ada 3”. Erişim 24 Kasım 2024. https://www.akinrobotics.com/sosyal-robot-mini-ada-3
3. Alemi, Minoo vd. “Social Robotics, Education, and Religion in the Islamic World: An Iranian Perspective”. Science and Engineering Ethics 26/5 (Ekim 2020), 2709-2734. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-020-00225-1
4. Alkhouri, Khader I. “The Role of Artificial Intelligence in the Study of the Psychology of Religion”. Religions 15/3 (Mart 2024), 290. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15030290
5. Baffelli, Erica. “The Android and the Fax: Robots, AI and Buddhism in Japan”. In Itineraries of an Anthropologist: Studies in Honour of Massimo Raveri. ed. Giovanni Bulian - Silvia Rivadossi. 249-263. Venezia: Edizioni Ca’ Foscari, 2021. https://doi.org/10.30687/978-88-6969-527-8
6. Bartneck, Christoph vd. “Cultural Differences in Attitudes Towards Robots”. Proceedings of the AISB Symposium on Robot Companions: Hard Problems And Open Challenges In Human-Robot Interaction. 1-4. Hatfield, 2005. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.22507.34085
7. BBC News Japan. “神とロボット　AIは宗教を変えるのか？”. YouTube. Yayın Tarihi 21 Ekim 2021. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36fcVqJrwS0
8. Breazeal, Cynthia. “Toward Sociable Robots”. Robotics and Autonomous Systems 42/3-4 (Mart 2003), 167-175. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8890(02)00373-1

9. Broadbent, Elizabeth. “Interactions With Robots: The Truths We Reveal About Ourselves”. Annual Review of Psychology 68 (Ocak 2017), 627-652. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010416-043958
10. Çinici, Murat - Kızılgeçit, Muhammed. “Yapay Zekâ ve Din Psikolojisi”. Diyanet İlmi Dergi 59/2 (Haziran 2023), 745-768. https://doi.org/10.61304/did.1240124
11. DW Shift. “Mindar: Can a Robot be Religious-Buddhist Robot Priest Mindar-Japanese Robots”. YouTube. Yayın Tarihi 23 Nisan 2020. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3VuHpYPU6Y&t=9s
12. DW Türkçe. “Japonya’nın Bir Milyon Dolarlık Robot Rahibi”. YouTube. Yayın Tarihi 5 Temmuz 2020. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WP_UnR8Pg1g&t=1s
13. Dwivedi, Yogesh K. vd. “Evolution of Artificial Intelligence Research in Technological Forecasting and Social Change: Research Topics, Trends, and Future Directions”. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 192 (Temmuz 2023), 122579.
14. Ecker, Ullrich K. H. vd. “The Psychological Drivers of Misinformation Belief and Its Resistance to Correction”. Nature Reviews Psychology 1/1 (Ocak 2022), 13-29. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-021-00006-y
15. El-Cezerî, İsmâil bin er-Rezzâz. El-Cami Beyne’l-İlm Ve’l-Amel En-Nafi Fi Eş-Şınaa Ti’l-Hiyel. çev. Yavuz Unat, Melek Dosay, Sevim Tekeli. Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 2002.
16. Fortuna, Paweł vd. “The Structure and Correlates of Anthropocentrism as a Psychological Construct”. Current Psychology 42/5 (Şubat 2023), 3630-3642. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-01835-z
17. Geraci, Robert M. “Spiritual Robots: Religion and Our Scientific View of the Natural World”. Theology and Science 4/3 (Kasım 2006), 229-246. https://doi.org/10.1080/14746700600952993
18. Gültekin, Mücahit. “Could Robots Empatize? A Review on The Employment of Social Robots in Mental Healthcare”. Turkish Psychological Counseling and Guidance Journal 12/67 (Aralık 2022), 593-618. https://doi.org/10.17066/tpdrd.12250405
19. Gültekin, Mücahit - Şahin, Meryem. “The Use of Artificial Intelligence in Mental Health Services in Turkey: What Do Mental Health Professionals Think?”. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace 18/1 (Şubat 2024). https://doi.org/10.5817/CP2024-1-6
20. Humaeroh, Eneng. "Islamic Religious Education Learning and Trends in the Use of Artificial Intelligence". ASIAN: Indonesian Journal of Learning Development and Innovation 1/1 (Temmuz 2023), 31-35.
21. Ikari, Shogo vd. “Religion-Related Values Differently Influence Moral Attitude for Robots in the United States and Japan”. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 54/6-7 (Ağustos 2023), 742-759. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220221231193369
22. Jackson, Joshua Conrad vd. “Exposure to Robot Preachers Undermines Religious Commitment”. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 152/12 (2023), 3344-3358. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001443
23. Kaplan, Frédéric. “Who is Afraid of the Humanoid? Investigating Cultural Differences in the Acceptance of Robots”. International Journal of Humanoid Robotics 01/03 (Eylül 2004), 465-480. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219843604000289
24. Karasar, Niyazi. Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemi. İstanbul: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım, 2005.
25. Kazak, Mehmet. Yapay Zekâ Kaygısı, Yabancılaşma ve Dindarlık İlişkisi. Denizli: Pamukkale Üniversitesi, İslami İlimler Enstitüsü, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, 2023.
26. Kızılgeçit, Muhammed vd. “Yapay Zekâ ile 2020-2025 Yıllarında Cinsiyete Göre Dindarlık Durumunun Tahmini”. İlahiyat Tetkikleri Dergisi 56/2 (Aralık 2021), 283-307. https://doi.org/10.29288/ilted.993560
27. Kızılgeçit, Muhammed vd. “Yapay Zekâ Sohbet Robotu CHATGPT ile İnanç- İnançsızlık, Doğal Afet ve Ölüm Konuları Üzerine Nitel Bir Araştırma: Din ve Maneviyatın Psikolojik Sağlığa Etkileri”. Ağrı İbrahim Çeçen Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi 9/1 (Nisan 2023), 137-172. https://doi.org/10.31463/aicusbed.1275061
28. Loewen-Colón, J. - Mosurinjohn, Sharday C. “Fabulation, Machine Agents, and Spiritually Authorizing Encounters”. Religions 13/4 (Nisan 2022), 333. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel13040333
29. Mavridis, Nikolaos vd. “Opinions and Attitudes Toward Humanoid Robots in the Middle East”. AI & Society 27/4 (Kasım 2012), 517-534. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-011-0370-2
30. Meghdari, Ali - Alemi, Minoo. “Recent Advances in Social & Cognitive Robotics and Imminent Ethical Challenges”. Proceedings of the 10th International RAIS Conference on Social Sciences and Humanities. Princeton: Atlantis Press, 2018. https://doi.org/10.2991/rais-18.2018.12
31. Otto, Rudolf. The Idea of the Holy. Oxford: Oxford Bookshelf, 1936.
32. Ozan, Ömer. Din Görevlisinin Toplumsal İmajını Etkileyen Faktörler (Samsun Örneği). Samsun: Ondokuzmayıs Üniversitesi SBE, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, 2013.
33. Puzio, Anna. “Robot, Let Us Pray! Can and Should Robots Have Religious Functions? An Ethical Exploration of Religious Robots”. AI & Society (Aralık 2023), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-023-01812-z
34. Sherwood, Harriet. “Robot Priest Unveiled in Germany to Mark 500 Years since Reformation”. The Guardian (30 Mayıs 2017). https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/may/30/robot-priest-blessu-2-germany-reformation-exhibition#:~:text=A%20robot%20priest%20that%20delivers,church%20door%20in%20the%20town
35. Simmerlein, Jonas - Tretter, Max. “Robots in Religious Practices: A Review”. Theology and Science 22/2 (Nisan 2024), 255-273. https://doi.org/10.1080/14746700.2024.2351639
36. Singler, Beth. “‘Will AI Create A Religion?’: Views of the Algorithmic Forms of the Religious Life in Popular Discourse”. American Religion 5/1 (Sonbahar 2023), 95-103. https://doi.org/10.2979/amerreli.5.1.05
37. Spatola, Nicolas vd. “Different Models of Anthropomorphism Across Cultures and Ontological Limits in Current Frameworks the Integrative Framework of Anthropomorphism”. Frontiers in Robotics and AI 9 (Ağustos 2022). https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2022.863319
38. Şahin, Meryem - Gültekin, Mücahit. “The Interaction of Religion and Robotics and Al-Sāmirī’s Calf (the Golden Calf) as an Early Theomorphic Robot”. Ilahiyat Studies 14/1 (Temmuz 2023), 133-168. https://doi.org/10.12730/is.1302053
39. Tran, Khoa - Nguyen, Tuyet. “Preliminary Research on the Social Attitudes Toward AI’s Involvement in Christian Education in Vietnam: Promoting AI Technology for Religious Education”. Religions 12/3 (Mart 2021), 208. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel12030208
40. Travagnin, Stefania. “From Online Buddha Halls to Robot-Monks”. Review of Religion and Chinese Society 7/1 (Mayıs 2020), 120-148. https://doi.org/10.1163/22143955-00701006
41. Tretter, Max. “When Discussing the Desirability of Religious Robots: Courage for Theology!”. AI & Society, 1-3. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-023-01860-5
42. Trovato, Gabriele vd. “Religion and Robots: Towards the Synthesis of Two Extremes”. International Journal of Social Robotics 13/4 (2021), 539-556. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-019-00553-8
43. Trovato, Gabriele vd. “Communicating with SanTO–the First Catholic Robot”. 28th IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN). 1-6. New Delhi, IEEE, 2019.
44. Umbrello, Steven. “The Intersection of Bernard Lonergan’s Critical Realism, the Common Good, and Artificial Intelligence in Modern Religious Practices”. Religions 14 (Aralık 2023), 1536. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel14121536
45. Yakut, İdris. “Yapay Zekâya Yönelik Tutum ve Dindarlık İlişkisi”. Kocatepe İslami İlimler Dergisi 7/1 (Haziran 2024), 37-59. https://doi.org/10.52637/kiid.1426977
46. Yam, Kai Chi vd. “Cultural Differences in People’s Reactions and Applications of Robots, Algorithms, and Artificial Intelligence”. Management and Organization Review 19/5 (Ekim 2023), 859-875. https://doi.org/10.1017/mor.2023.21
47. Yavuzer, Hasan. “Toplumda Din Görevlisi Algısı: Nevşehir İli Örneği”. Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli Üniversitesi SBE Dergisi 12/3 (Ekim 2022), 1653-1673. https://doi.org/10.30783/nevsosbilen.1168671
48. Yıldırım, Ali - Şimşek, Hasan. Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık, 2013.