İnanç Gelişimi Modelinin Müslüman Popülasyon İçin Modifiye Edilmesi: Yeni Bir Çerçeve

Öz

Dindarlıkta meydana gelen değişimler, insan davranışları üzerinde derin etkiler yaratır. Dindarlık çeşitliliğini açıklamak amacıyla kapsamlı bir teori geliştirmek ve bunu test edebilecek araçlar oluşturmak, din psikolojisi tarihinin önemli hedeflerinden biri olmuştur. Bilişsel gelişim modeline dayanan iman gelişim teorisi, dindarlığı anlamada önemli katkılar sağlamıştır. Ancak bu teori, normatif bir bakış açısı sunduğu, iman tanımının belirsiz olduğu, yeterince ampirik kanıta dayanmadığı, iman içeriğini ihmal ettiği ve diğer kültüre özgü dinlerin unsurlarını yansıtmadığı gerekçeleriyle geniş çapta eleştirilmiştir. Bu çalışmanın amacı, Müslüman dindarlık tarzlarına uyarlanmış, kültürel hassasiyeti olan, değiştirilmiş bir iman gelişim modelini tanıtmaktır. Bu model, hem dini hem de dinsiz içerikleri kapsayarak, daha az sofistike ile yüksek derecede sofistike bilişsel tarzlar arasında kesişen boyutları içerir. Ampirik bulgular, önde gelen Müslüman tarihsel figürlerin otobiyografileri ve modern dini bireylerin söylemlerine dayalı olarak, değiştirilmiş bir iman gelişim modeli önerilmektedir. Çalışma, hem seküler hem de dini tarzların modelde yer alması gerektiğini savunarak, dört ana boyut önermektedir: İtirazcılar (antagonist ve muhalif), Muhafazakârlar (özelci ve uyumcu), Arayışçılar (diyalektik ve aydınlanmış) ve Birleştiriciler (apologetik ve şefkatli), her biri iki alt boyutla birlikte. Orijinal iman gelişim modelinin unsurlarını korurken, yeni model dindarlığa yönelik eleştirel ve antagonist yaklaşımları, gelişmiş dindarlık biçimlerini ve her dindarlık tarzının daha ayrıntılı versiyonlarını da kapsamaktadır. Bu yeni modeli desteklemek amacıyla bir ampirik çalışma gerçekleştirilmiş olup, bulguları yer darlığı nedeniyle başka bir çalışmada yayımlanacaktır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• İnanç Gelişimi
• Müslüman
• Aşama
• Uyarlama
• Seküler

Adapting the Faith Development Model to Muslim Populations: A New Framework

Abstract

Changes in religiosity have profound effects on human behavior. Developing a comprehensive theory, along with instruments to test it, to explain the diversity in religiosity has been a critical goal in the history of the psychology of religion. The theory of faith development, primarily based on the cognitive development model, has made significant contributions to understanding religiosity. However, it has been widely criticized for its normative stance, lack of clarity in the definition of faith, insufficient empirical evidence, neglect of the content of faith, and failure to account for elements of other culture-specific religions. The aim of this study is to introduce a culturally sensitive, modified theoretical model of faith development tailored to Muslim religiosity styles. This model encompasses dimensions of both religious and non-religious content, intersecting with a spectrum of cognitive styles ranging from less sophisticated to highly sophisticated. Based on empirical findings, the autobiographies of leading Muslim historical figures, and the discourses of contemporary religious individuals, a revised version of the faith development model is proposed. The study argues that both secular and religious styles should be integrated into the model and introduces four main dimensions: Objectors (antagonistic and dissenting), Conservers (particularistic and conforming), Seekers (dialectical and enlightened), and Unifiers (apologetic and compassionate), each with two sub-dimensions. While retaining elements of the original Fowlerian faith development model presented by Fowler 1981, the new model incorporates critical and antagonistic approaches to religiosity, advanced forms of religious expression, and more nuanced variations within each religiosity style. An empirical study has been conducted to support this new model, and its findings will be published in a separate paper due to space constraints.

Keywords

• Faith Development
• Muslim
• Stage
• Adaptation
• Secular

Kaynakça

1. Altemeyer, Bob. Right-Wing Authoritarianism. Winnipeg: University of Manitoba Press, 1981.
2. Altemeyer, Bob - Hunsberger Bruce. "Authoritarianism, Religious Fundamentalism, Quest and Prejudice". The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion 2 (1992), 113-133. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327582ijpr0202_5.
3. Batson, C. Daniel - Raynor-Prince, Linda. "Religious Orientation and Complexity of Thought About Existential Concerns". Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 22 (1983), 38-50.
4. Batson, C. Daniel - Schoenrade, Patricia. "Measuring Religion as Quest: 1) Validity Concerns". Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 30 (1991), 416-429.
5. Batson, C. Daniel vd. Religion and the Individual: A Social-Psychological Perspective. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993.
6. Cirhinlioğlu, Zafer vd. Modernite, Dindarlık ve Ruh Sağlığı (Individual Modernity, Religiosity and Mental Health). İstanbul: Nobel Yayınları, 2013.
7. Conkle, Daniel O. "Secular Fundamentalism, Religious Fundamentalism, and the Search for Truth in Contemporary America". Articles by Maurer Faculty 2105 (1996). https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/facpub/2105.
8. Costa, Paul T. – McCrae, Robert R. Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI): Professional Manual. Odessa: Psychological Assessment Resources, 1985.

9. Duriez, Bart vd. "A Further Elaboration of the Post-Critical Belief Scale: Evidence for the Existence of Four Different Approaches to Religion in Flanders-Belgium". Psychologica Belgica 40/3 (2000), 153-181.
10. Duriez, Bart vd."Introducing the Shortened Post-Critical Belief Scale". Personality and Individual Differences 38/4 (2005), 851-857. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2004.06.009.
11. Exline, Julie J. – Ellen, Rose. "Religious and Spiritual Struggles". Handbook of the Psychology of Religion and Spirituality. ed. Raymond F. Paloutzian - Crystal L. Park, 315-330. New York; London: The Guilford Press, 2005.
12. Fowler, James W. Stages of Faith: The Psychology of Human Development and the Quest for Meaning. New York: Harper & Row, 1981.
13. Fowler, James W. vd. Manual for Faith Development Research. Bielefeld; Atlanta: Research Center for Biographical Studies in Contemporary Religion, Bielefeld; Center for Research in Faith and Moral Development, Emory University, 3. Basım, 2004. http://wwwhomes.uni-bielefeld.de/religionsforschung/.
14. Francis, Leslie J. "Understanding the Attitudinal Dimension of Religion and Spirituality". International Handbook of Education for Spirituality, Care and Wellbeing. ed. Marian de Souza - Leslie J. Francis, 147-167. Berlin: Springer, 2009.
15. Gennerich, Carsten. “Values and the Value Space as a Coordinate System for Understanding Xenosophia and Inter-Religious Prejudice”. Xenosophia and religion, 255-281. Seiten, 2018.
16. Hogg, Michael A. - Vaughan, Graham M. Social Psychology. Londra: Pearson, 2014.
17. Huber, Stefan, - Odilo W. Huber. "The Centrality of Religiosity Scale (CRS)". Religions 3/3 (2012), 710-724.
18. Hutsebaut, Dirk. "Post-Critical Belief: A New Approach to the Religious Attitude Problem". Journal of Empirical Theology 9/2 (1996), 48-66.
19. Hutsebaut, Dirk. "Identity Statuses, Ego Integration, God Representation and Religious Cognitive Styles". Journal of Empirical Theology 10 (1997), 39-54.
20. Kegan, Robert. The Evolving Self: Problem and Process in Human Development. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1982.
21. Kroger, Jane. Identity in Adolescence: The Balance Between Self and Other. Londra: Routledge, 2004. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203346860.
22. Kruglanski, Arie W. vd. "Groups as Epistemic Providers: Need for Closure and the Unfolding of Groupcentrism". Psychological Review 113 (2006), 84-100.
23. Ok, Üzeyir. "Faith Development and Perception of Diversity Among Muslims in Turkey: Construction and Initial Test of a Measure for Religious Diversity in Islam". Din Bilimleri 6/3 (2007), 199-225.
24. Ok, Üzeyir. “Dini Şemalar Ölçeğinden İnanç veya Dünya Görüşü Şemaları Ölçeğine”. C.Ü. Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi 33/2 (2009), 149-155.
25. Ok, Üzeyir. “Dini Tutum Ölçeği: Ölçek Geliştirme ve Geçerlik Çalışması”. Uluslararası İnsan Bilimleri Dergisi 8/2 (2011), 528-549.
26. Ok, Üzeyir. “Biyografik Anlatıya Dayalı İnanç Gelişim Biçimleri ve Nicel Ölçümler”. Çukurova Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi 12/2 (2012), 121-155.
27. Ok, Üzeyir. “The Ok-Religious Attitude Scale (Islam): Introducing an Instrument Originated in Turkish for International Use”. Journal of Beliefs and Values 37/1 (2016), 55-67. doi:10.1080/13617672.2016.1141529.
28. Ok, Üzeyir - Gören, Ayşe Burcu. “The Impact of Religion on Human Rights Among Adolescents.” 6th Conference on Religion and Human Rights, Bari, İtalya: 5-8 Aralık 2018.
29. Parks, Sharon Daloz. The Critical Years: The Young Adult Search for a Faith to Live By. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1986.
30. Riegel, Ulrich. “Centrality of Religiosity, Attitude Towards Christianity and Post-Critical Belief: Comparing Three Measures of Religiosity”. Religions 11/46 (2020), 2-15.
31. Rokeach, Milton. The Open and Closed Mind; Investigations into the Nature of Belief Systems and Personality Systems. New York: Basic Books, 1960.
32. Ryff, Carol D. - Singer, Burton H. “Psychological Well-Being: Meaning, Measurement, and Implications for Psychotherapy Research”. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics 65/1 (1996), 14-23.
33. Schwartz, Shalom H. “Universals in the Content and Structure of Values: Theoretical Advances and Empirical Tests in 20 Countries.” Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. der. M. P. Zanna. 1-65. Orlando: Academic Press, 1992.
34. Streib, Heinz. “Faith Development Theory Revisited: The Religious Styles Perspective”. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion 11 (2001), 143-158.
35. Streib, Heinz. “Is There a Way Beyond Fundamentalism? Challenges for Faith Development and Religious Education.” The Fourth R for the Third Millennium: Education in Religions and Values for the Global Future. der. L. J. Francis vd. 177-199. Dublin: Lindisfarne Books, 2001.
36. Streib, Heinz vd.“Categorising People by Their Preference for Religious Styles: Four Types Derived from Evaluation of Faith Development Interviews”. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion 30/2 (2020), 112-127.
37. Streib, Heinz vd. “The Religious Schema Scale: Construction and Initial Validation of a Quantitative Measure for Religious Styles”. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion 20 (2010), 151-172.
38. Wulff, David M. Psychology of Religion: Classic and Contemporary Views. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1991.