The Explanation and Its Models in Religious Study

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Associate Professor of Philosophy and Islamic Theology, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran

2 Ph. D. Student of Western Philosophy, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran

Abstract

Abstract
The ultimate goal of science is to predict the future and predicting is impossible without explanation. The scientific explanation is the expression of causes of a phenomenon in the light of a scientific law. Explanation in the humanities is a widespread and challenging issue and many theories have been put forward. The most prominent explanatory strategies in the humanities are naturalism and anti-naturalism, which have produced three causal, reasoning, and interpretative paradigms. The purpose of the present study is to criticize each of the models in religious studies and to design and redefine a new model for explication in religious studies. The basic strategy in explaining religious phenomena is methodological pluralism, which requires us to distinguish between the three concepts of paradigms, approaches, and methods in the study of religion. The relationship between the three is interactional. The explanation is a method used as a tool for measuring and evaluating hypotheses. The explanation of religious phenomena varies depending on the utilized approach. Our approach to the study of religion determines our model of explanation. Accordingly, the theological approaches are divided into the three categories of explanation-seeking, reason-seeking, and interpretation-seeking. The appropriate paradigm must be in synergy with the approach, and method, and state the cause.
Religious issues are multidisciplinary and can be studied in different paradigms with many different approaches and methods. Thus, the three causal, discursive, and interpretive patterns in the religion do not have the same dignity and change depending on our approach. Our approaches to the study of religious phenomena determine the appropriate pattern of explanation. Religious research in the explanation-seeking approach seeks to explain the religious behavior causally and therefore the explanations are empirical. In the reason-seeking approach, an attempt is made to  seek to reason and understand religious behavior rather than to model religious beliefs and propositions. Finally, in the interpretation-seeking approach, theology seeks to interpret religious phenomena and to understand the behavior of the religion. A researcher needs all three models in religious studies and the use of all three is instructive and effective, provided they engage and cooperate with a pluralistic strategy. The pluralistic explanation is a better and more modeled approach to religious phenomena, which means accepting and benefiting from various approaches to understanding and articulating why religious phenomena occur.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

References
- Benton, T., & Jan, C. (2005). The Philosophy of Social Sciences (Foundations of Philosophy of Social Thought). Translated by Shahnaz Mossamaparast and Mahmoud United, First Edition. Tehran: Agah Publication.
- Ebadi, A. (2016). Drawing on the Methodological Pattern of Religious Studies Based on the Conceptualization of Methodology, Method and Paradigm. Ghabasat Journal, 82(95), 21-48.
- Fana'i, A. (2000). Religious Explanation. Critique and Review, 23/24(79), 110-144.
- Faramarz Gharamlaki, A. (2009). The Methodology of Mulla Sadra's Philosophy. Tehran: Sadra Islamic Wisdom Foundation Publications.
- Faramarz Gharamlaki, A. (2016). The Methodology of Religious Studies. Mashhad: Razavi Islamic University.
- Faramarz Karamaleki, A. (2004). From Pluralism to the Universalization of Knowledge. Papers and Reviews, 76(2), 83.
- Fotoorchi, P. (2004). On Scientific Explanation. The Quarterly of the Mind, 5(2), 1-18.
- Hobbes, T. (1991). Leviathan. Edited by Richard Tuck. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Hospers, J. (1946). On Explanation. Journal of Philosophy, 43, 337-356.
- Kim, J. (1972). Explanation in Science. The Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Edited by Poul Edwards. London: Collier-Macmillan Publishers, 3, 159-163.
- Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The Structure of Scientific Revolution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Little, D. (2009). Explanation in the Social Sciences (Introduction to Philosophy of Social Sciences). Translated by Abdul Karim Soroush. Tehran: The Cultural Institute of Sarat.
- Mardiyeh, M. (2016). The Meaning and Basis of Explanation in the Social Sciences. Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies in the Humanities, 4(8), 79-104.
- Parkinson, J. (2005). Different Types of Causality. Translated by Massoud Sadeghi. Letter of Wisdom, 5, 207-232.
- Reuters, G. (2000). Contemporary Theory of Sociology. Translated by Mohsen Salasi. Tehran: Scientific Publications.
- Rosenberg, A. (1988). Philosophy of Social Science. Bolder, Colo: Westview Press.
- Ryan, A. (1970). The Philosophy of the Social Sciences. London: Macmillan Press LTD.
- Ryan, A. (1991). Philosophy of Social Sciences. Translated by Abdolkarim Soroush, Second Edition. Tehran: Sarat Publication.
- Sadeghi, M. (2006). Types of Explanations and Theories of Scientific Explanation. Wisdom Letter, 8(85), 45-65.
- Soroush, A. (2009). Philosophical Scientology (Speeches in Philosophy of Experimental Science). Tehran: Sarat Publication.
- Taylor, C., & Charles, T. (1985). Philosophical Papers: Volume 2, Philosophy and the Human Sciences (Vol. 2). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Von Wright, G. H. (1971). Explanation and Understanding. New York: Cornell University Press.
 

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics