AccScience Publishing / BIJP / Volume 14 / Issue 3 / DOI: 10.29228/beytulhikme.78070
Submit to BIJP
Cite this article
3
Views
Related Info Links
Google Scholar
More by Authors Links
Osman Zahid Çifçi
Journal Browser
Volume | Year
Issue
Search
Forthcoming Issue
Current Issue
View All
News and Announcements
View All
RESEARCH ARTICLE

The Two Faces of Faith: A Study on Spandrel and Fitrah    

Osman Zahid Çifçi1
Show Less
1 Selçuk Üniversitesi, İlahiyat Fakültesi, Felsefe ve Din Bilimleri Bölümü 42130, Konya, Türkiye
BIJP 2024, 14(3), 705–734; https://doi.org/10.29228/beytulhikme.78070
Received: 26 August 2024 | Published online: 26 September 2024
© 2024 by the Authors. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution -Noncommercial 4.0 International License (CC-by the license) ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ )
Download PDF
XML
Cite
Abstract

A study on the two concepts of spandrel and fitrah, which appear to have the same meaning but are interpreted differently due to differences in perspective. Both concepts recognise the existence of certain innate faculties in humans and posit that these faculties predispose humans to belief. Spandrel posits that these innate faculties are a by-product of adaptations that enable us to survive in the evolutionary process, whereas fitrah asserts that these faculties are bestowed by God. The impetus for this study is the recognition that human beings are creatures of faith. The prevalence of belief in supernatural powers across all periods, geographical regions and cultures throughout human history, coupled with the existence of common features in all such beliefs despite formal differences, demonstrates the necessity for further research in this area.

Keywords
Philosophy of religion
evolution
cognitive science of religion
spandrel
fitrah.
References
  1. Akçay, M. (2011). İnsanlığın Ortak Dini Temeli: Fıtrat. Sakarya Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 13(23), Article 23. https://doi.org/10.17335/suifd.36898
  2. Arslan, A. (2021). Felsefeye Giriş. Serbest Akademi.
  3. Atran, S., & Norenzayan, A. (2004). Religion’s Evolutionary Landscape: Counterintuition, Commitment, Compassion, Communion. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27(6), 713–730; discussion 730-770. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x04000172
  4. Barrett, J. L. (2000). Exploring the Natural Foundations of Religion. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(1), 29–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(99)01419-9
  5. Barrett, J. L. (2007). Cognitive Science of Religion: What Is It and Why Is It? Religion Compass, 1(6), 768–786. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1749-8171.2007.00042.x
  6. Barrett, J. L. (2008). Why Santa Claus is not a God. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 8, 149–161. https://doi.org/10.1163/156770908X289251
  7. Barrett, J. L. (2011a). Cognitive Science of Religion: Looking Back, Looking Forward. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 50(2), 229–239. https://www.jstor.org/stable/41307072
  8. Barrett, J. L. (2011b). Cognitive Science, Religion, and Theology: From Human Minds to Divine Minds (First edition). Templeton Press.
  9. Berger, P. L. (1969). The social reality of religion (First Edition). Faber and Faber Ltd.
  10. Bloom, P. (2005a). Descartes’ Baby: How the Science of Child Development Explains What Makes Us Human (Illustrated edition). Basic Books.
  11. Bloom, P. (2005b, December 1). Is God an Accident? The Atlantic. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2005/12/is-god-an-accident/304425/
  12. Bloom, P. (2007). Religion Is Natural. Developmental Science, 10(1), 147–151. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2007.00577.x
  13. Bloom, P. (2009). Religious Belief as an Evolutionary Accident. In The Believing Primate. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199557028.003.0006
  14. Boyer, P. (1994). The Naturalness of Religious Ideas: A Cognitive Theory of Religion (First edition). University of California Press.
  15. Boyer, P. (2001). Religion Explained: The Evolutionary Origins of Religious Thought. Basic books.
  16. Boyer, P., & Bergstrom, B. (2008). Evolutionary Perspectives on Religion. Annual Review of Anthropology, 37(1), 111–130. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.37.081407.085201
  17. Calāl-ad-Dīn Rūmī. (2015). Mesnevî-i ma’nevî (D. Örs & H. Kırlangıç, Trans.). Türkiye Yazma Eserler Kurumu Başkanlığı.
  18. Calvin, J. (1975). The Institutes of the Christian Religion (H. Beveridge, Trans.).
  19. Clark, K., & Barrett, J. (2010). Reformed Epistemology and the Cognitive Science of Religion. Faith and Philosophy: Journal of the Society of Christian Philosophers, 27(2), 174–189. https://doi.org/10.5840/faithphil201027216
  20. Clark, K. J., & Barrett, J. L. (2011). Reidian Religious Epistemology and the Cognitive Science of Religion. Journal of the American Academy of Religion, 79(3), 639–675. https://doi.org/10.1093/jaarel/lfr008
  21. https://www.ccel.org/ccel/c/calvin/institutes/cache/institutes.pdf
  22. Çi̇fçi̇, O. Z. (2015). Naturali̇st Veri̇leri̇n Tei̇sti̇k Sonuçlari (Fıtrat Kavramı Özelinde Bir Yorum Denemesi). Ekev Akademi Dergisi, 63, Article 63. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/sosekev/issue/71572/1151770
  23. Çifçi, O. Z. (2023). Spandrel or Fitrah? An Essay on the Relationship between Cognitive Science of Religion and Fitrah (1st ed.). Grin Verlag.
  24. Descartes, R. (2020). Meditasyonlar (Ç. Dürüşken, Trans.). Alfa Yayınları.
  25. Dow, J. W. (2006). The Evolution of Religion: Three Anthropological Approaches. Method & Theory in the Study of Religion, 18(1), 67–91. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23551754
  26. Evans, E. M. (2000a). Beyond Scopes: Why Creationism Is Here to Stay. In C. N. Johnson, K. S. Rosengren, & P. L. Harris (Eds.), Imagining the Impossible: Magical, Scientific, and Religious Thinking in Children (pp. 305–333). Cambridge University Press; Cambridge Core. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511571381.012
  27. Evans, E. M. (2000b). The Emergence of Beliefs About the Origins of Species in School-Age Children. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly (1982-), 221–254.
  28. Evans, E. M. (2001). Cognitive and Contextual Factors in the Emergence of Diverse Belief Systems: Creation Versus Evolution. Cognitive Psychology, 42(3), 217–266. https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.2001.0749
  29. Gould, S. J., & Lewontin, R. C. (1979). The Spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian Paradigm: A Critique of the Adaptationist Programme. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 205(1161), 581–598. https://www.jstor.org/stable/77447
  30. Green, A. (2015). The Mindreading Debate and the Cognitive Science of Religion. Sophia, 54(1), 61–75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11841-014-0450-0
  31. Guthrie, S., Agassi, J., Andriolo, K. R., Buchdahl, D., Earhart, H. B., Greenberg, M., Jarvie, I., Saler, B., Saliba, J., Sharpe, K. J., & Tissot, G. (1980). A Cognitive Theory of Religion [and Comments and Reply]. Current Anthropology, 21(2), 181–203. https://doi.org/10.1086/202429
  32. Guthrie, S. E. (1995). Faces in the Clouds: A New Theory of Religion (1st edition). Oxford University Press.
  33. Guthrie, S. E. (2015). Religion and Art: A Cognitive and Evolutionary Approach. Journal for the Study of Religion, Nature and Culture, 9(3), 283–311. https://doi.org/10.1558/jsrnc.v9i3.23971
  34. Hökelekli, H. (1996). Fitrat. TDV İslâm Ansiklopedisi. https://islamansiklopedisi.org.tr/fitrat
  35. İbn Teymiyye. (1978). Der’u tearuz el-Akl ve’n-Nakl: Vol. VII. Dârü’l-Künuzi’l- Edebiyye.
  36. İbn Teymiyye. (1987a). İbn Teymiye Külliyatı (9 Cilt): Vol. I. Tevhid Yayınları.
  37. İbn Teymiyye. (1987b). İbn Teymiye Külliyatı (9 Cilt): Vol. V. Tevhid Yayınları.
  38. Jensen, J. S. (2009). Religion as the unintended product of brain functions in the ‘standard cognitive science of religion model’: On Pascal Boyer, Religion explained (2001) and Ilkka Pyysiäinen, How religion works (2003). In M. Stausberg (Ed.), Contemporary Theories of Religion (pp. 139–165). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203875926-14
  39. Kelemen, D. (2004). Are Children “Intuitive Theists”?: Reasoning About Purpose and Design in Nature. Psychological Science, 15(5), 295–301. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00672.x
  40. Kuhn, T. S. (1996). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (3rd edition). University of Chicago Press.
  41. Lawson, E. T., & McCauley, R. N. (1993). Rethinking Religion: Connecting Cognition and Culture. Cambridge University Press.
  42. McCauley, R. N. (2013). Why Religion is Natural and Science is Not (1st edition). Oxford University Press.
  43. Moser, P. K. (Ed.). (2002). Introduction. In The Oxford Handbook of Epistemology (p. 0). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195301700.001.0001.002.004
  44. Murray, M. J., & Goldberg, A. (2009). Evolutionary Accounts of Religion: Explaining and Explaining Away. In J. Schloss & M. Murray (Eds.), The Believing Primate: Scientific, Philosophical, and Theological Reflections on the Origin of Religion (p. 0). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199557028.003.0010
  45. Okumuşlar, M. (2002). Fıtrattan Dine. Yediveren Kitap.
  46. Pals, D. L. (2006). Eight Theories of Religion. Oxford University Press.
  47. Plantinga, A. (1981). Is Belief in God Properly Basic? Noûs, 15(1), 41–51. https://doi.org/10.2307/2215239
  48. Plantinga, A. (2000). Warranted Christian Belief (1st edition). Oxford University Press.
  49. Plato. (1999). Great Dialogues of Plato (E. H. Warmington & P. G. Rouse, Eds.; W. H. D. Rouse, Trans.; 1st edition). Signet Classics.
  50. Popper, K. R. (1998). Bilimsel Araştırmanın Mantığı: Kazım Taşkent Klasik Yapıtlar Dizisi (İ. Aka, Trans.).
  51. Popper, K. R. (2013). The Open Society and Its Enemies: New One-Volume Edition (New edition). Princeton University Press.
  52. Reid, T. (1981). Thomas Reid’s Lectures on natural theology (1780) (E. H. Duncan, Ed.). University Press of America. http://catalog.hathitrust.org/api/volumes/oclc/6943197.html
  53. Reid, T. (2008). No. 6 of Essays on the Intellectual Powers of Man. https://www.earlymoderntexts.com/assets/pdfs/reid1785essay6_2.pdf
  54. Samet, J. (2008). The Historical Controversies Surrounding Innateness. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2019/entries/innateness-history/
  55. Smedt, J. D., & Cruz, H. D. (2011). The Cognitive Appeal of the Cosmological Argument. Plantijnstraat 2, P o Box 9000, 2300 Pa Leiden, Netherlands.
  56. Visala, A. (2011). Naturalism, Theism and the Cognitive Study of Religion: Religion Explained? Ashgate Publishing Company.
Share
Back to top
Beytulhikme An International Journal of Philosophy, Print ISSN: 1303-8303, Published by AccScience Publishing
We use cookies on our website to ensure you get the best experience.
Read more about our cookies here
Accept