Post-Critical Beliefs and Religious Reflection: Religious Openness Hypothesis in Iranian University and Islamic Seminary Students

IF 1.4 0 RELIGION
N. Ghorbani, P. Watson, Z. Sarmast, Z. Chen
{"title":"Post-Critical Beliefs and Religious Reflection: Religious Openness Hypothesis in Iranian University and Islamic Seminary Students","authors":"N. Ghorbani, P. Watson, Z. Sarmast, Z. Chen","doi":"10.1163/15709256-12341367","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Negative relationships between Post-Critical Beliefs in Iran imply that Muslim perspectives are closed-minded, but positive correlations between Religious Reflection factors point instead toward a Muslim open-mindedness. The hypothesis of this study was that this contrast reveals the Post-Critical Belief of Symbolism to be a questionable index of Muslim open-mindedness. Iranian university students and Islamic seminarians ( N = 296) responded to Post-Critical Beliefs, Religious Reflection, Religious Orientation, Quest, Rumination-Reflection, and Satisfaction with Life measures. The “openness” of Symbolism correlated negatively with the “openness” of Intellect Oriented Reflection. Other relationships broadly documented Muslim potentials for openness. Evidence of open-mindedness also appeared in contrasts between university students and Islamic seminarians. These results argued against Symbolism as a culturally sensitive measure of Muslim open-mindedness and supported the claim of the Religious Openness Hypothesis that traditional religions have at least some potentials for openness that can be obscured by contextual influences.","PeriodicalId":42786,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Empirical Theology","volume":"31 1","pages":"49-70"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2018-04-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/15709256-12341367","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Empirical Theology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15709256-12341367","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

Negative relationships between Post-Critical Beliefs in Iran imply that Muslim perspectives are closed-minded, but positive correlations between Religious Reflection factors point instead toward a Muslim open-mindedness. The hypothesis of this study was that this contrast reveals the Post-Critical Belief of Symbolism to be a questionable index of Muslim open-mindedness. Iranian university students and Islamic seminarians ( N = 296) responded to Post-Critical Beliefs, Religious Reflection, Religious Orientation, Quest, Rumination-Reflection, and Satisfaction with Life measures. The “openness” of Symbolism correlated negatively with the “openness” of Intellect Oriented Reflection. Other relationships broadly documented Muslim potentials for openness. Evidence of open-mindedness also appeared in contrasts between university students and Islamic seminarians. These results argued against Symbolism as a culturally sensitive measure of Muslim open-mindedness and supported the claim of the Religious Openness Hypothesis that traditional religions have at least some potentials for openness that can be obscured by contextual influences.
后批判信仰与宗教反思:伊朗大学与伊斯兰神学院学生的宗教开放假说
伊朗后批判信仰之间的负相关关系暗示穆斯林的观点是封闭的,但宗教反思因素之间的正相关关系却表明穆斯林的思想是开放的。本研究的假设是,这种对比揭示了后批判的象征主义信仰是穆斯林开放思想的一个值得怀疑的指标。伊朗大学生和伊斯兰神学院学生(N = 296)对后批判信仰、宗教反思、宗教取向、探索、反刍反思和对生活的满意度有回应。象征主义的“开放性”与智性反思的“开放性”呈负相关。其他关系广泛地记录了穆斯林开放的潜力。思想开放的证据也出现在大学生和伊斯兰神学院学生之间的对比中。这些结果反对象征主义作为穆斯林开放思想的文化敏感指标,并支持宗教开放假说的主张,即传统宗教至少有一些开放的潜力,但可能被背景影响所掩盖。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
25.00%
发文量
7
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信