Journal of Religion and Health

, Volume 57, Issue 3, pp 836–848 | Cite as

Perspective of Islamic Self: Rethinking Ibn al-Qayyim’s Three-Heart Model from the Scope of Dynamical Social Psychology

Psychological Exploration
  • 82 Downloads

Abstract

The present article proposes the perspective of Islamic self (PIS), which is guided by three core principles. First, the Islamic self is shaped by the God’s predicament: The life test. Second, the structure of the self and its spiritual virtues represent means to succeed the life test. Third, the complex dynamics of the self can be mathematically formalized into a parsimonious framework. Specifically, the PIS considers the self as a dynamical system characterized by the emergence of self-organized stable and unstable patterns taking the form of positive (“illuminating heart”) or negative (“darkened heart”) dynamics.

Keywords

Psychology Spirituality Ego Complexity Change 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors report no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

References

  1. Abu-Raiya, H. (2012). Toward a systematic Qura’nic theory of personality. Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 15(3), 217–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abu-Raiya, H. (2014). Western psychology and Muslim psychology in dialogue: Comparisons between a Qura’nic theory of personality and Freud’s and Jung’s ideas. Journal of Religion and Health, 53, 326–338. doi: 10.1007/s10943-012-9630-9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Atkinson, J. W. (1957). Motivational determinants of risk-taking behavior. Psychological Review, 64, 359–372. doi: 10.1037/h0043445.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (2002). Control processes and self-organization as complementary principles underlying behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 6, 304–315. doi: 10.1207/S15327957PSPR0604_05.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cooley, C. H. (1964). Human nature and the social order. New York: Schocken Books.Google Scholar
  6. Cushman, P. (1990). Why the self is empty. Toward a historically situated psychology. American Psychologist, 45(5), 599–611.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Cushman, P. (2002). How psychology erodes personhood. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 22(2), 103–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Self-determination theory: A macrotheory of human motivation, development, and health. Canadian Psychology, 49(3), 182–185. doi: 10.1037/a0012801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Desilver, D. (2013). World’s Muslim population more widespread than you might think. PewResearchCenter. http://pewrsr.ch/116QRmk.
  10. Freud, S. (1961). Ego and the id. In J. Strachey (Ed.), Standard edition of the complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. 19). London: Hogarth. (Original work published 1923).Google Scholar
  11. Gernigon, C., Vallacher, R. R., Nowak, A., & Conroy, D. E. (2015). Rethinking approach and avoidance in achievement contexts: The perspective of dynamical systems. Review of General Psychology, 19(4), 443–457. doi: 10.1037/gpr0000055.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Haque, A. (2004). Psychology from Islamic perspective: Contributions of early Muslim scholars and challenges to contemporary Muslim psychologists. Journal of Religion and Health, 43, 357–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hoshmand, L. T., & Ho, D. Y. E. (1995). Moral dimensions of selfhood: Chinese traditions and cultural change. World Psychology, 1, 47–69.Google Scholar
  14. Hwang, K.-K. (2011). The Mandala model of self. Psychological Studies, 56, 329–334. doi: 10.1007/s12646-011-0110-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hwang, K.-K. (2015a). Cultural system vs. pan-cultural dimensions: Philosophical reflection on approaches for indigenous psychology. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 45, 1–25. doi: 10.1111/jtsb.12051.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hwang, K.-K. (2015b). Culture-inclusive theories of self and social interaction: The approach of multiple philosophical paradigms. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 45, 40–63. doi: 10.1111/jtsb.12050.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jung, C. G. (1961). Memories, dreams, reflections. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
  18. Keshavarzi, H., & Haque, A. (2013). Outlining a psychotherapy model for enhancing Muslim mental health within an Islamic context. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 23(3), 230–249. doi: 10.1080/10508619.2012.712000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (2010). Cultures and selves: A cycle of mutual constitution. Psychological Science, 5(4), 420–430. doi: 10.1177/1745691610375557.Google Scholar
  20. Maslow, A. H. (1970). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  21. Mohamed, Y. (1998). Human nature in Islam. Kuala Lumpur: A.S. Noordeen.Google Scholar
  22. Nasr, S. H. (2006). Islamic philosophy from its origin to the present. New York: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  23. Nowak, A. (2004). Dynamical minimalism: Why less is more in psychology. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8, 183–192. doi: 10.1207/s15327957pspr0802_12.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Plante, T. G., & Boccaccini, M. T. (1997). The Santa Clara strength of religious faith questionnaire. Pastoral Psychology, 45(5), 375–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Smither, R., & Khorsandi, A. (2009). The implicit personality theory of Islam. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 1, 81–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Tuller, B., Case, P., Ding, M., & Kelso, J. A. S. (1994). The nonlinear dynamics of speech categorization. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20, 3–16. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.20.1.3.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Utz, A. (2011). Psychology from the Islamic perspective. Riyadh: International Islamic Publishing House (IIPH).Google Scholar
  28. Vallacher, R. R., Coleman, P. T., Nowak, A., & Bui-Wrzosinska, L. (2010). Rethinking intractable conflict: The perspective of dynamical systems. American Psychology, 65, 262–278. doi: 10.1037/a0019290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Vallacher, R. R., & Nowak, A. (1997). The emergence of dynamical social psychology. Psychological Inquiry, 8, 73–99. doi: 10.1207/s15327965pli0802_1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Van Rooij, I. V., Bongers, R. M., & Haselager, F. G. (2002). A non-representational approach to imagined action. Cognitive Science, 26, 345–375. doi: 10.1207/s15516709cog2603_7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Van Rooij, M. M. J. W., Favela, L. H., Malone, M., & Richardson, M. J. (2013). Modeling the dynamics of risky choice. Ecological Psychology, 25, 293–303. doi: 10.1080/10407413.2013.810502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Yazdi, M. H. (1992). The principles of epistemology in Islamic philosophy: Knowledge by presence. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College of Arts and SciencesQatar UniversityDohaQatar

Personalised recommendations