Islamic psychology: Emergence and current challenges

Introduction

When psychology was evolving as a scientific discipline, most of the subjects of study in the field primarily included white males, the middle-class, and college-going students. Findings obtained from these particular groups were generalized universally while ignoring the gender, ethnicity, cultural, and other differences that were acutely worthy of consideration. One reason could be that the researchers assumed the acquired knowledge to be objective, scientific, and uninfluenced by such factors. Such assumptions of scientific or mainstream psychology were challenged by several Western psychologists, which ultimately led them to develop alternative views. These alternative views, which we now know as critical psychology, social constructivist approach, transpersonal psychology, indigenous psychology, and the like, may be referred to as minority views. They differ from mainstream psychology in terms of ontology, epistemology, and methodology. Four main limitations of mainstream psychology can be delineated. First, most of the theories of mainstream psychology had emanated from the values and cultural context of Western Europe and North American countries, making the universal application questionable (Smith et al., 2013). Second, it had ignored contextual factors, meaning-making, and perspective of the subjects in understanding reality (Boudry & Buekens, 2011). Third, it had ignored the voices of the minority and marginalized groups such as women, people from low socio-economic backgrounds, the disadvantaged, and the oppressed groups (Crawford & Unger, 2000; Mertens, 2009). Fourth, the positivist approach of science used by mainstream psychology is inherently materialistic; therefore, psychologists did not discuss the spiritual nature of human beings (Wulff, 1997). Because of these limitations, there is an upsurge of different alternative approaches in the field. Some of these perspectives, such as cross-cultural psychology, cultural psychology, and indigenous psychology, are trying to make psychology a culturally relevant and appropriate area of scientific interest. On one hand, the constructive and interpretive approaches are trying to incorporate contextual factors and perspectives of the subjects in psychological investigations. On the other hand, feminist and Marxist theories are trying to give voice to marginalized groups. Still, other perspectives such as transpersonal psychology and various religion-based approaches are trying to incorporate spiritual nature and supernatural aspects of human beings.

Islamic psychology is one of the religion-based perspectives that is sincerely attempting to incorporate spiritual factors and underscore the significance of religion in the lives of people. Because of the lack of a clear definition of Islamic psychology, some Muslim psychologists prefer to use the term Islam and psychology instead of Islamic psychology. Kaplick and Skinner (2017) differentiated between Islamic psychology (referring to the psychology developed from Islamic sources, i.e. Islam’s version of psychology); and Islam and psychology (referring to the broader movement that relates Islam to psychology in general).

To understand human nature, Islamic psychology must take, as a starting point, belief in the existence of Allah, the spiritual nature of humans, and the teachings and guidance of Islamic sources (e.g. Quran, Hadith, and the writings of medieval Muslim thinkers). The Islamic psychology approach is different from, but can also be thought of as a subset of, the broader Psychology of Islam. The Psychology of Islam typically corresponds to the psychology of religion and is grounded in the Western paradigm. This broader Psychology of Islam often seeks to evaluate and critique Western psychological knowledge in the light of Islamic understanding (the “filter” approach) or compares Western psychological concepts with their assumed equivalents in Islamic sources (the “comparison” approach) (Kaplick & Skinner, 2017).

As a subset of the Psychology of Islam, Islamic psychology is in its nascent stage and differs in that it emphasizes the importance of Islamic sources for understanding the human condition. As discussed ahead, Western research and theory may be useful in Islamic psychology. However, Western psychology is limited because it does not also include consideration of the many spiritual influences on a person’s thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. The development of Islamic psychology as an accepted paradigm would allow Muslim psychologists to include wisdom derived from Islamic sources in their research and theorizing and, ultimately, would also provide novel insights and methodologies for the study of religion and human behavior in general.

The standpoint of Islamic psychology has garnered the attention of some of the Western psychologists (Al-Karam, 2018; Kaplick & Skinner, 2017; Rothman & Coyle, 2018). Seemingly, religion influences human behavior substantially and the majority of people all over the world, across diverse countries, ethnicities, and cultures, do believe in God or a higher power. The exception to this is some countries in Western Europe, Russia, and China, where the percentage of people believing in God is not as high (Keysar & Navarro-Rivera, 2017; Spilka et al., 2003).

The traditional view of psychologists about religion

In the early part of the twentieth century, there were two distinct groups of psychologists, who held different opinions about religion. The first group harbored a relatively negative view of religion and equated it with poor mental health. Freud, Skinner, and Ellis were the leading supporters of that view. Subsequently, Ellis revised his attitude toward religion (Haque, 2001), but Freud and Skinner did not. On the other hand, the second group held a regardful attitude toward the role of religion in physical and mental well-being. James, Jung, Allport, Erickson, and many others belonged to this group. Freud believed that those who were religious had an underlying abnormality; on the other hand, Jung believed that those who were unable to find a religious outlook in the second part of their lives (by the age of 35 years and above) were more likely to develop psychological problems (Haque, 2001). Interestingly, Allport described two types of religious orientations: intrinsic and extrinsic. People with an intrinsic orientation toward religion are described as the individuals who are committed to their religious beliefs and the effect of religion is evident in every aspect of their lives. Whereas extrinsic religiosity is limited to a more utilitarian form of religion to gain different privileges. Usually, the intrinsic orientation is associated with a healthier personality and better mental health (Allport, 1966; Allport & Ross, 1967).

Despite many psychologists having a positive view about religion, mainstream psychology remained antagonistic toward religion until recently. A 1984 survey of religious preferences of academicians in the United States found psychologists to be among the least religious, with as many as 50% responding that they had no current choice of religion, compared with only about 10% of the general population (“Politics,” 1991). It was further noted that clinical psychologists were the least religious of the major psychotherapy providing groups. Merely 33% of this group described religious faith as having the most important influence in their lives, as compared with 72% of the general population (Bergin & Jensen, 1990).

It is to be noted that there might be various reasons for traditional psychologists to remain anti-religion or harbor non-religious beliefs. The most noteworthy reason appears to be the infamous clash between science and church in Europe during the Renaissance period. During that period, many people considered the church an obstacle in the way of scientific advancement. The work of scientists was banned and burned by labeling it contrary to Christian teaching. As a consequence of this conflict, all religions became associated with being backward, superstitious, and regressive (Qutub, 1999). However, some scholars argued that the relationship between science and religion was not singular, that is, not always of conflict (see, e.g. Barbour, 1998, 1990; Brooke, 1991). As pointed out by Wulff (1997), another reason could be psychology’s dominant philosophy of positivism. Perhaps positivism attracted those persons who had rejected religion in the first place and repelled those for whom religion was important. Third, according to Thomas Szasz (2015), the negative viewpoint of religion held by psychologists could be a direct influence of Freud’s notion of religion. Sigmund Freud was one of the architects of modern materialist thought (Qutub, 1999); thus, he had an enormous influence on the mind of Western people.

Researchers have suggested that the sheer denial of spirituality has undesirable consequences. For example, Baumesiter (1991) believes that science is successful in many areas but it seems inefficient when it comes to providing a sense of meaning, purpose, and values that are important for dealing with stressful life events. Similarly, Schumaker (2001) stressed that religiosity and spirituality are essential for human mental health, something that secularism and materialism of modern society are not providing. He further said that the declining meaning, purpose, values, and spirituality are inimical to our nature and are causing mental health problems.

Victor Frankl’s experience in the concentration camp during the Nazi period also underscored the importance of the purpose or meaning of life in dealing with the trauma. He could manage to survive and led a healthy life, despite the trauma he was subjected to and this appears to be mainly because of his sense of purpose in life (Frankl, 1946). The meaning of life is usually rendered by religion, which, therefore, makes it very important for human existence.

Current situation

The situation has changed now. Because of the accumulated evidence that religion/spirituality improves physical and mental health (Koenig, 2001, 2012), many psychologists now view spirituality and religion in a positive light. Given the importance of religion/spirituality, American Psychological Association (APA) formed division 36 as the “Psychologists Interested in Religious Issues” (PIRI), in 1976 which was named “Psychology of religion” in 1993 (see Reuder, 1999). In addition, in most of the introductory books, journals, and conferences of psychology, we now find meaningful discussions on religion/spirituality, which was not common 40 years ago. But this mainstream psychology perspective does not acknowledge the spiritual nature of human beings and their connection to God, thus does not accept the influence of God on the thoughts and behavior of human beings. Rather, it is based only on naturalistic explanations. There are many ways to define and understand religion and spirituality. To put it briefly, some argue that religion and spirituality are different, while others attempt to tie the two together instead of separating their core meanings (Hill et al., 2000; Hill & Pargament, 2003). There is a growing realization that religion/spirituality has a beneficial role to play in the physical and mental health of human beings. Although there are a handful of studies that suggest a negative relationship (Exline et al., 2000; Krause & Wulff, 2004; Schieman et al., 2013), the majority of studies report a substantially advantageous function of religion in improving physical and mental health (Koenig et al., 2001, 2012; Oman, 2018). Critics point out two main limitations of the studies which suggest a positive relationship between religion and health. First, most of these studies had poor conceptualizations and methodology; therefore, the cause and effect relationship is rendered doubtful in these studies. Second, these studies did not include atheists as a comparison control group (Levin, 2010). A lot of many researchers, who favor the role of religion in the maintenance of mental/physical health, have studied the pathways and the various mechanisms (moderating and mediating factors) that lead to the positive relationship between religion and physical and psychological health (Baumgardner & Crothers, 2009; Levin, 2010).

Beginning of Islamic psychology movement

During the late 1970s, there was a growing awareness among Muslim psychologists (Badri, 1979; Najati, 1979) regarding the importance of understanding and developing psychology from an Islamic viewpoint. Since then, the publications and debates have evolved in the form of a movement (Badri, 2016). This movement is known as Islamic psychology or Islamic perspective in psychology or Islam and psychology, which seeks to make psychology spiritually relevant. Several associations/platforms have come up for critical dialogue and exchange of ideas related to the development of this perspective in different parts of the world. For example, Indian Council on Islamic Perspective in Psychology (ICIPP) was established in 2016 in India. Three seminars (two international) and several workshops have been organized in India under the ICIPP banner to debate and exchange ideas about this evolving field. Moreover, the optional papers of Islamic psychology are included in the syllabi of Psychology recommended for Indian universities and colleges as a model syllabi by the University Grants Commission (UGC) of India. Besides, there is an International Association of Islamic Psychology which was founded in 2017 also devoted to the same purpose. This association has members from the United Kingdom, Germany, the United States, South Africa, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, Pakistan, Malaysia, and other countries.

In an article titled “Looking East,” American Psychological Association (APA) President Dr. Susan McDaniel (2016) emphasized that “Western psychology can learn a lot from Eastern psychologies that often have a religious or spiritual underpinning.” The Islamic perspective to psychology appears to be performing that role (Kaplick & Skinner, 2017).

Islamic perspective to psychology is based on the knowledge of Islam. The word Islam is derived from the Arabic word “salam” a root word meaning peace; it is also derived from a root word “silim” meaning peace acquired by submitting one’s will to Allah, and the one who submits or surrenders to Allah is referred to as Muslim (“Islam,” n.d.; “Peace in Islamic philosophy,” n.d.). According to the Islamic perspective, human beings are Allah’s Khalifa (Vicegerent) on earth. They did not appear on the earth accidentally. They have been created by Allah for the fixed period to worship Him (The Quran, 51:56) and to see who is best in conduct (The Quran, 11:7). In Islam worship does not only mean the performance of certain religious rituals but to lead complete life in all spheres according to the Quran and the way (sunnah) of the prophet. So the present life is an examination. Since we have been given free will in this temporary life, we are accountable to Allah for our actions. After death, all human beings will be raised again on the Day of Judgment. Based on the deeds done here, we will be given eternal life either in paradise or in hell. So human beings (particularly believers) not only work for the worldly gains; they also work for the gains in the hereafter, that is, paradise. This is an important motive. To lead a life on the earth human beings have certain material needs that must be fulfilled. But they have been asked to rise from that level and work also for the hereafter (fulfill spiritual needs) because life on the earth is temporary and life in the hereafter is eternal. There are two primary sources of knowledge of Islam, the Quran (revealed knowledge) and the hadith (prophetic tradition).

Kaplick and Skinner (2017) have identified three different trends in this area, namely, the Islamic Filter Approach, the Comparison Approach, and the Islamic Psychology Approach. The Islamic filter approach was started by Badri (1979) with his publication titled “The Dilemma of Muslim Psychologists.” He criticized Muslim psychologists for accepting Western psychological theories uncritically. His main emphasis was to evaluate modern psychology from a critical Islamic viewpoint, but his approach still functions within Western psychology tradition. He did not seek to develop a paradigm of Islamic psychology as an alternative to Western psychology. Fundamentally, his approach tries to discover the universals within it based on Islamic understanding and to distinguish those from culturally influenced theories and potential contradictions to Islamic thought. More importantly, the filter approach considers an empirical method to be entirely compatible with Islamic thinking, by encouraging every individual to observe his or her environment critically and comprehend it (Kaplick & Skinner, 2017).

The second approach, known as the comparison approach, compares Western psychological concepts with their assumed equivalents in Islamic sources. For example, some Muslim psychologists tried to study self, motivation, personality, cognitive-behavior therapy, and so on in the light of Islamic sources. It was the widespread response from the Muslim academicians to the rise of modern Western science, which was also evident across academic disciplines (Bakar, 2012). The comparison approach aimed to find common ground with mainstream psychology. Though such type of work can be insightful at the beginning of conceptual inquiries (Abu-Raiya, 2014), in most cases, these are very simplistic approaches to the subject area and hardly contribute to the theoretical development of Islamic psychology (Kaplick & Skinner, 2017).

The third approach, which is the Islamic psychology approach, was proposed by Skinner (1989). It placed the traditional Islamic thought at the center and suggested that Islamic sources needed to be the basis for developing Islamic psychology. He described two Islamic sources, Qur’anic verses and the prophetic traditions (primary sources), and the works of early Muslim scholars (secondary sources). He incessantly argued for the development of Islamic psychology as an alternative paradigm to psychology.

Although Skinner suggested both primary and secondary Islamic sources to develop Islamic psychology, he is not averse to using only primary Islamic sources (The Qur’an and prophetic tradition) in that endeavor. However, there are only meager efforts in that direction (Abu-Raiya, 2012; Ansari, 2002; Raba, 2010). It may be due to lack of required interdisciplinary knowledge (Haque et al., 2016; Skinner, 1989), while others have suggested that early Muslim scholars had already exerted a great effort to reach this understanding (Keshavarzi & Haque, 2013).

Skinner’s approach is not entirely against Badri’s (1979) initial position, but he argues that by developing Islamic psychology based on Islamic sources, Badri’s viewpoint will be more meaningful. Both Badri’s and Skinner’s perspective criticize Western psychological, philosophical assumptions, for example, the cultural niche that has fostered the development of its theories (Kaplick & Skinner, 2017).

If we develop an Islamic psychology paradigm based on Islamic sources then instead of using hypothetical psychological concepts such as ego. We will use the terminology of Islamic sources such as Qalb, Fuad, Nafs, Ruh, and so on to explain human thoughts and behavior. Moreover, we have to take into account the influence of Allah on the thoughts and behavior of human beings. Although we have a separate existence from Allah, still we are connected to Him in some way probably through our soul. The Quran which is the sacred book of Muslims expresses that Allah is close to human beings from their jugular vein (The Quran, 50:16). This clearly shows that human nature and behavior cannot be understood fully without our connection with Allah. In psychology, this connection with God and His influence on the thoughts and behavior of human beings have not been accepted. No theory of psychology recognizes it and no psychological method can study it. The main reason seems to be that theories of mainstream psychology view human beings as a physical entity only; the spiritual nature of human beings and their connection to God have been completely ignored. Therefore, all psychological theories are incomplete, and they do not explain human behaviors completely. There is a need to accept the above-mentioned aspects and present a complete view of human nature and behavior which can explain it in its entirety.

Challenges

Despite the work of more than 40 years, there is an apparent lack of progress in this area, as far as the development of the paradigm is concerned. One of the most apparent reasons for this is that most of the researchers, who are working in this area, have focused either solely on the work of medieval Muslim thinkers or tried to use what Kaplick and Skinner (2017) call a comparison approach. Most of these authors have not utilized primary sources to derive psychological theories or principles. If we want to develop Islamic psychology as an alternative paradigm to Western psychology, we must also use primary sources, that is, The Quran and the Hadith (Prophetic tradition). The work of medieval Muslim thinkers is important and must be utilized in developing Islamic psychology, but we must not always entirely focus on that and accept it uncritically. One of the reasons why we should not solely rely on the work of medieval Muslim thinkers is that they lived in a different time and a different socio-cultural reality, and as a result, they might have understood some of the concepts differently. Second, debate, and discussion on the development of the paradigm of the discipline, including ontological, epistemological, and methodological issues, as we understand currently, was not evident in the work of medieval Muslim thinkers as presented by the contemporary writers in the area of Islamic psychology. Third, the writings of some medieval Muslim scholars such as Al-Tabari, Al-Farabi, and Ibn Rushd were influenced by Greek philosophers (Al-Khalili, 2011; Awaad et al., 2019; Virk, 2017). Consequently, some of their ideas might not be based on Islam.

Developing and fully establishing a paradigm of Islamic psychology is certainly an effortful enterprise, which is why it will take a considerable amount of time. Moreover, we feel that those who possess a comprehensive understanding of the following will be able to develop this paradigm and become recognized authorities of the field:

We do not suggest that any level/type of formal Islamic education is compulsory for knowing the Quran and Hadith. Although having that up to a certain level will be advantageous. Without formal Islamic education, some people develop an acceptable level of understanding of Islam by regularly reading the Quran and Hadith. Those who have attained that level can comfortably work in the area of Islamic psychology. Those who do not have sufficient Islamic knowledge can also work in this area as they can collaborate with those who have the knowledge and understanding of Islam. It is pertinent to mention that some verses of the Quran are interpreted differently partly due to its allegorical nature (The Quran, 3:7) and partly depending on the sects (Sunni vs Shia) and different subsects of both the sects. Therefore, this fact should be taken into consideration while developing Islamic psychology.

One of the most challenging tasks is to be able to find someone who would fulfill the conditions mentioned above. Based on these conditions, we anticipate that gradually Islamic psychology will become multidisciplinary. Psychologists have written a lot on the work of medieval Muslim thinkers, the comparison approach, and some concepts based on primary Islamic sources. The concern is that the Muslim psychologists have not discussed the research paradigms of Western social and behavioral sciences. Moreover, they have not delineated the ontological, epistemological, and methodological issues of their work. To our knowledge, there has been no attempt to develop the Islamic psychology viewpoint, discussing the debates of the research paradigm in Western social and behavioral sciences.

Research paradigms in Western social and behavioral sciences

Possessing a comprehensive knowledge of issues discussed by Western social and behavioral scientists will be advantageous in developing Islamic psychology. Western researchers have made remarkable contributions in research and developed various research perspectives or paradigms. A paradigm includes some philosophical assumptions such as ontology, epistemology, and axiology. Ontology deals with the nature of reality. It relates to whether there are only one reality or multiple, socially constructed realities (Patton, 2002). Epistemology is a way of knowing; it deals with how do we know what we know. Axiology is about ethics and value systems (Patton, 2002). So, using a particular paradigm, we are expected to use a specific methodology.

Originally, Kuhn (1962) conceptualized a paradigm as “a way to summarize researchers’ beliefs about their efforts to create knowledge,” an understanding that has witnessed a considerable changed (Morgan, 2007). Freshwater and Cahill (2013) have argued in the favor of conceptualizing paradigms as “constructed entities” that are likely to be changed (Morgan, 2007). It is interesting to note that some researchers consider the concept of a paradigm as not useful (Biesta, 2010), and others suggest the use of the concept of “mental models” (Greene & Hall, 2010) or “stances” (Maxwell & Mittapalli, 2010).

There is no consensus among the researchers about the main research paradigms in social sciences (Bryman, 2006; Greene & Hall, 2010; Mertens, 2012). Consequently, we find different categorizations of the research paradigm by researchers. To name a few, Chilisa (2011) suggested positivist/post-positivist, interpretivist/constructivist, transformative, and postcolonial/indigenous paradigms. The perspectives delineated by Shannon-Baker (2015) are pragmatism, transformative emancipation, dialectics, and critical realism.

A brief discussion of the research paradigms useful in the development of Islamic psychology is as follows: