Religious philosophy: Difference between revisions
imported>OAbot m Open access bot: url-access=subscription updated in citation with #oabot. |
imported>AnomieBOT Rescuing orphaned refs (":22" from rev 1330377705; ":25" from rev 1330377705; ":3" from rev 1330377705; ":17" from rev 1330377705; ":24" from rev 1330377705; ":23" from rev 1330377705; ":15" from rev 1330377705; ":18" from rev 1330377705; ":16" from rev 1330377705) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
{{Distinguish|Philosophy of religion|Theology}} | {{Distinguish|Philosophy of religion|Theology}} | ||
{{Cleanup reorganize|date=September 2022}} | {{Cleanup reorganize|date=September 2022}} | ||
{{Philosophy sidebar}} | {{Philosophy sidebar}} | ||
{{Religion by Country}} | {{Religion by Country}} | ||
| Line 10: | Line 9: | ||
== Philosophical commonalities == | == Philosophical commonalities == | ||
Religious faith and philosophical reflection are closely interconnected. Religious traditions influence the philosophical thinking and beliefs of adherents within a given religion.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=De Cruz |first=Helen |date=2014 |title=Cognitive Science of Religion and the Study of Theological Concepts |url=http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11245-013-9168-9 |journal=Topoi |language=en |volume=33 |issue=2 |pages=487–497 |doi=10.1007/s11245-013-9168-9 |s2cid=144668135 |issn=0167-7411 |access-date=2020-11-02 |archive-date=2023-07-17 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230717154738/https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11245-013-9168-9 |url-status=live |url-access=subscription}}</ref> | |||
Many philosophical commonalities among religions have emerged from shared historical foundations. For example, the [[Abrahamic religions]]—including [[Judaism]], [[Christianity]], [[Islam]], [[Baháʼí Faith]], [[Yazidis|Yazidism]], [[Druze]], [[Samaritans|Samaritanism]], and [[Rastafari]]—share a number of philosophical themes, although these concepts are expressed differently in their respective [[religious text]]s.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Vitkovic |first=Scott |date=2018 |title=The Similarities and Differences Between Abrahamic Religions |journal=IJASOS – International e-Journal of Advances in Social Sciences |volume=4 |issue=11 |page=456 |doi=10.18769/ijasos.455673 |issn=2411-183X |doi-access=free}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Kunst |first1=Jonas R. |last2=Thomsen |first2=Lotte |date=2015-10-02 |title=Prodigal Sons: Dual Abrahamic Categorization Mediates the Detrimental Effects of Religious Fundamentalism on Christian–Muslim Relations |url=http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10508619.2014.937965 |journal=The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion |language=en |volume=25 |issue=4 |pages=293–306 |doi=10.1080/10508619.2014.937965 |issn=1050-8619 |hdl=10852/43723 |s2cid=53625066 |hdl-access=free |access-date=2020-11-02 |archive-date=2020-07-28 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200728143805/https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10508619.2014.937965 |url-status=live}}</ref> | |||
In addition, some philosophical concepts and forms of reasoning found in religious teachings appear to have developed independently while nevertheless exhibiting notable similarities and analogous ideas.<ref name=":6">{{Cite journal |last=De Cruz |first=Helen |date=2014 |title=Cognitive Science of Religion and the Study of Theological Concepts |url=http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11245-013-9168-9 |journal=Topoi |language=en |volume=33 |issue=2 |page=491 |doi=10.1007/s11245-013-9168-9 |s2cid=144668135 |issn=0167-7411 |access-date=2020-11-02 |archive-date=2023-07-17 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230717154738/https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11245-013-9168-9 |url-status=live |url-access=subscription}}</ref> For instance, arguments concerning the existence of an omniscient [[god]] or multiple gods appear in several religious traditions, including Christianity, Islam, and Hinduism. Similarly, the philosophical concept of [[free will]] is present in both [[Monotheism|monotheistic]] and [[Polytheism|polytheistic]] religions.<ref name=":6" /> | |||
== Types == | == Types == | ||
=== Intuitive religious philosophy === | === Intuitive religious philosophy === | ||
Many religious concepts are | Many religious concepts are described as "cross-culturally ubiquitous"<ref name=":5" /> because they are considered "cognitively natural."<ref>{{Cite book |last=McCauley, Robert N. |title=Why Religion Is Natural and Science Is Not |date=November 2013 |publisher=[[Oxford University Press]] |isbn=978-0-19-934154-2 |location=Oxford, Oxfordshire |oclc=869781247}}</ref><ref name=":5" /> These concepts are regarded as intuitive in that they tend to arise with little explicit direction, instruction, or formal teaching during early stages of cognitive development<ref name=":7">{{Cite journal |last=De Cruz |first=Helen |date=2014 |title=Cognitive Science of Religion and the Study of Theological Concepts |url=http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11245-013-9168-9 |journal=Topoi |language=en |volume=33 |issue=2 |page=488 |doi=10.1007/s11245-013-9168-9 |s2cid=144668135 |issn=0167-7411 |url-access=subscription}}</ref> and do not necessarily originate from specific cultural instruction.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Sperber |first=Dan |date=2008-06-28 |title=Intuitive and Reflective Beliefs |url=http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/j.1468-0017.1997.tb00062.x |journal=Mind & Language |language=en |volume=12 |issue=1 |pages=67–83 |doi=10.1111/j.1468-0017.1997.tb00062.x |access-date=2020-11-02 |archive-date=2023-07-17 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230717154804/https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1468-0017.1997.tb00062.x |url-status=live |url-access=subscription}}</ref> Examples of such religious concepts include beliefs concerning the afterlife, souls, [[supernatural]] agents, and miraculous events.<ref name=":5" /> | ||
=== Reflective religious philosophy === | === Reflective religious philosophy === | ||
Some religious concepts require deliberate | Some religious concepts require deliberate instruction to ensure their transmission within a community.<ref name=":7" /> These beliefs are categorized as reflective and are often encoded in linguistic or doctrinal forms that facilitate communication and preservation. Reflective religious philosophies are understood to play a significant role in the maintenance and continuity of cultural and religious traditions.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Sperber |first=Dan |date=2008-06-28 |title=Intuitive and Reflective Beliefs |url=http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/j.1468-0017.1997.tb00062.x |journal=Mind & Language |language=en |volume=12 |issue=1 |page=83 |doi=10.1111/j.1468-0017.1997.tb00062.x |access-date=2020-11-02 |archive-date=2023-07-17 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230717154804/https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1468-0017.1997.tb00062.x |url-status=live |url-access=subscription}}</ref> Examples of reflective religious philosophies include concepts such as [[karma]], divine immanent justice or providence, as well as theological doctrines such as the [[Trinity]] in Christianity and [[Brahman]] in Hinduism.<ref name=":7" /> | ||
== God == | == God == | ||
=== Ontological arguments === | Religious philosophy is largely concerned with conceptions of [[God]], gods, or the divine.<ref name=":0" /> | ||
=== Ontological arguments === | |||
{{Main|Ontological argument}} | {{Main|Ontological argument}} | ||
In the 11th century | Ontological arguments are a class of philosophical arguments that rely on reason alone to conclude that God exists.<ref name=":8">{{Cite web |last=Oppy |first=Graham |date=1996-02-08 |title=Ontological Arguments |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2020/entries/ontological-arguments/ |website=[[Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]] |access-date=2020-11-20 |archive-date=2020-08-24 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200824203105/https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2020/entries/ontological-arguments/ |url-status=live}}</ref> Numerous philosophers have contributed to the development of various ontological arguments. | ||
In the 11th century CE, [[Anselm of Canterbury|Saint Anselm of Canterbury]] (1033–1109) formulated an ontological argument in his work ''[[Proslogion]]''. His reasoning was based on the idea of God as "that than which nothing greater can be conceived."<ref name=":8" /><ref name=":0" /><ref>{{Cite web |last=Williams |first=Thomas |date=2000-05-18 |title=Saint Anselm |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2016/entries/anselm/ |website=[[Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]] |access-date=2020-11-20 |archive-date=2020-10-08 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201008025051/https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2016/entries/anselm/ |url-status=live}}</ref> | |||
[[Thomas Aquinas]] ({{Circa|1225}}–1274) incorporated philosophical reasoning into Christian theology, using philosophy as a means of addressing questions about the existence of God.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Aquinas' Philosophical Theology {{!}} Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy |url=https://iep.utm.edu/aq-ph-th/ |access-date=2020-11-20 |language=en-US |archive-date=2020-11-20 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201120071723/https://iep.utm.edu/aq-ph-th/ |url-status=live}}</ref> In his ''[[Summa Theologica]]'', Aquinas presents five arguments for the existence of God, commonly referred to as the [[Five Ways (Aquinas)|''quinque viae'']] or "Five Ways."<ref>{{Cite web |last1=McInerny |first1=Ralph |last2=O'Callaghan |first2=John |date=1999-07-12 |title=Saint Thomas Aquinas |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2018/entries/aquinas/ |website=[[Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]] |access-date=2020-11-20 |archive-date=2019-05-27 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190527180840/https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2018/entries/aquinas/ |url-status=live}}</ref> | |||
[[File:Frans Hals - Portret van René Descartes.jpg|thumb|Portrait of René Descartes]] | [[File:Frans Hals - Portret van René Descartes.jpg|thumb|Portrait of René Descartes]] | ||
In the 17th century, [[René Descartes]] (1596–1650) proposed ontological arguments similar to those of Anselm. In his ''[[Meditations on First Philosophy|Fifth Meditation]]'', Descartes argues that the idea of a supremely perfect being entails its existence, on the grounds that necessary existence is a defining attribute of such a being.<ref name=":8" /><ref name=":9">{{Cite web |last=Nolan |first=Lawrence |date=2001-06-18 |title=Descartes' Ontological Argument |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2020/entries/descartes-ontological/ |website=[[Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]] |access-date=2020-11-20 |archive-date=2021-07-11 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210711134317/https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2020/entries/descartes-ontological/ |url-status=live}}</ref><ref name=":10">{{Cite journal |last=Abbruzzese |first=John Edward |date=2007 |title=The Structure of Descartes's Ontological Proof |url=http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09608780701255394 |journal=British Journal for the History of Philosophy |language=en |volume=15 |issue=2 |pages=253–282 |doi=10.1080/09608780701255394 |s2cid=145725622 |issn=0960-8788 |access-date=2020-11-20 |archive-date=2023-02-10 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230210022731/https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09608780701255394 |url-status=live |url-access=subscription}}</ref><ref name=":11">{{Cite journal |last=Wee |first=Cecilia |date=2012 |title=Descartes's Ontological Proof of God's Existence |url=http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09608788.2011.650973 |journal=British Journal for the History of Philosophy |language=en |volume=20 |issue=1 |pages=23–40 |doi=10.1080/09608788.2011.650973 |s2cid=170398478 |issn=0960-8788 |access-date=2020-11-20 |archive-date=2023-07-17 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230717160835/https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09608788.2011.650973 |url-status=live |url-access=subscription}}</ref> | |||
Two commonly cited formulations of Descartes' ontological argument are as follows:<ref name=":9" /><ref name=":10" /><ref name=":11" /> | |||
'''Version A''' | |||
* Whatever is clearly and distinctly perceived to be contained in the idea of a thing is true of that thing. | |||
* Necessary existence is clearly and distinctly perceived to be contained in the idea of God. | |||
* Therefore, God exists. | |||
'''Version B''' | |||
=== Concept of God === | * There exists an idea of a supremely perfect being, that is, a being possessing all perfections. | ||
* Necessary existence is a perfection. | |||
* Therefore, a supremely perfect being exists. | |||
In the 18th century, [[Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz|Gottfried Leibniz]] (1646–1716) further developed Descartes' ontological argument by addressing the issue of whether the concept of a supremely perfect being is coherent. Leibniz argued that perfections are mutually compatible and can therefore coexist within a single being, thereby supporting the argument's validity.<ref name=":8" /> | |||
More recent philosophers, including [[Kurt Gödel]], [[Charles Hartshorne]], [[Norman Malcolm]], and [[Alvin Plantinga]], have proposed ontological arguments that elaborate on or modify earlier formulations by thinkers such as Anselm, Descartes, and Leibniz.<ref name=":8" /> For example, [[Kurt Gödel]] (1906–1978) employed modal logic to formalize and expand upon Leibniz's version of Anselm's argument in what is known as [[Gödel's ontological proof|Gödel's ontological proof]].<ref>{{Cite web |last=Kennedy |first=Juliette |date=2020 |title=Kurt Gödel |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2020/entries/goedel/ |website=[[Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]] |editor-last=Zalta |editor-first=Edward N. |edition=Winter 2020 |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |access-date=2020-11-20 |archive-date=2021-12-30 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211230162936/https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2020/entries/goedel/ |url-status=live}}</ref> | |||
=== Concept of God === | |||
{{Main|Conceptions of God}} | {{Main|Conceptions of God}} | ||
An individual's | |||
An individual's conception of God has been shown to influence religious coping styles.<ref name=":12">{{Cite journal |last1=Maynard |first1=Elizabeth |last2=Gorsuch |first2=Richard |last3=Bjorck |first3=Jeff |date=2001 |title=Religious Coping Style, Concept of God, and Personal Religious Variables in Threat, Loss, and Challenge Situations |url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/0021-8294.00038 |journal=Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion |language=en |volume=40 |issue=1 |pages=65–74 |doi=10.1111/0021-8294.00038 |issn=0021-8294 |access-date=2020-11-20 |archive-date=2020-11-27 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201127174345/https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/0021-8294.00038 |url-status=live |url-access=subscription}}</ref> Research has identified several religiously affiliated coping styles: | |||
* '''Self-directing style''': Individuals address problems independently without directly involving God.<ref name=":12" /><ref name=":13">{{Cite journal |last1=Pargament |first1=Kenneth I. |last2=Kennell |first2=Joseph |last3=Hathaway |first3=William |last4=Grevengoed |first4=Nancy |last5=Newman |first5=Jon |last6=Jones |first6=Wendy |date=1988 |title=Religion and the Problem-Solving Process: Three Styles of Coping |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/1387404 |journal=Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion |volume=27 |issue=1 |pages=90 |doi=10.2307/1387404 |jstor=1387404 |access-date=2021-05-22 |archive-date=2016-10-07 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161007233703/https://www.jstor.org/stable/1387404 |url-status=live |url-access=subscription}}</ref> | |||
* '''Deferring style''': Individuals defer responsibility for problem-solving to God.<ref name=":12" /><ref name=":13" /> | |||
* '''Collaborative style''': Individuals and God are viewed as jointly involved in the problem-solving process.<ref name=":12" /><ref name=":13" /> | |||
* '''Surrender style''': Individuals work collaboratively with God while prioritizing divine guidance over personal control.<ref name=":12" /><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Wong-Mcdonald |first1=Ana |last2=Gorsuch |first2=Richard L. |date=2000 |title=Surrender to God: An Additional Coping Style? |url=http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/009164710002800207 |journal=Journal of Psychology and Theology |language=en |volume=28 |issue=2 |pages=149–161 |doi=10.1177/009164710002800207 |s2cid=149374402 |issn=0091-6471 |access-date=2020-11-20 |archive-date=2020-12-05 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201205184238/https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/009164710002800207 |url-status=live |url-access=subscription}}</ref> | |||
== Bioethics == | == Bioethics == | ||
=== Medical care === | |||
An individual's religious philosophy | === Medical care === | ||
{{See also|Bioethics#Medical ethics}} | |||
An individual's religious philosophy can play a significant role in medical care and healthcare decision-making, and consideration of these beliefs may contribute to improved quality of care.<ref name=":1" /> In particular, within [[palliative care]], awareness of diverse religious and philosophical frameworks can assist healthcare providers in addressing patients' spiritual needs appropriately.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Inbadas |first=Hamilton |date=2018-10-02 |title=Indian philosophical foundations of spirituality at the end of life |journal=Mortality |language=en |volume=23 |issue=4 |page=321 |doi=10.1080/13576275.2017.1351936 |issn=1357-6275 |pmc=6157526 |pmid=30294243}}</ref> Religious philosophy is also a relevant consideration in [[Psychotherapy|psychotherapeutic]] approaches to [[Mental disorder|psychiatric disorders]].<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Agorastos |first1=Agorastos |last2=Huber |first2=Christian G. |last3=Demiralay |first3=Cueneyt |date=2014 |title=Influence of religious aspects and personal beliefs on psychological behavior: focus on anxiety disorders |journal=Psychology Research and Behavior Management |volume=7 |language=en |page=98 |doi=10.2147/PRBM.S43666 |issn=1179-1578 |pmc=3956626 |pmid=24648780 |doi-access=free}}</ref> Considerations surrounding [[organ donation]] after death are likewise influenced by an individual's religious philosophy.<ref name=":2">{{Cite journal |last1=Oliver |first1=M. |last2=Woywodt |first2=A. |last3=Ahmed |first3=A. |last4=Saif |first4=I. |date=2011-02-01 |title=Organ donation, transplantation and religion |journal=Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation |language=en |volume=26 |issue=2 |pages=437–444 |doi=10.1093/ndt/gfq628 |pmid=20961891 |issn=0931-0509 |doi-access=free}}</ref> | |||
=== Diet === | === Diet === | ||
Many religions prescribe or encourage specific dietary practices. For example, vegetarian diets are commonly observed by adherents of Buddhism, Hinduism, and the [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]].<ref name=":1" /><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Sabaté |first=Joan |date=2004 |title=Religion, diet and research |journal=British Journal of Nutrition |language=en |volume=92 |issue=2 |pages=199–201 |doi=10.1079/BJN20041229 |pmid=15333148 |issn=0007-1145 |doi-access=free}}</ref><ref name=":19">{{Cite journal |last=Davidson |first=Jo Ann |date=2007-01-01 |title=World Religions and the Vegetarian Diet |url=https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/pd/vol12/iss1/3 |journal=Perspective Digest |volume=12 |issue=1 |access-date=2020-11-20 |archive-date=2021-02-26 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210226191522/https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/pd/vol12/iss1/3/ |url-status=live}}</ref> The ethical principle of ''[[ahimsa]]'' (non-injury to living beings), central to Buddhist and Hindu philosophy, emphasizes the sanctity of life and has influenced vegetarian traditions. This principle encompasses both human and animal life and is also associated with beliefs such as [[reincarnation]].<ref name=":19" /> | |||
[[Fasting]] practices, which may involve abstaining from certain foods or refraining from eating for specified periods, are observed in several religious traditions, including those of the [[The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints|Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints]], [[Eastern Orthodox Church|Eastern Orthodoxy]], [[Islam]], and [[Catholic Church|Roman Catholicism]].<ref name=":1" /> | |||
=== Euthanasia === | Some religious traditions require food to be prepared or consumed with invocation of God's name.<ref name=":1" /><ref name=":20">{{Cite journal |last1=Regenstein |first1=J. M. |last2=Chaudry |first2=M. M. |last3=Regenstein |first3=C. E. |date=2003 |title=The Kosher and Halal Food Laws |journal=Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety |language=en |volume=2 |issue=3 |pages=111–127 |doi=10.1111/j.1541-4337.2003.tb00018.x |pmid=33451233 |issn=1541-4337 |doi-access=free}}</ref> In Islam, for example, meat must come from properly slaughtered animals considered permissible (''[[halal]]''), while the consumption of certain animals, such as [[scavenger]] species, is prohibited.<ref name=":19" /><ref name=":20" /> Islamic dietary laws, derived from the commandments of [[Allah]] as outlined in the [[Quran]] and the [[Sunnah]] of Muhammad, emphasize purity, with dietary practices intended to promote both physical and spiritual cleanliness.<ref name=":20" /><ref name=":21">{{Cite journal |last1=Pakeeza |first1=Shahzadi |last2=Munir |first2=Mohsina |title=Dietary Laws of Islam and Judaism: A Comparative Study |journal=Al Adwa |volume=45 |issue=31 |pages=1–14}}</ref> Similarly, Jewish [[Kosher foods|kosher]] dietary laws are derived from religious texts such as the [[Torah]] and the [[Mishnah]].<ref name=":20" /><ref name=":21" /> | ||
=== Euthanasia === | |||
{{Main|Euthanasia}} | {{Main|Euthanasia}} | ||
=== Abortion === | Attitudes toward euthanasia are influenced by religious philosophy. Opposition to the legalization of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide is frequently associated with religious beliefs.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Danyliv |first1=Andriy |last2=O'Neill |first2=Ciaran |date=2015 |title=Attitudes towards legalising physician provided euthanasia in Britain: The role of religion over time |journal=Social Science & Medicine |language=en |volume=128 |page=53 |doi=10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.12.030 |pmid=25589032 |access-date=2020-11-20 |archive-date=2022-04-13 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220413002649/https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0277953614008387 |url-status=live |url-access=subscription}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Hains |first1=Carrie-Anne Marie |last2=Hulbert-Williams |first2=Nicholas J. |date=2013 |title=Attitudes toward euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide: a study of the multivariate effects of healthcare training, patient characteristics, religion and locus of control |journal=Journal of Medical Ethics |language=en |volume=39 |issue=11 |pages=713–716 |doi=10.1136/medethics-2012-100729 |pmid=23378530 |s2cid=9657186 |issn=0306-6800 |access-date=2020-11-20 |archive-date=2023-07-17 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230717161405/https://jme.bmj.com/content/39/11/713 |url-status=live |url-access=subscription}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Aghababaei |first=Naser |date=2013 |title=The Euthanasia–Religion Nexus: Exploring Religious Orientation and Euthanasia Attitude Measures in a Muslim Context |journal=OMEGA – Journal of Death and Dying |language=en |volume=66 |issue=4 |pages=333–341 |doi=10.2190/OM.66.4.d |pmid=23785984 |s2cid=20288072 |issn=0030-2228 |access-date=2020-11-20 |archive-date=2020-12-06 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201206055534/https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.2190/OM.66.4.d |url-status=live |url-access=subscription}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Marsala |first=Miles S. |date=2019 |title=Approval of Euthanasia: Differences Between Cohorts and Religion |journal=SAGE Open |language=en |volume=9 |issue=1 |page=1 |doi=10.1177/2158244019835921 |issn=2158-2440 |doi-access=free}}</ref> Studies indicate that individuals who believe in God as an entity that controls [[destiny]] are more likely to oppose the legalization of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Gielen |first1=Joris |last2=van den Branden |first2=Stef |last3=Broeckaert |first3=Bert |date=2009 |title=Religion and Nurses' Attitudes To Euthanasia and Physician Assisted Suicide |journal=Nursing Ethics |language=en |volume=16 |issue=3 |page=311 |doi=10.1177/0969733009102692 |pmid=19372125 |s2cid=6777605 |issn=0969-7330 |access-date=2020-11-20 |archive-date=2020-12-07 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201207010935/https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0969733009102692 |url-status=live |url-access=subscription}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Bendiane |first1=M. |last2=Galinier |first2=A. |last3=Favre |first3=R. |last4=Ribiere |first4=C. |last5=Lapiana |first5=J.-M. |last6=Obadia |first6=Y. |last7=Peretti-Watel |first7=P. |date=2007-12-01 |title=French district nurses' opinions towards euthanasia, involvement in end-of-life care and nurse patient relationship: a national phone survey |journal=Journal of Medical Ethics |language=en |volume=33 |issue=12 |pages=708–711 |doi=10.1136/jme.2006.018374 |issn=0306-6800 |pmc=2598217 |pmid=18055901}}</ref> Religions such as Christian Science, the [[The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints|Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints]], Hinduism, Islam, [[Jehovah's Witnesses]], and the [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]] generally oppose or do not practice euthanasia.<ref name=":1" /><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Burdette |first1=Amy M. |last2=Hill |first2=Terrence D. |last3=Moulton |first3=Benjamin E. |date=2005 |title=Religion and Attitudes Toward Physician-Assisted Suicide and Terminal Palliative Care |journal=Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion |language=en |volume=44 |issue=1 |pages=79–93 |doi=10.1111/j.1468-5906.2005.00266.x |issn=0021-8294 |access-date=2020-11-02 |archive-date=2023-07-17 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230717161144/https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1468-5906.2005.00266.x |url-status=live |url-access=subscription}}</ref> | ||
=== Abortion === | |||
{{Main|Religion and abortion}} | {{Main|Religion and abortion}} | ||
== Religions == | Many religions attribute significant philosophical value to human life and therefore oppose abortion.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Harris |first1=Richard J. |last2=Mills |first2=Edgar W. |date=1985 |title=Religion, Values and Attitudes toward Abortion |journal=Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion |volume=24 |issue=2 |pages=137 |doi=10.2307/1386338 |jstor=1386338 |access-date=2020-11-02 |archive-date=2020-08-19 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200819052106/https://www.jstor.org/stable/1386338 |url-status=live |url-access=subscription}}</ref> However, some religious traditions permit abortion under specific circumstances, such as cases involving rape or when the life of the pregnant person is at risk.<ref name=":1" /> | ||
Religious philosophy influences many aspects of an individual's | |||
== Religions == | |||
Religious philosophy influences many aspects of an individual's worldview and approach to life. For example, empirical studies focusing on the philosophical concept of [[spirituality]] at or near the end of life in India have found that individuals who follow Indian philosophical traditions are influenced by these frameworks in their perceptions of spirituality.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Inbadas|first=Hamilton|date=2018-10-02|title=Indian philosophical foundations of spirituality at the end of life|journal=Mortality|language=en|volume=23|issue=4|pages=320–333|doi=10.1080/13576275.2017.1351936|issn=1357-6275|pmc=6157526|pmid=30294243}}</ref> | |||
Considerations related to [[health care|medical care]], [[death]], diet, and [[pregnancy]] vary among adherents of different religions due to their respective philosophical traditions.<ref name=":1">{{Citation|last1=Swihart|first1=Diana L.|last2=Yarrarapu|first2=Siva Naga S.|last3=Martin|first3=Romaine L.|title=Cultural Religious Competence in Clinical Practice|date=2020|url=https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK493216/|work=StatPearls|place=Treasure Island, FL|publisher=StatPearls Publishing|pmid=29630268|access-date=2020-11-02|archive-date=2021-01-30|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210130191641/https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK493216/|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Huang|first1=Ya-Ling|last2=Yates|first2=Patsy|last3=Prior|first3=Deborah|date=2009|title=Factors influencing oncology nurses' approaches to accommodating cultural needs in palliative care|journal=Journal of Clinical Nursing|language=en|volume=18|issue=24|pages=3421–3429|doi=10.1111/j.1365-2702.2009.02938.x|pmid=20487490|hdl=10072/404334|hdl-access=free|url-access=subscription}}</ref> | |||
=== Islamic philosophy === | |||
Islamic philosophy generally prohibits the violation of the human body,<ref name=":4">{{Cite journal|last1=Oliver|first1=M.|last2=Woywodt|first2=A.|last3=Ahmed|first3=A.|last4=Saif|first4=I.|date=2011-02-01|title=Organ donation, transplantation and religion|journal=Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation|language=en|volume=26|issue=2|page=438|doi=10.1093/ndt/gfq628|pmid=20961891|issn=0931-0509|doi-access=free}}</ref> while also emphasizing altruism and the preservation of life: | |||
<blockquote>And whoever saves one—it is as if he had saved mankind entirely. (Quran 5:32)</blockquote> | |||
Organ donation is generally supported within Islamic ethics<ref name=":1" />, based on the principle of necessity overriding prohibition (''al-darurat tubih al-mahzurat'').<ref name=":4" /><ref name=":14">{{Cite journal|last=Messina|first=E.|date=2015|title=Beyond the Officially Sacred, Donor and Believer: Religion and Organ Transplantation|journal=Transplantation Proceedings|language=en|volume=47|issue=7|page=2093|doi=10.1016/j.transproceed.2015.06.031|pmid=26361651|url-access=subscription}}</ref> Objections to organ donation within Muslim communities are often attributed to cultural rather than theological considerations, as Islamic principles allow exceptions for medical necessity, including the use of porcine-derived medical products such as [[bone grafting|bone grafts]] and [[insulin (medication)|insulin]].<ref name=":4" /><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Hassaballah|first=A. M.|date=1996-06-01|title=Definition of death, organ donation and interruption of treatment in Islam|journal=Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation|language=en|volume=11|issue=6|page=964|doi=10.1093/oxfordjournals.ndt.a027515|issn=0931-0509}}</ref> | |||
Formal rulings supporting organ donation have been issued by Islamic authorities, including a 1996 ''[[ijtihad]]'' by the UK Muslim Law Council and a 1988 ruling by the Islamic Jurisprudence Assembly Council in [[Saudi Arabia]], with similar decisions made in [[Egypt]], [[Iran]], and [[Pakistan]].<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Golmakani|first1=Mohammad Mehdi|last2=Niknam|first2=Mohammad Hussein|last3=Hedayat|first3=Kamyar M.|date=2005|title=Transplantation ethics from the Islamic point of view|journal=Medical Science Monitor|volume=11|issue=4|pages=RA105–109|issn=1234-1010|pmid=15795706}}</ref> | |||
Islamic jurisprudence does not permit voluntary death, including euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide.<ref name=":22">{{Cite journal |last=Isgandarova |first=Nazila |date=2015 |title=Physician-Assisted Suicide and Other Forms of Euthanasia in Islamic Spiritual Care |url=http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1542305015616099 |url-status=live |journal=Journal of Pastoral Care & Counseling |language=en |volume=69 |issue=4 |pages=215–221 |doi=10.1177/1542305015616099 |issn=1542-3050 |pmid=26631521 |s2cid=206757887 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211230170718/https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1542305015616099 |archive-date=2021-12-30 |access-date=2020-11-20|url-access=subscription }}</ref><ref name=":23">{{Cite journal |last1=Rm |first1=Yousuf |last2=Ar |first2=Mohammed Fauzi |date=2012 |title=Euthanasia and Physician-Assisted Suicide: A Review from Islamic Point of View |url=https://journals.iium.edu.my/kom/index.php/imjm/article/view/556 |url-status=live |journal=IIUM Medical Journal Malaysia |language=en |volume=11 |issue=1 |doi=10.31436/imjm.v11i1.556 |issn=2735-2285 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210112125003/https://journals.iium.edu.my/kom/index.php/imjm/article/view/556 |archive-date=2021-01-12 |access-date=2020-11-20 |doi-access=free}}</ref> Life is regarded as a sacred gift from Allah, who alone determines its duration.<ref name=":24">{{Cite journal |last1=K |first1=Aramesh |last2=H |first2=Shadi |date=2007-01-01 |title=EUTHANASIA: AN ISLAMIC ETHICAL PERSPECTIVE |url=https://www.sid.ir/en/Journal/ViewPaper.aspx?ID=83985 |url-status=live |journal=Iranian Journal of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology |language=En |volume=6 |issue=5 |page=37 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220614160305/https://www.sid.ir/en/journal/ViewPaper.aspx?id=83985 |archive-date=2022-06-14 |access-date=2020-11-20}}</ref> The moment of death (''ajal'') is believed to be beyond human control, and any form of intentional hastening of death is prohibited.<ref name=":25">{{Cite journal |last=Ayuba |first=Mahmud Adesina |date=2016 |title=Euthanasia: A Muslim's Perspective |url=http://scriptura.journals.ac.za/pub/article/view/1175 |url-status=live |journal=Scriptura |volume=115 |doi=10.7833/115-0-1175 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201022061303/https://scriptura.journals.ac.za/pub/article/view/1175 |archive-date=2020-10-22 |access-date=2020-11-20 |doi-access=free}}</ref> Although the Qur'an states, "Nor take life—which Allah has made sacred—except for just cause" (Quran 17:33), ''[[hadith]]'' literature further reinforces the prohibition of euthanasia, even in cases of severe suffering.<ref name=":22" /> | |||
=== | === Christian philosophy === | ||
{{Expand section|date=September 2024}} | |||
Christian philosophical traditions generally support organ donation, although theological reasoning and acceptance vary among denominations.<ref name=":1" /><ref name=":2" /> Christian theologians often reference biblical teachings emphasizing altruism and self-sacrifice,<ref name=":3">{{Cite journal|last1=Tarabeih|first1=Mahdi|last2=Abu-Rakia|first2=Riad|last3=Bokek-Cohen|first3=Ya'arit|last4=Azuri|first4=Pazit|date=2020-03-04|title=Christianity, Islam, Judaism, and unwillingness to donate organs post-mortem|url=https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/07481187.2020.1734114|journal=Death Studies|volume=46|issue=2|language=en|pages=391–398|doi=10.1080/07481187.2020.1734114|pmid=32129149|s2cid=212403687|issn=0748-1187|access-date=2020-11-02|archive-date=2022-03-02|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220302031734/https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/07481187.2020.1734114|url-status=live|url-access=subscription}}</ref> including: | |||
<blockquote> | |||
Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils: freely you have received, freely give. (Matthew 10:8)<ref>{{Cite web|title=Bible Gateway passage: Matthew 10:8 – New International Version|url=https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2010%3A8&version=NIV|access-date=2020-11-20}}</ref> | |||
Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one's life for one's friends. (John 15:13)<ref>{{Cite web|title=Bible Gateway passage: John 15:13 – New International Version|url=https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%2015%3A13&version=NIV|access-date=2020-11-20}}</ref></blockquote> | |||
Most Christian scholars consider organ transplantation an act of charity and selflessness. In 1990, the [[Catholic Church]] and several [[Protestantism|Protestant]] denominations jointly endorsed organ donation as an expression of Christian love.<ref name=":4" /><ref name=":14" /> | |||
=== Jewish philosophy === | |||
{{Expand section|date=December 2024}} | |||
Jewish philosophy places significant importance on the intact burial of the deceased, based on ''[[Halakha|halakhic]]'' principles.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Tarabeih|first1=Mahdi|last2=Abu-Rakia|first2=Riad|last3=Bokek-Cohen|first3=Ya'arit|last4=Azuri|first4=Pazit|date=2020-03-04|title=Christianity, Islam, Judaism, and unwillingness to donate organs post-mortem|journal=Death Studies|volume=46|issue=2|pages=391–398|doi=10.1080/07481187.2020.1734114|pmid=32129149|s2cid=212403687|url-access=subscription}}</ref> However, the principle of saving a life (''[[pikuach nefesh]]'') overrides nearly all other commandments.<ref name=":15">{{Cite journal|last=Messina|first=E.|date=2015|title=Beyond the Officially Sacred, Donor and Believer: Religion and Organ Transplantation|url=https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0041134515006545|journal=Transplantation Proceedings|language=en|volume=47|issue=7|page=2094|doi=10.1016/j.transproceed.2015.06.031|pmid=26361651|access-date=2020-11-02|archive-date=2018-07-01|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180701103039/https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0041134515006545|url-status=live|url-access=subscription}}</ref> | |||
<blockquote> | |||
Whoever destroys a soul, it is considered as if he destroyed an entire world. And whoever saves a life, it is considered as if he saved an entire world. (Babylonian [[Talmud]], Sanhedrin 37a)</blockquote> | |||
[[ | As a result, [[organ donation in Jewish law|organ donation]] is supported by most Jewish authorities.<ref name=":1" /><ref name=":15" /> | ||
Jewish | Jewish legal traditions generally prohibit abortion, [[foeticide]], and [[infanticide]], viewing them as violations of human life.<ref name=":16">{{Citation|last=Maguire|first=Daniel C.|title=Abortion and Religion|date=2016-04-21|url=http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/9781118663219.wbegss267|encyclopedia=The Wiley Blackwell Encyclopedia of Gender and Sexuality Studies|pages=1–5|editor-last=Wong|editor-first=Angela|place=Singapore|publisher=John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.|language=en|doi=10.1002/9781118663219.wbegss267|isbn=978-1-4051-9694-9|access-date=2020-11-20|editor2-last=Wickramasinghe|editor2-first=Maithree|editor3-last=hoogland|editor3-first=renee|editor4-last=Naples|editor4-first=Nancy A|archive-date=2023-07-17|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230717161401/https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/9781118663219.wbegss267|url-status=live|url-access=subscription}}</ref><ref name=":17">{{Cite journal|last=Jakobovits|first=I.|date=1968|title=Jewish views on abortion|journal=Child and Family|volume=7|issue=2|pages=142–156|issn=0009-3882|pmid=12309928}}</ref> However, rabbinical sources permit abortion when the mother's life or health is endangered, prioritizing her well-being over that of the fetus.<ref name=":17" /> Jewish law does not permit abortion in cases of [[rape]] or [[incest]].<ref name=":17" /> | ||
=== Hindu philosophy === | === Hindu philosophy === | ||
Hindu | Hindu philosophical traditions generally prohibit abortion in accordance with ''[[Dharmaśāstra|Dharmashastra]]'' texts. Hindu beliefs regarding conception hold that both physical and spiritual attributes, including an individual's past [[karma]], are present from the moment of conception and enter the human [[embryo]].<ref name=":16" /> | ||
=== Buddhist philosophy === | === Buddhist philosophy === | ||
Buddhist philosophical traditions, similar to Hindu views, generally regard abortion as morally problematic in accordance with the [[Five precepts|Five Precepts]].<ref>{{Cite book|last=Maguire|first=Daniel C.|title=Sacred Rights|date=2003|publisher=Oxford University Press|isbn=978-0-19-516001-7}}</ref> However, intention (''cetana'') plays a significant role in ethical evaluation,<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Florida|first=R. E.|date=1991|title=Buddhist Approaches to Abortion|journal=Asian Philosophy|language=en|volume=1|issue=1|pages=39–50|doi=10.1080/09552369108575334|url-access=subscription}}</ref> and some Buddhist interpretations allow abortion under circumstances where compassionate intent is emphasized.<ref name=":16" /> | |||
=== Taoist philosophy === | === Taoist philosophy === | ||
Taoist philosophy | Taoist philosophy emphasizes balance between human populations and natural resources.<ref name=":18">{{Citation|last=Maguire|first=Daniel C.|title=Abortion and Religion|date=2016-04-21|url=http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/9781118663219.wbegss267|encyclopedia=The Wiley Blackwell Encyclopedia of Gender and Sexuality Studies|page=3|editor-last=Wong|editor-first=Angela|place=Singapore|publisher=John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.|language=en|doi=10.1002/9781118663219.wbegss267|isbn=978-1-4051-9694-9|access-date=2020-11-20|editor2-last=Wickramasinghe|editor2-first=Maithree|editor3-last=hoogland|editor3-first=renee|editor4-last=Naples|editor4-first=Nancy A|archive-date=2023-07-17|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230717161401/https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/9781118663219.wbegss267|url-status=live|url-access=subscription}}</ref> These principles influenced population management policies in China, including the [[one-child policy]].<ref name=":18" /><ref>{{Cite web|last=Shang|first=Geling|date=2003|title=Excess, Lack, and Harmony: Some Confucian and Taoist Approaches to Family Planning and Population Management|url=https://repository.library.georgetown.edu/handle/10822/1004682|access-date=2020-11-20}}</ref> Abortion is generally discouraged in Taoist thought, as it is believed to disrupt bodily harmony and negate the body's natural capacity to generate life.<ref>{{Cite journal|date=1995-10-01|title=Gender Lines Fall 1995|journal=Gender Lines|page=48|access-date=2020-11-20}}</ref> | ||
==See also== | ==See also== | ||
Latest revision as of 02:31, 31 December 2025
Template:Short description Script error: No such module "Distinguish". Script error: No such module "Unsubst". Template:Philosophy sidebar Template:Religion by Country Religious philosophy is philosophical thinking that is influenced and directed as a consequence of teachings from a particular religion. It can be done objectively, but it may also be done as a persuasion tool by believers in that faith. Religious philosophy is concerned with the nature of religion, theories of salvation, and conceptions of god, gods, and/or the divine.[1]
Due to the historical development of religions, many religions share commonalities concerning their philosophies. These philosophies are often considered to be universal and include beliefs about concepts such as the afterlife, souls, and miracles.[2]
Philosophical commonalities
Religious faith and philosophical reflection are closely interconnected. Religious traditions influence the philosophical thinking and beliefs of adherents within a given religion.[3]
Many philosophical commonalities among religions have emerged from shared historical foundations. For example, the Abrahamic religions—including Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Baháʼí Faith, Yazidism, Druze, Samaritanism, and Rastafari—share a number of philosophical themes, although these concepts are expressed differently in their respective religious texts.[4][5]
In addition, some philosophical concepts and forms of reasoning found in religious teachings appear to have developed independently while nevertheless exhibiting notable similarities and analogous ideas.[6] For instance, arguments concerning the existence of an omniscient god or multiple gods appear in several religious traditions, including Christianity, Islam, and Hinduism. Similarly, the philosophical concept of free will is present in both monotheistic and polytheistic religions.[6]
Types
Intuitive religious philosophy
Many religious concepts are described as "cross-culturally ubiquitous"[2] because they are considered "cognitively natural."[7][2] These concepts are regarded as intuitive in that they tend to arise with little explicit direction, instruction, or formal teaching during early stages of cognitive development[8] and do not necessarily originate from specific cultural instruction.[9] Examples of such religious concepts include beliefs concerning the afterlife, souls, supernatural agents, and miraculous events.[2]
Reflective religious philosophy
Some religious concepts require deliberate instruction to ensure their transmission within a community.[8] These beliefs are categorized as reflective and are often encoded in linguistic or doctrinal forms that facilitate communication and preservation. Reflective religious philosophies are understood to play a significant role in the maintenance and continuity of cultural and religious traditions.[10] Examples of reflective religious philosophies include concepts such as karma, divine immanent justice or providence, as well as theological doctrines such as the Trinity in Christianity and Brahman in Hinduism.[8]
God
Religious philosophy is largely concerned with conceptions of God, gods, or the divine.[1]
Ontological arguments
Script error: No such module "Labelled list hatnote".
Ontological arguments are a class of philosophical arguments that rely on reason alone to conclude that God exists.[11] Numerous philosophers have contributed to the development of various ontological arguments.
In the 11th century CE, Saint Anselm of Canterbury (1033–1109) formulated an ontological argument in his work Proslogion. His reasoning was based on the idea of God as "that than which nothing greater can be conceived."[11][1][12]
Thomas Aquinas (c. Template:TrimScript error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".–1274) incorporated philosophical reasoning into Christian theology, using philosophy as a means of addressing questions about the existence of God.[13] In his Summa Theologica, Aquinas presents five arguments for the existence of God, commonly referred to as the quinque viae or "Five Ways."[14]
In the 17th century, René Descartes (1596–1650) proposed ontological arguments similar to those of Anselm. In his Fifth Meditation, Descartes argues that the idea of a supremely perfect being entails its existence, on the grounds that necessary existence is a defining attribute of such a being.[11][15][16][17]
Two commonly cited formulations of Descartes' ontological argument are as follows:[15][16][17]
Version A
- Whatever is clearly and distinctly perceived to be contained in the idea of a thing is true of that thing.
- Necessary existence is clearly and distinctly perceived to be contained in the idea of God.
- Therefore, God exists.
Version B
- There exists an idea of a supremely perfect being, that is, a being possessing all perfections.
- Necessary existence is a perfection.
- Therefore, a supremely perfect being exists.
In the 18th century, Gottfried Leibniz (1646–1716) further developed Descartes' ontological argument by addressing the issue of whether the concept of a supremely perfect being is coherent. Leibniz argued that perfections are mutually compatible and can therefore coexist within a single being, thereby supporting the argument's validity.[11]
More recent philosophers, including Kurt Gödel, Charles Hartshorne, Norman Malcolm, and Alvin Plantinga, have proposed ontological arguments that elaborate on or modify earlier formulations by thinkers such as Anselm, Descartes, and Leibniz.[11] For example, Kurt Gödel (1906–1978) employed modal logic to formalize and expand upon Leibniz's version of Anselm's argument in what is known as Gödel's ontological proof.[18]
Concept of God
Script error: No such module "Labelled list hatnote".
An individual's conception of God has been shown to influence religious coping styles.[19] Research has identified several religiously affiliated coping styles:
- Self-directing style: Individuals address problems independently without directly involving God.[19][20]
- Deferring style: Individuals defer responsibility for problem-solving to God.[19][20]
- Collaborative style: Individuals and God are viewed as jointly involved in the problem-solving process.[19][20]
- Surrender style: Individuals work collaboratively with God while prioritizing divine guidance over personal control.[19][21]
Bioethics
Medical care
Script error: No such module "Labelled list hatnote".
An individual's religious philosophy can play a significant role in medical care and healthcare decision-making, and consideration of these beliefs may contribute to improved quality of care.[22] In particular, within palliative care, awareness of diverse religious and philosophical frameworks can assist healthcare providers in addressing patients' spiritual needs appropriately.[23] Religious philosophy is also a relevant consideration in psychotherapeutic approaches to psychiatric disorders.[24] Considerations surrounding organ donation after death are likewise influenced by an individual's religious philosophy.[25]
Diet
Many religions prescribe or encourage specific dietary practices. For example, vegetarian diets are commonly observed by adherents of Buddhism, Hinduism, and the Seventh-day Adventist Church.[22][26][27] The ethical principle of ahimsa (non-injury to living beings), central to Buddhist and Hindu philosophy, emphasizes the sanctity of life and has influenced vegetarian traditions. This principle encompasses both human and animal life and is also associated with beliefs such as reincarnation.[27]
Fasting practices, which may involve abstaining from certain foods or refraining from eating for specified periods, are observed in several religious traditions, including those of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Eastern Orthodoxy, Islam, and Roman Catholicism.[22]
Some religious traditions require food to be prepared or consumed with invocation of God's name.[22][28] In Islam, for example, meat must come from properly slaughtered animals considered permissible (halal), while the consumption of certain animals, such as scavenger species, is prohibited.[27][28] Islamic dietary laws, derived from the commandments of Allah as outlined in the Quran and the Sunnah of Muhammad, emphasize purity, with dietary practices intended to promote both physical and spiritual cleanliness.[28][29] Similarly, Jewish kosher dietary laws are derived from religious texts such as the Torah and the Mishnah.[28][29]
Euthanasia
Script error: No such module "Labelled list hatnote".
Attitudes toward euthanasia are influenced by religious philosophy. Opposition to the legalization of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide is frequently associated with religious beliefs.[30][31][32][33] Studies indicate that individuals who believe in God as an entity that controls destiny are more likely to oppose the legalization of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide.[34][35] Religions such as Christian Science, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Hinduism, Islam, Jehovah's Witnesses, and the Seventh-day Adventist Church generally oppose or do not practice euthanasia.[22][36]
Abortion
Script error: No such module "Labelled list hatnote".
Many religions attribute significant philosophical value to human life and therefore oppose abortion.[37] However, some religious traditions permit abortion under specific circumstances, such as cases involving rape or when the life of the pregnant person is at risk.[22]
Religions
Religious philosophy influences many aspects of an individual's worldview and approach to life. For example, empirical studies focusing on the philosophical concept of spirituality at or near the end of life in India have found that individuals who follow Indian philosophical traditions are influenced by these frameworks in their perceptions of spirituality.[38]
Considerations related to medical care, death, diet, and pregnancy vary among adherents of different religions due to their respective philosophical traditions.[22][39]
Islamic philosophy
Islamic philosophy generally prohibits the violation of the human body,[40] while also emphasizing altruism and the preservation of life:
And whoever saves one—it is as if he had saved mankind entirely. (Quran 5:32)
Organ donation is generally supported within Islamic ethics[22], based on the principle of necessity overriding prohibition (al-darurat tubih al-mahzurat).[40][41] Objections to organ donation within Muslim communities are often attributed to cultural rather than theological considerations, as Islamic principles allow exceptions for medical necessity, including the use of porcine-derived medical products such as bone grafts and insulin.[40][42]
Formal rulings supporting organ donation have been issued by Islamic authorities, including a 1996 ijtihad by the UK Muslim Law Council and a 1988 ruling by the Islamic Jurisprudence Assembly Council in Saudi Arabia, with similar decisions made in Egypt, Iran, and Pakistan.[43]
Islamic jurisprudence does not permit voluntary death, including euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide.[44][45] Life is regarded as a sacred gift from Allah, who alone determines its duration.[46] The moment of death (ajal) is believed to be beyond human control, and any form of intentional hastening of death is prohibited.[47] Although the Qur'an states, "Nor take life—which Allah has made sacred—except for just cause" (Quran 17:33), hadith literature further reinforces the prohibition of euthanasia, even in cases of severe suffering.[44]
Christian philosophy
Script error: No such module "Unsubst". Christian philosophical traditions generally support organ donation, although theological reasoning and acceptance vary among denominations.[22][25] Christian theologians often reference biblical teachings emphasizing altruism and self-sacrifice,[48] including:
Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils: freely you have received, freely give. (Matthew 10:8)[49]
Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one's life for one's friends. (John 15:13)[50]
Most Christian scholars consider organ transplantation an act of charity and selflessness. In 1990, the Catholic Church and several Protestant denominations jointly endorsed organ donation as an expression of Christian love.[40][41]
Jewish philosophy
Script error: No such module "Unsubst". Jewish philosophy places significant importance on the intact burial of the deceased, based on halakhic principles.[51] However, the principle of saving a life (pikuach nefesh) overrides nearly all other commandments.[52]
Whoever destroys a soul, it is considered as if he destroyed an entire world. And whoever saves a life, it is considered as if he saved an entire world. (Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 37a)
As a result, organ donation is supported by most Jewish authorities.[22][52]
Jewish legal traditions generally prohibit abortion, foeticide, and infanticide, viewing them as violations of human life.[53][54] However, rabbinical sources permit abortion when the mother's life or health is endangered, prioritizing her well-being over that of the fetus.[54] Jewish law does not permit abortion in cases of rape or incest.[54]
Hindu philosophy
Hindu philosophical traditions generally prohibit abortion in accordance with Dharmashastra texts. Hindu beliefs regarding conception hold that both physical and spiritual attributes, including an individual's past karma, are present from the moment of conception and enter the human embryo.[53]
Buddhist philosophy
Buddhist philosophical traditions, similar to Hindu views, generally regard abortion as morally problematic in accordance with the Five Precepts.[55] However, intention (cetana) plays a significant role in ethical evaluation,[56] and some Buddhist interpretations allow abortion under circumstances where compassionate intent is emphasized.[53]
Taoist philosophy
Taoist philosophy emphasizes balance between human populations and natural resources.[57] These principles influenced population management policies in China, including the one-child policy.[57][58] Abortion is generally discouraged in Taoist thought, as it is believed to disrupt bodily harmony and negate the body's natural capacity to generate life.[59]
See also
Script error: No such module "Portal". Each religion also has unique philosophies that distinguish them from other religions, and these philosophies are guided through the concepts and values behind the teaching pertaining to that belief-system. Different religious philosophies include:
- Template:Annotated link
- Template:Annotated link
- Template:Annotated link
- Template:Annotated link
- Template:Annotated link
- Template:Annotated link
- Template:Annotated link
- Template:Annotated link
- Template:Annotated link
- Template:Annotated link
References
<templatestyles src="Reflist/styles.css" />
- ↑ a b c Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ a b c d Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ a b Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ a b c Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ a b c d e Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ a b Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ a b Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ a b Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ a b c d e Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ a b c Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ a b c d e f g h i j Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ a b Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ a b c Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ a b c d Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ a b Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ a b c d Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ a b Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ a b Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ a b Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ a b c Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ a b c Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ a b Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
Script error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".