foundationalism

The Cognitive Science of Religion (CSR) is a relatively young field that explores the intersection between science and religion. Some argue that CSR, by employing purely explanatory methods and presupposing methodological naturalism, has secularized and materialized religion. Others believe that explanatory methods are not the sole approach in CSR, and the use of other methods is permissible. This article aims to show how CSR has influenced the entire realm of philosophy of religion and the nature of this impact. It examines various perspectives on the extent of CSR’s influence on the philosophy of religion, particularly analyzing its effect on the proofs of natural theology. The second part demonstrates that contrary to the dominant literature, the impact of CSR can extend beyond merely strengthening or weakening theological arguments and can be used to argue for the reform of religious beliefs. This argument is pursued from four different perspectives: first, the concept of God, arguing that weakening classic proofs does not imply weakening belief in God; second, the methodology of studying religion, advocating for methodological pluralism; third, the topic of revelation and the role of humans in religion, suggesting that a behavioral shift desirable in economics is also preferable in the study of religion; and fourth, the issue of religious pluralism and interfaith relations, arguing against the exclusivity produced by textualism and foundationalism in epistemology.

Between two spectrums of foundationalism and anti- foundationalism, ideas called post- foundationalist have emerged in the field of politics. They neither emphasize fixed and unchangeable foundations like foundationalists, nor do they consider everything variable like anti- foundationalists. They seek to reinterpret, in a process of dialogue and exchange, the foundations that have come to them as givens or precipitated in democratic societies, within the framework of temporal changes. In this way, a new experience has opened up for us from Western thought. Now the main question is whether it is possible to find a fixed foundation in this type of thought in which change in that is not recognized? By examining these ideas, and focusing on the thoughts of two important thinkers, John Rawls and Ernesto Laclau, we find that there are dimensions of political ontology among these ideas that are considered as red lines. Dimensions that can be called democratic political ontology. Now, in the next step, we should ask ourselves whether this experience can be used in defining The Islamic Political or not? By examining this type of political thought, we can claim that there is a way to present an Islamic political ontology and ultimately create a concept of The Islamic political. In a way that both religious principles are taken into account and changes in Muslim societies are recognized and, so to speak, channeled. In this article, this possibility is examined and the extraction of the foundations of Islamic political ontology is postponed to another text.