SavedAdd your journal

Journals / İmgelem / 2026 / Sayı: Küresel Modern Toplumsal Çelişkiler Özel Sayı

Religiosity Without Morality? Rethinking the Relationship Between Religion and Morality Through Ideological Dilemmas

Ahlak Olmadan Dindarlık mı? Din ve Ahlak İlişkisinin İdeolojik İkilemler Bağlamında Yeniden Düşünülmesi

Filiz Çömez Polat(ÇUKUROVA ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-3563-0999
Journal
İmgelem
Pages
374–389
Publication Date
2026-10-20
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Consequently, this study presents a holistic model that conceptualises ideological dilemmas as a mediating mechanism in explaining the relationship between religiosity and moral behaviour.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Greater access to religious knowledge, coupled with the increased prominence of religious discourse in public life, has led to the widespread belief that there is, or should be, a strong link between religion and moral behaviour.
📊
Key Findings & Data:However, empirical findings suggest that this relationship is more complex than generally assumed.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Consequently, this study presents a holistic model that conceptualises ideological dilemmas as a mediating mechanism in explaining the relationship between religiosity and moral behaviour.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Dindarlık · Ahlak · İdeolojik İkilemler

Abstract

Greater access to religious knowledge, coupled with the increased prominence of religious discourse in public life, has led to the widespread belief that there is, or should be, a strong link between religion and moral behaviour. However, empirical findings suggest that this relationship is more complex than generally assumed. While individuals may define themselves as religious based on their knowledge and identity, they may not always act in accordance with the values they espouse. This study uses the concept of ‘ideological dilemmas', one of the key concepts of critical discursive psychology, as an analytical framework to explain this situation. Accordingly, when making moral judgements, individuals oscillate between competing explanatory repertoires, such as religious norms, pragmatic conditions, and social expectations. Consequently, this study presents a holistic model that conceptualises ideological dilemmas as a mediating mechanism in explaining the relationship between religiosity and moral behaviour.

Özet

Dini bilgiye erişimin artması ve dini söylemlerin kamusal alanda daha görünür hâle gelmesi, din ile ahlaki davranış arasında güçlü bir ilişkinin var olduğu ya da olması gerektiği yönündeki beklentiyi pekiştirmektedir. Bununla birlikte, ampirik bulgular bu ilişkinin düşünüldüğünden daha karmaşık ilerlediğini göstermektedir. Bireyler sahip oldukları dini bilgi ve dini kimlik temelinde kendilerini dindar olarak tanımlayabilmekte; ancak benimsedikleri dini değerleri davranışlarına her zaman yansıtamayabilirler. Bu çalışma, söz konusu durumu açıklamak amacıyla eleştirel söylemsel psikolojinin temel kavramlarından biri olan ideolojik ikilemleri analitik bir çerçeve olarak ele almaktadır. Buna göre bireyler, ahlaki yargılarda bulunurken dini normlar, pragmatik koşullar ve toplumsal beklentiler gibi birbiriyle rekabet hâlindeki farklı açıklayıcı repertuarlar arasında gidip gelmektedirler. Sonuç olarak bu çalışma, ideolojik ikilemleri dindarlık ile ahlaki davranış arasındaki ilişkinin açıklanmasında aracı bir mekanizma olarak kavramsallaştıran bütüncül bir model sunmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Polat, F. Ç. (2026). Religiosity Without Morality? Rethinking the Relationship Between Religion and Morality Through Ideological Dilemmas. İmgelem, Sayı: Küresel Modern Toplumsal Çelişkiler Özel Sayı, 374–389. https://doi.org/10.53791/imgelem.1987242

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (42)

  1. Allport, G. W., & Ross, J. M. (1967). Personal religious orientation and prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 5(4), 432–443. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0021212.
  2. Altemeyer, B., & Hunsberger, B. (1992). Authoritarianism, religious fundamentalism, quest, and prejudice. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 2(2), 113–133. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327582ijpr0202_5.
  3. Aquino, K., & Reed, A. (2002). The self-importance of moral identity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(6), 1423–1440. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.83.6.1423.
  4. Arkonaç, S. A. (2014). Psikolojide söz ve anlam analizi: Niteliksel duruşun eleştirel sorgulamaları. Ayrıntı Yayınları.
  5. Bandura, A. (1999). Moral disengagement in the perpetration of inhumanities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3(3), 193–209. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0303_3.
  6. Batson, C. D. (1993). Religion and the individual: A social-psychological perspective. Oxford University Press.
  7. Batson, C. D., & Schoenrade, P. (1991). Measuring religion as quest: 1. validity concerns. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 30(4), 416–429. https://doi.org/10.2307/1387277.
  8. Batson, C. D., Thompson, E. R., Seuferling, G., Whitney, H., & Strongman, J. A. (1999). Moral hypocrisy: Appearing moral to oneself without being so. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(3), 525–537. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.77.3.525.
  9. Billig, M., Condor, S., Edwards, D., Gane, M., Middleton, D., & Radley, A. (1988). Ideological dilemmas: A social psychology of everyday thinking. Sage.
  10. Çömez-Polat, F., & Tekdemir, G. (2020). Sosyal medyada Müslüman kimlik algısı: İslami fenomenler ve twitter örneği. Medya ve Din Araştırmaları Dergisi (MEDİAD), 3(2), 165–180. https://doi.org/10.47951/mediad.808915.
  11. Çömez-Polat, F., & Tekdemir, G. (2023). What it takes to be religious: Religion online vs. online religion. Journal of Arab & Muslim Media Research, 16(2), 161–179. https://doi.org/10.1386/jammr_00061_1.
  12. Cushman, F. (2013). Action, outcome, and value: A dual-system framework for morality. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 17(3), 273–292. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868313495594.
  13. Durkheim, E. (1995). The elementary forms of religious life (K. E. Fields, Trans.). Free Press. (Original work published 1912)
  14. Edley, N. (2001). Analysing masculinity: Interpretative repertoires, ideological dilemmas and subject positions, discourse as data. a guide for analysis, (ed. m. wetherell, s. taylor and s. yates), s. 189–228. Sage.
  15. Effron, D. A., & Monin, B. (2010). Letting people off the hook: When do good deeds excuse transgressions? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36(12), 1618–1634. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167210385922.
  16. Ergül, N. (2025). Tüketim, dindarlık ve kutsal: Disiplinlerarası bir analiz. İmgelem, 177–202. https://doi.org/10.53791/imgelem.1647678.
  17. Glock, C. Y., & Stark, R. (1965). Religion and society in tension. Rand McNally.
  18. Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. Anchor Books.
  19. Greene, J. D., Sommerville, R. B., Nystrom, L. E., Darley, J. M., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). An fmri investigation of emotional engagement in moral judgment. Science, 293(5537), 2105–2108. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1062872.
  20. Günay, Ü. (1999). Erzurum ve çevre köylerinde dinî hayat. Dergâh Yayınları.
  21. Haidt, J. (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychological Review, 108(4), 814–834. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.108.4.814.
  22. Hill, P. C., & Hood, R. W. (1999). Measures of religiosity. Religious Education Press.
  23. Hitlin, S., & Vaisey, S. (2013). The new sociology of morality. Annual Review of Sociology, 39(1), 51–68. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-071312-145628.
  24. Hökelekli, H. (2010). Din psikolojisine giriş. Dem Yayınları.
  25. Hood, R. W., Jr., Hill, P. C., & Spilka, B. (2009). The psychology of religion: An empirical approach (4th ed.). Guilford Press.
  26. Kayıklık, H. (2011). Din psikolojisi: Bireysel dindarlık üzerine. Karahan Kitabevi.
  27. Killen, M., & Smetana, J. G. (2014). Handbook of moral development (2nd ed.). Psychology Press.
  28. Leman, P. J. (2001). The development of moral reasoning. In C. Fraser & B. Burchell (Eds.), Introducing social psychology (pp. 195–215). Polity Press.
  29. McKay, R., & Whitehouse, H. (2015). Religion and morality. Psychological Bulletin, 141(2), 447–473. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038455.
  30. Moore, C. (2015). Moral disengagement. Current Opinion in Psychology, 6, 199–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2015.07.018.
  31. Ryan, R. M., Rigby, C. S., & King, K. (1993). Two types of religious internalization and their relations to religious orientations and mental health. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65(3), 586–596. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.65.3.586.
  32. Saroglou, V. (2011). Believing, bonding, behaving, and belonging: The big four religious dimensions and cultural variation. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 42(8), 1320–1340. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022111412267.
  33. Saroglou, V. (2013). Religion, spirituality, and altruism. In K. I. Pargament (Ed.), APA handbook of psychology, religion, and spirituality (pp. 439–457, Vol. 1). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/14045-024.
  34. Smith, C. (2003). Moral, believing animals: Human personhood and culture. Oxford University Press.
  35. Vaisey, S. (2009). Motivation and justification: A dual-process model of culture in action. American Journal of Sociology, 114(6), 1675–1715. https://doi.org/10.1086/597179.
  36. Valdesolo, P., & DeSteno, D. (2008). The duality of virtue: Deconstructing the moral hypocrite. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44(5), 1334–1338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2008.03.010.
  37. Van Cappellen, P., & Saroglou, V. (2011). Awe activates religious and spiritual feelings and behavioral intentions. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 4(3), 223–236. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025986.
  38. Weber, M. (2002). The protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism (S. Kalberg, Trans.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203995808. (Original work published 1905)
  39. Wetherell, M., & Potter, J. (1987). Discourse and social psychology: Beyond attitudes and behaviour. Sage.
  40. Wetherell, M., & Potter, J. (1992). Mapping the language of racism: Discourse and the legitimation of exploitation. Columbia University Press.
  41. Yeşilmen, H. (2026). Kültürel tamamlanma süreci olarak sekülerleşme: Moderniteden dijitalleşmeye doğru dinin dönüşümü ve yeniden üretimi. İmgelem, (18), 499–528. https://doi.org/10.53791/imgelem.1828255.
  42. Ysseldyk, R., Matheson, K., & Anisman, H. (2010). Religiosity as identity: Toward an understanding of religion from a social identity perspective. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 14(1), 60–71. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868309349693.