The Coexistence of Different Explanatory Models of Misfortune: A Case from Serbia
| Authors | |
|---|---|
| Year of publication | 2015 |
| Type | Article in Periodical |
| Magazine / Source | Human Affairs |
| MU Faculty or unit | |
| Citation | |
| Doi | http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/humaff-2015-0022 |
| Field | Philosophy and religion |
| Keywords | supernatural harm; supernatural punishment; attribution theory; immanent justice; explanatory framework |
| Description | The paper discusses two concepts of supernatural explanations of misfortune and how they co-exist in a particular socio-cultural environment. The author argues that these two concepts are used differently depending on the position of the person evaluating them. While the concept of supernatural harm is usually used in “first person” narratives, the concept of God’s punishment is used by community members as a warning to all wrongdoers and cheats. Searching for the external source of problems is important for personal self-esteem, while identifying an internal cause and its consequence (God’s punishment as the consequence of someone’s “sins”) is part of “immanent justice” narratives. The central claim is based on attribution theory, but the study also looks at cognitive theories of supernatural beliefs. |
| Related projects: |