Abstract:Despite being of undisputed importance, there is no consensus on what emotions are, with the majority of research that constructs ideas about them being colored by a particular worldview. This conceptual article examines the case for conducting an Islamic analysis of emotion. It might seem a peculiar area to examine; what would be the need to analyze such a universal psychological concept through the lens of a particular religion? Three points are used to argue for this endeavor. To begin with, this article highlights the relative instability of the term; there is yet no universally agreed upon definition of what emotions are, and which human processes they contribute to. As the concept is still being defined, there is merit in engaging with the discussion, particularly given the relative absence of metaphysics from the debate. Secondly, specificities relating to emotions and how they have conceptualized are considered. This section delves into the way in which variable factors, such as culture, language, and worldview, influence how emotions manifest. The overarching point argued for here is that how emotions are experienced, and even which emotions are experienced, are shaped by factors that are not consistent across time and space. Accordingly, different worldviews will formulate different "emotional palates" and "emotional ideologies"; different groups of people will understand and engage with emotions differently. Thirdly, a broader discussion ensues pertaining to the nature of science, psychology, and their relationship with secularity. This discussion includes critique of the idea that forces such as secularism and scientific materialism have been "discovered" and are therefore value-neutral. Accordingly, understandings of emotions to have emerged from the Academy, and contemporary psychology, are value-laden. This section also looks at the origins of science in order to determine whether it is inherently atheistic or areligious, and therefore antagonistic to a religious worldview. The section also challenges the apparent secularity of psychology and key psychologists. A range of other facets pertaining to how the emotions have been conceptualized, such as their relational core, their interaction with moral faculties, and their enmeshment with what is important to individuals and groups, are also considered.

Incorrect emotions in ancient, austrian & contemporary philosophy

The Logic of Emotional Experience: Noninferentiality and the Problem of Conflict Without Contradiction

When is lack of emotion a problem for justice? Four views on legal decision makers’ emotive life

Reason without feelings? Emotions in the history of western philosophy

Concepts of Emotions in Modern Philosophy and Psychology

Philosophical Considerations on Errors in Teaching and Learning

Emotions in Philosophy. A Short Introduction

Do we need to reconceptualize emotions?

Correction to "The dual-process approach to human sociality: Meta-analytic evidence for a theory of internalized heuristics for self-preservation" by Capraro (2024).

How to judge emotions? Measuring moral emotions of lawyers in a retrospective situation

Law, Reason, and Emotion

II. The Emotions and their Philosophy of Mind

Introduction: The Challenge of Uncovering and Using Emotions in Criminal Justice

Medicine, emotience, and reason

Tracing the Origin of Concepts in Western Ethics: An Existentialist Interpretation of Aristotle's Ethical Concepts

Do emotions play an essential role in moral judgments?

Philosophical handling of "Idiographic Approach”

On the conceptual grounds of subjective rectification: Responsibility, choice, and freedom in Lacanian psychoanalysis

Moral Judgment and the Non-metaphysical Trend of Ethics

A concept in flux and starved of the metaphysical: desecularizing emotion

The Emotional Dog Was a Glauconian Canine: The Reception of the Social Intuitionist Model, From the Neurocentric Paradigm to the Digital Paradigm