The Coexistence of Different Explanatory Models of Misfortune: A Case from Serbia

Investor logo

Warning

This publication doesn't include Faculty of Economics and Administration. It includes Faculty of Arts. Official publication website can be found on muni.cz.
Authors

JEROTIJEVIĆ Danijela

Year of publication 2015
Type Article in Periodical
Magazine / Source Human Affairs
MU Faculty or unit

Faculty of Arts

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:

You are running an old browser version. We recommend updating your browser to its latest version.