PERSPECTIVES
“Psychologists Say”
Although it is not very common (alhamdulillah), I have come across a minority of ‘popular’ speakers who, when offering Islamic guidance, attempt to reinforce their points by appealing to what “psychologists say.” This is not always inherently problematic; there can indeed be areas of overlap between psychological insights and Islamic teachings. However, given how modern psychological theories and secular ideologies function, this practice can create significant confusion and lead to deeper conceptual issues.
Islam does not require science- or worse, pseudoscience- to verify its truth, authority, or reliability. A growing concern in the emerging field of so-called “Islamic psychology” is that many individuals take Islamic teachings and then selectively reinterpret or misalign classical scholarship to fit contemporary liberal narratives. Thus, terms such as “Islamic psychoanalysis” or “Islamic CBT” are promoted as if two fundamentally different worldviews can be fused without contradiction. This is similar to suggesting an “Islamic Christianity” or “Islamic Buddhism”- superficial similarities do not bridge ontological and epistemological divides. Yes, certain psychological observations may appear congruent with Islam, but congruence does not imply full alignment in metaphysics, ethics, or understanding of the human being. It is similar to the Left and Right in political theory: there may be overlapping positions, but they remain distinct systems with different underlying assumptions.
Another issue arises when speakers who do not possess a deep understanding of psychology, philosophy, or the Islamic intellectual heritage as it pertains to “Islamic psychology” make sweeping assertions such as “psychologists say…,” creating the impression that such statements are established scientific facts. In reality, many psychological claims are debated, theoretical, culturally bound, or built on assumptions that conflict with an Islamic worldview- and scientifically false.
This problem also relates to the broader reality of secularisation. Modern psychology, in most of its dominant frameworks, emerges from a secular paradigm- an alternative din with its own conception of the self, wellbeing, morality, and authority. When Muslims adopt or attempt to “Islamicise” these frameworks uncritically, the result is often an unintended secularisation of Islamic thought. Over time, the authority of revelation risks being subordinated to the authority of secular psychological theories, and Islamic concepts are reshaped to fit contemporary ideological expectations.
A more grounded and intellectually responsible approach recognises that:
• Islam has its own comprehensive tradition concerning the soul (nafs), the heart (qalb), intellect (‘aql), and human behaviour.
• Secular psychology contains some beneficial observations and also many problematic philosophical assumptions and unscientific claims.
• Real ‘integration’ requires deep scholarship in both domains, not convenient borrowing.
• Revelation remains the ultimate source of truth, and empirical findings should be measured against it- not the other way around.
In essence, while using psychology to illustrate a point may sometimes be helpful, using it to authorise Islamic teachings- or reshaping Islam to satisfy modern psychological paradigms- risks distorting the religion and unintentionally secularising the Muslim worldview.
