Mendeley
TY  _  JOUR
ID  -  pesi-46186
TI  -  A Comparative Study on Human Agency in Bandura’s Cognitive-Social Theory and the Islamic Approach of “Human as agent”
JO  -  Philosophy of Education
JA  -  ES
LA  -  fa
SN  -  2538-2802
AU  -  naserzaeim mahdi
AU  -  mohammadi Reza
AU  -  Bagheri khosrow
AU  -  Fathabadi Jalil
AU  -  shokri OMID
AD  -  دانشگاه شهید بهشتی
AD  -  دانشگاه شهید بهشتی
AD  -  دانشگاه تهران 
AD  -  دانشگاه شهید بهشتی
AD  -  دانشگاه شهید بهشتی
Y1  -  2024
PY  -  2024
VL  -  7
IS  -  
SP  -  5
EP  -  24
KW  -  Agency
KW  -   Bandura's cognitive-social theory
KW  -   Islamic approach of "human as agent"
KW  -   Comparative study.   
DO  -  
N2  -  The purpose of this article is to compare the concept of agency in Bandura's cognitive-social theory and the Islamic approach of "human as agent". According to Bandura, agency refers to a voluntary effect on one's performance and environmental events, which has the main aspects of intentionality, foresight, self-reaction, and self-reflection. On the other hand, in the Islamic perspective, human action or agency is based on three fundamental bases: cognition, tendency, and volition. In terms of methodology, the current study is a comparative study that deals with similarities and differences of two viewpoints with a glance on their roots. In the educational section, Frankena’s practical syllogism is used as the method. The basics and aspects of agency in both perspectives have a lot in common, in such a way that foresight and self-reflection in the first perspective can be compared with the cognition in the second approach; as self-reactivity and intentionality in the first approach can be compared with the emotional and volitional bases in the second approach. Despite this, the two views have differences in issues such as the concept of action and performance, the nature of interactive, cognitive, emotional and volitional aspects, the nature of interaction, responsibility and ethics, which will have relevant consequences for education. While, for instance, the first approach emphasizes the importance of structure, the second approach gives more weight to individual agency, and as a result of this difference, the role and influence of the individual within social structures will be different. Given the importance of human agency which is at issue in the two approaches, their commonalities are emphasized in the educational inferences.
UR  - rimag.ir/en/Article/46186
L1  - rimag.ir/en/Article/Download/46186
ER  -  
