| The place of a topic like ‘procedures for developing religiosity’, as a novel and innovative topic, seems to have been standing empty beside topic like ‘origins of religiosity’, and ‘the origin of religion’. The present article, after describing the content, use, and requirements of the topic under investigation, deals with introducing and categorizing paradigms of religiosity. In order to come up with a more comprehensive understanding of the phenomenon of religiosity, its varieties, and developments, the researcher has introduced eleven different religiosity procedures, comparing and contrasting them at the same time. Religiosity procedures have been categorized in terms of three criteria: religious supply and demand, intentionality or non-intentionality of religiosity, and ‘theoretical or practical priority’ of the procedures. In the end, the paradigms have been evaluated in terms of possibility, circulation, and rationality. ‘Innate inclinations’ and ‘psychological preparation’ are paradigms proposed under the rubric of religious demand, whereas ‘acquisition’ is regarded the most prominent supply-oriented paradigm. However, what seems to be more realistic and more widespread would be the ‘dual’ paradigm of innateness of acquisition. Religiosity through ‘denial’, facing an extraordinary event, and being influenced by religious figures belong to non-intentional procedures. ‘Logical-rational’ or ‘selective’ procedures may be categorized under ‘intentional’ paradigms, through which merely intellectually developed or mature human beings may find their own ways. Finally, there is the so-called ‘practical religiosity’, the most widespread paradigm among the religious, especially among children and teenagers; whereas, the ‘inclusive paradigm’ offers the most realistic procedure for religiosity. |
