AUCTORES
Globalize your Research
Research | DOI: https://doi.org/10.31579/2690-1919/189
1 Academic Member at Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Iran.
2 Department of English language, Iran Language Institute, Iran.
*Corresponding Author: Ebrahim Khodadady, Academic Member at Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Iran.
Citation: Ebrahim Khodadady and Zahra H. Zahani, (2021). Which Self Represents Sapiens? Biological, Psychiatric, Psychological or Religious? J Clinical Research and Reports, 8(5); DOI:10.31579/2690-1919/189
Copyright: © 2021 Ebrahim Khodadady. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Received: 28 July 2021 | Accepted: 17 August 2021 | Published: 28 August 2021
Keywords: life; self; sapiens; schema theory; harmful organisms; living things; psychiatry
Background: The physical science of biology and social sciences of psychiatry, psychology and religion address “self” as one of their main themes of investigation.
Objective: to find out which self-described by these sciences represents “sapiens” distinguished from all other organisms because of having wisdom.
Methodology: a representative text of biology was chosen and subjected to textual and statistical analyses and contrasted to those of psychiatry, psychology and religion.
Results: Biology, psychiatry and psychology employ the eight-taxon structure of Linnaeus [1] in which wisdom has no role to play and thus “sapiens” are treated as if they were similar, if not the same as, all other species of plants and animals. Religion, however, divides “sapiens” to three types of self-based on whether they exercise their wisdom or not.
Conclusion: Biology, psychiatry and psychology render all selves including “sapiens” subject to life on the earth and justify whatever they do in terms of securing and enjoying it. Religion, however, lifts “sapiens” to the vicegerency of God and holds them responsible for the type of self they choose to become by extending life to hereafter.
Linnaeus [1] was the first biologist who provided humans with a scientific name to distinguish them from all other “living things” or “organisms” [2], i.e., sapiens. Khodadady [3] was also the first scholar who utilized schema as a theory to explain words such as “sapiens” not only from a biological or taxonomical perspective as Linnaeus did but also from linguistic, cognitive and personal or individualistic dimensions. (While words are external and exist in dictionaries what they represent in the mind of a specific person or individual are internal and form that individual’s schemata, the plural of schema.)
Upon naming humans as “sapiens” Linnaeus [1] placed them at the lowest level or taxon of a hierarchically organized structure or taxonomy, i.e., species, and related them to other organisms biologically by including them at seven other taxa called genus, family, order, class, phylum, kingdom, and domain. Khodadady [3, 4] argued that Linnaeus’ taxonomy represents cognition as materialized in reading comprehension ability. Khodadady also contended that each taxon of cognition stands for a concept, mental image or schema with a number of constituting common and distinctive features through which it not only distinguishes itself but also relates to other taxa in the mind of a specific individual.
Linnaeus [1], for example, used the distinct feature of “wise” or “sapiens” in Latin [5] to distinguish humans from all other organisms. “Sapiens” is, therefore, a biological schema whose “wisdom” distinguishes them as a specific “species” different from all other species such as chimpanzees as another distinct “species”. In spite of being a distinct species different from the species of chimpanzees, “sapiens,” bear “anatomical resemblance” [6] to chimpanzees and are, therefore, placed together in the cognitive taxa of family represented by the biological schema hominidae (Table 1).
| No | Cognitive taxa | Biological schemata | Constituting features |
| 1 | domain | organisms | humans, chimpanzees, monkeys, bats, frogs, birds, plants, bacteria |
| 2 | kingdom | animals | humans, chimpanzees, monkeys, bats, frogs, birds |
| 3 | phylum | vertebrates | humans, chimpanzees, monkeys, bats, frogs |
| 4 | class | mammals | humans, chimpanzees, monkeys, bats |
| 5 | order | primates | humans, chimpanzees, monkeys |
| 6 | family | hominidae | humans, chimpanzees |
| 7 | genus | Homo sapiens | humans, Neanderthal (extinct) |
| 8 | species | sapiens | wise living things or humans |
Table 1: Cognitive taxa represented by biological schemata and their constituting features
Although as a biologist Linnaeus [1] did not provide any further elaboration of “sapiens” in terms of wisdom as their distinctive feature, modern biologists do employ “self” as a schema in their writings quite frequently. The present researchers believe that the wisdom in “sapiens” is partly captured by the schema “self” defined as “a set of cognitive [emphasis added] processes concerned with thought and perception” [7]. Furthermore, wisdom, according to Delaney [8], requires “an understanding [emphasis added] of the highest principles of things that functions as a guide for living a truly exemplary human life” (p. 976).
By resorting to cognitive taxa and their representative biological schemata containing distinctive features such as those presented in Table 1 above, the present study was designed and conducted to find out which features of organisms in general and sapiens in particular are represented by the schema “self” in “Life: The science of Biology” [2] as a representative textbook of biology. Four research questions were raised to guide the study.
1. How many features of “self” are used in biology?
2. Which features of “self” have the highest frequency in biology?
3. What schemata do “self” and its features represent the most in biology?
4. Do biology, psychiatry, psychology and religion differ in their classification and explanation of “self” and its features?
Texts
Following Khodadady and Zahani [9] who chose “Kaplan & Sadock's Synopsis of Psychiatry: Behavioral Sciences/ Clinical Psychiatry” [10], “Abnormal Psychology,” [11], and the Quran as the representative texts of psychiatry, psychology and religion, respectively, the present researchers chose the 10th edition of “Life: The science of Biology” [2] as a representative text to study the schema species represented by the word “self” in biology. The textbook consists of 1442 pages, ten parts and 59 chapters.
In addition to the representative text of biology, the findings of Khodadady and Zahani [9] on the representative texts of psychiatry, psychology and religion were used in this study. Since the scientific evidences of the representative text of religion, i.e., the Quran, have also been referred to in this study to address “self” from a more inclusive perspective, among its various translations, the rendering of Nasr, Dagli, Dakake, Lumbard and Rustom [12] has also been employed and quoted if not specified otherwise.
The PDF file of “Life: The science of Biology” [2] was broken into different sections by utilizing Adobe Acrobat Pro DC version 2015. The title page, table of contents, illustration credits, and index were excluded from any analysis in this study. A table of specifications was developed in Word to specify the page number and the linguistic context, i.e., a single sentence, sentences, or paragraph, of which the words “self” and “selves” formed a part. If a single sentence containing these words and their derivatives was not clear enough, the sentences or paragraphs in which they occurred were analyzed in order to determine the cognitive taxa and biological schemata the words containing “self” addressed.
Table 2 presents sample linguistic contexts analyzed in this study to determine the schemata biology employs to define “self” at various cognitive levels. As can be seen, “self-regulate” in a sentence on page two of the representative textbook provides a distinctive feature of “living organisms” at the highest level of cognition, i.e., domain. Specifying the biological schema represented by “itself”, however, requires analyzing two sentences on page 637 to treat it as a distinctive feature of animals. As a biological schema animals represent the second highest level of cognition, i.e., kingdom, in biology. Similarly, two sentences on page 575 must be read together to understand “self-sufficient” as a distinctive feature of plants. As a biological schema plants represent another kingdom of cognition. (Biologists like Collin [13] generally divide organisms as a cognitive domain into three kingdoms represented by the schemata animals, plants and micro-organisms.)
| Page | Linguistic contexts | Biological schemata | Distinctive feature |
| 2 | Living organisms self-regulate their internal environments, thus maintaining the conditions that allow them to survive. | living organisms | self-regulate |
| 637 | Air and water often contain small organisms and organic molecules that are potential food for animals. Moving air and water may carry those items to an animal that positions itself in a good location. | animal | Itself |
| 575 | There is a trend toward reduction of the gametophyte generation in plant evolution. In the nonvascular land plants, the gametophyte is larger, longer-lived, and more self-sufficient than the sporophyte. | plants | self-sufficient |
Table 2: The biological schemata addressed by “self”
Data Analysis
Following Bussmann [14] the “blank spaces” (p. 1285) appearing before and after the word “self” and its derivatives were used to identify and separate them one by one to compile a corpus. Descriptive statistics were then carried out on the corpus to specify the frequency and types of each word. Chi-square analyses were also carried out to find out whether the biology differed significantly from the fields of psychiatry, psychology and religion in the type of “self” and its derivatives it addresses. All analyses were conducted via IBM SPSS Statistic 24.
Table 3 presents “self” and its features in biology. As can be seen, the “self” has the second highest frequency of 46 (f=46, 10.4%) preceded by “themselves” and “itself” as its first and second most frequent features, i.e., 129 (29.3%) and 112 (25.4%), respectively. These results answer the first and second research questions by setting the number of “self” features at 40 and specifying “themselves” and “itself” as its most frequent features. These results partially agree with those of Khodadady and Zahani [9] because “themselves” is not only the first most frequent feature (f= 129) of “self” in biology but also in psychiatry, psychology and religion, i.e., f=324, 325, and 77, respectively.
| No | “Self” and its features | F | % | No | “Self” and its features | F | % |
| 1 | antiself | 1 | 0.2 | 22 | self-fertilizes | 1 | 0.2 |
| 2 | herself | 1 | 0.2 | 23 | self-fertilizing | 3 | 0.7 |
| 3 | himself | 7 | 1.6 | 24 | self-incompatibility | 10 | 2.3 |
| 4 | itself | 111 | 25.4 | 25 | self-incompatible | 6 | 1.4 |
| 5 | nonself | 32 | 7.3 | 26 | selfing | 4 | 0.9 |
| 6 | ourselves | 3 | 0.7 | 27 | selfish | 1 | 0.2 |
| 7 | same-as-self | 1 | 0.2 | 28 | self-pollinate | 10 | 2.3 |
| 8 | self | 46 | 10.4 | 29 | self-pollinating | 1 | 0.2 |
| 9 | self-cells | 1 | 0.2 | 30 | self-pollination | 11 | 2.5 |
| 10 | self-assembles | 1 | 0.2 | 31 | self-propagating | 1 | 0.2 |
| 11 | self-awareness | 1 | 0.2 | 32 | self-regenerating | 6 | 1.4 |
| 12 | self-compatibility | 7 | 1.6 | 33 | self-regulate | 1 | 0.2 |
| 13 | self-compatible | 4 | 0.9 | 34 | self-regulation | 1 | 0.2 |
| 14 | self-consumption | 1 | 0.2 | 35 | self-replicate | 1 | 0.2 |
| 15 | self-contained | 4 | 0.9 | 36 | self-replicating | 2 | 0.5 |
| 16 | self-control | 1 | 0.2 | 37 | self-replication | 2 | 0.5 |
| 17 | self-destruct | 2 | 0.5 | 38 | self-sufficiency | 1 | 0.2 |
| 18 | self-extending | 1 | 0.2 | 39 | self-sufficient | 2 | 0.5 |
| 19 | self-feeders | 1 | 0.2 | 40 | themselves | 129 | 29.3 |
| 20 | self-fertilization | 14 | 3.2 | 41 | yourself | 5 | 1.1 |
| 21 | self-fertilize | 3 | 0.7 | Total | 441 | 100 |
Table 3: Frequency (F) and percentage (%) of “self” and its features in biology
“Self” and its features represent 194 biological schemata, 20 most frequent of which are presented in Table 4 to answer the third research question. (Interested readers can contact the corresponding author for the complete list of these schemata.) As can be seen “plants” as the kingdom of cognition had the highest frequency (71, 16.1%), e.g., Most plants have evolved mechanisms that prevent self-fertilization. “Self” itself represents various cognitive taxa such as the antigens of cognitive species representing “sapiens” or people, as the second most frequent (26, 5.9%), e.g., People with rheumatoid arthritis have difficulty in shutting down a T cell response to self-antigens. It is followed by the cognitive kingdom of “animals” as the third highest (f=19, 4.3%), e.g., Animals have several ways of defending themselves against pathogens—harmful organisms and viruses that can cause disease.
| No | Biological schemata | F | % | No | Biological schemata | F | % |
| 1 | plant, plants | 71 | 16.1 | 11 | Leptosiphon | 9 | 2.0 |
| 2 | antigen, antigens | 26 | 5.9 | 12 | action potential | 6 | 1.4 |
| 3 | animal, animals | 19 | 4.3 | 13 | Birds | 6 | 1.4 |
| 4 | organism, organisms | 15 | 3.4 | 14 | DNA | 5 | 1.1 |
| 5 | sapiens [man, people, taxi drivers, transplant receivers, you] | 13 | 2.9 | 15 | B cells | 4 | 0.9 |
| 6 | Species | 12 | 2.7 | 16 | bacterium, bacteria | 4 | 0.9 |
| 7 | protein, proteins | 11 | 2.5 | 17 | Fungi | 4 | 0.9 |
| 8 | cell, cells | 10 | 2.3 | 18 | Pollen | 4 | 0.9 |
| 9 | molecule, molecules | 10 | 2.3 | 19 | flower, flowers | 3 | 0.7 |
| 10 | immune system | 9 | 2.0 | 20 | Individuals | 3 | 0.7 |
Table 4: Most frequent biological schemata and the frequency (F) and percentage (%) with which they were represented by “self” in biology
Biology, psychiatry, psychology and religion share “self” and five of its features as common schemata, i.e., “herself”, “himself”, “ourselves”, “themselves”, and “yourself”. They do, however, not only bring up 27, 173, 33 and three features exclusively, respectively, but also in various combinations with each other resulting in the creation of six interdisciplinary fields as shown in Table 5. The Chi-square analysis of these common and exclusive features answers the fourth research question and shows that the fields differ significantly from each other in their classification and explanation of “self” and its features, i.e. X2= 822.242, df=9, p < .0001.
| Field of Study | F | % | Field of Study | F | % |
| Biology | 27 | 8.6 | Psychiatry & Psychology | 62 | 19.7 |
| Psychiatry | 173 | 55.1 | Psychiatry, Psychology & Religion | 1 | 0.3 |
| Psychology | 33 | 10.5 | Psychology & Religion | 1 | 0.3 |
| Religion | 3 | 1.0 | Biology, Psychiatry, Psychology & Religion | 6 | 1.9 |
| Biology & Psychiatry | 2 | 0.6 | Total | 314 | 100.0 |
| Biology, Psychiatry & Religion | 6 | 1.9 |
Table 5: Frequency (F) and percent (%) of “self” and its 313 features addressed in 10 fields
Biology is the science of organisms because they alone possess the distinctive feature of life. Though the representative text of biology analyzed in the present study, i.e., “Life: The science of Biology” [2], never tells its readers where life comes from or why the organisms have been brought to life, it addresses them in general and “sapiens” in particular by assigning them to eight taxa of cognition, i.e., species, genus, family, order, class, phylum, kingdom, and domain. Although biology deals with the “sapiens” as an important species, it deliberately subsumes them under the cognitive taxa of kingdom represented by plants, animals and microorganisms in order to strip them of their unique wisdom.
Biology, for example, replaces the scientific schema “sapiens” with “man”, “people”, “taxi drivers”, “transplant receivers”, and “you”. It then describes these general schemata in a way that renders sapiens everything but a “wise self” For elaborating “Animal Reproduction”, for example, biology brings up coitus interruptus as a non-technological method of contraception through which “the man withdraws his penis prior to ejaculation with the intention of not depositing sperm into the vagina” It then provides the comment that coitus interruptus “requires self-control, especially by the man”, highlighting the fact that it has a “very high failure rate” (p. 898)!
Practicing coitus interruptus by sapiens, however, defies what biology studies as a scientific field, i.e., life. Biology divides all things having life, including sapiens, as selves into two categories, i.e., “self” (f=46, 10.4%) and “nonself” (f= 32, 7.3%), having the third and fourth highest frequencies after “themselves” (f= 129, 29.3) and “itself” (f= 111, 25.4%) [see Table 3]. Biology also approaches “self” as an action whose accomplishment secures the life of organisms through reproduction. According to Sadava et al [2] “individuals of some species”, for example, “regularly fertilize their ovules using their own pollen; they are referred to as self-fertilizing, or selfing, species” (p. 460).
In other words, the life studied by biology allegedly occurs out of blue and scientifically secured through certain instinctual behaviours referred to as self-fertilization (f=14, 3.2%), self-pollination (f=11, 2.5%), self-pollinate (f=10, 2.3%), self-regenerating (f=6, 1.4%), selfing (f=4, 0.9%), self-fertilize (f=3, 0.7%), self-fertilizing (f=3, 0.7%), self-replicating (f=2, 0.5%), self-replication (f=2, 0.5%), self-fertilizes (f=1, 0.2%), self-pollinating (f=1, 0.2%), self-propagating (f=1, 0.2%), and self-replicate (f=1, 0.2%). These findings show that out of 41 features of “self” studied in biology 13 (32%) deal specifically with sexual and non-sexual reproduction of “self” (see Table 3).
If a mature male sapiens enters a mature female why should he withdraw “his penis prior to ejaculation with the intention of not depositing sperm into her vagina” if he knows that their life as “selves” may be secured through this intercourse? Which members of sapiens living with these two male and female selves in the same society should they consider as “self” and which ones should they treat as “nonself? Biology considers itself a physical science which is incapable of answering these questions.
Biology [2] does, for example, declare categorically that “although scientific knowledge allows us to do these things [e.g., to select the sex of our children, to use stem cells to repair our bodies, and to modify the human genome], science cannot tell us whether or not we should do so or, if we choose to do them, how we should regulate them. Such issues are as crucial to human society as the science itself, and a responsible scientist does not lose sight of these questions or neglect the contributions of the humanities or social sciences in attempting to come to grips with them” (p. 14)
Among the social sciences recommended indirectly by biology, psychiatry and psychology deal specifically with “self”. Similar to biology, these two sciences approach sex as one of their main themes. As a psychologist, Comer [11], for example, resorted to Freud, a psychiatrist, to claim that “all id instincts tend to be sexual, noting that from the very earliest stages of life a child’s pleasure is obtained from nursing, defecating, masturbating, or engaging in other activities that he considered to have sexual ties” (p. 63). In response to questions raised by biology, psychiatry and psychology, however, brush away the centrality of “sex” and suggest following “true self” [15] instead. They seem to be arguing, for example, that as “sapiens” these are the “true selves” who can decide when, how, why and with whom they can have sex with or without coitus interruptus.
The “true self” accepted and advocated by social sciences such as psychiatry and psychology is however, according to Strohminger, Newman and Knob [16], “shall we say, evidence-insensitive. … claims made on its behalf may completely contradict all available data, as when the hopelessly miserable and knavish are nonetheless deemed good ’deep down’. The true self is posited rather than observed. It is a hopeful phantasm. … in our view, it is a fiction nonetheless” (p. 7).
Neither biology nor psychiatry and psychology do, therefore, offer any answers to the questions dealing with the wisdom of “sapiens” as a “self” from a scientific perspective. Religion does, however, distinguish and separate “sapiens” from all other “selves” subsumed under the biological schemata of plants, animals and microorganisms in terms of their wisdom. It stems from their two unique features, i.e., having God’s psyche (e.g., Q15:29), and their being God’s only vicegerents on the earth (e.g., Q2:30; 6:165). The “sapiens” are, however, warned by religion that they have not been given God’s psyche and vicegerency to do whatever they want but to be tried as to which of them proves to be “the most virtuous in deed” (Q67:2). The acquisition of these virtues does in fact determine the “self” each “sapiens” prefers to become.
The best or highest virtue which is scientifically known as religious orientation is defined by the Quran as “living in this world and hereafter by seeking and following God as the best model and supporter” [17]. In other words, wisdom will be acquired if a “sapiens” complies what God says and avoids what God forbids. They should, for example, be patient (Q13:22) curb their rage (Q3:134), do whatever they say (Q61:2), give regular charity (Q22:41), and stand out firmly for justice (Q4:135). They should not, however, betray trusts (Q8:27), commit fornication (Q25:68), consume alcohol or gamble (Q5:90), defame or slander people (Q49:11), fabricate a lie against God or deny His signs (Q10:17), fear the blame of any blamer (Q5:54), give money in usury or earn any money in usury (Q2:278), help one another toward sin and enmity (Q5:2), and wrong anyone (Q4:29) o name a few.
Instead of adopting a scientific method to examine “sapiens” from a religious perspective biology has joined hands with psychiatry and psychology to render God, the creator of life and death (Q67:2), organismic. According to Sadava et al [2], for example, “the 20 species of priapulids are cylindrical, unsegmented, wormlike animals with a three-part body plan consisting of a proboscis, trunk, and caudal appendage (“tail”). It should be clear from their appearance why they were named after the Greek fertility god Priapus” (p. 665). Any male sapiens having a penis of Priapus (Figure 1) will never, shall it be argued from an instinctive and hedonistic perspective, withdraw it from the vagina of any female he chooses for the very reason of being a god of fertility!
Biology, psychiatry and psychology do in fact equate “self” with its “life” and indirectly teach all male sapiens to look at themselves as gods and follow none but themselves, if not physical and social scientists! To deify “sapiens” the majority of these scientists, for example, resort to various strategies such as naming some organisms after the Greek fertility god Priapus. Doing so they assume the delusional position of god themselves, i.e., self-theists, and convince others to follow them as polytheists. They justify their delusion by selling the existence of fertility gods as a reality, endorsing having or making penises similar to that of Priapus as indicators of godhood and shouldering off the responsibility of entering and impregnating females as nontechnical! Eulogizing these delusion developers, Harari [18], for example, claimed “We are more powerful than ever before …Self-made gods with only the laws of physics to keep us company (p. 352).
The delusional nature of Harari’s [18] claim that we as sapiens are “self-made gods” is explained by religion. The Quran, for example, argues that there is no god but one and only one God (e.g., Q37:35; 47:19) because of a number of reasons. He is, for example, the Living and Self-subsisting who never dies (Q2:255). Furthermore, God is the Eternally Sufficient unto Himself. (Q112:2). He begets not; nor is He begotten (Q112:3). And there is none like unto Him (Q112:4). The delusions presented as scientific findings are not confined to fabricating organismic gods and advertising sapiens as “self-made gods”. They are extended to what they do as “selves”.
The unaccountability of criminal “selves” such as murderers is brought up as a fact or treated as mental disorders in psychiatry and psychology at most because sapiens “are accountable to no one” [18]. A clear and modern example for such criminals is Trump, the former president of America. Being defeated in his second presidential campaign in 2020 he fabricated many lies and incited his supporters to invade the Capitol Hills and stop the approval of his rival, President Biden, as his successor. Trump’s supporters injured and killed several people in the process of invasion on January 6, 2021. His second impeachment trial in Senate, however, found Trump not guilty of any crime!
According to religion, Harari’s [18] statement that sapiens such as Trump “are accountable to no one” (p. 352) is, nonetheless, a delusion he and almost all biologists, psychiatrists and psychologists believe and support as reality. While they consider “death” as the end of everything including “life”, religion argues that “life” in this world is a probationary period during which whatever the sapiens do is recorded in smallest details. It also instructs each and every sapiens to either act as a “vicegerent of God” (Q6:165), i.e., practicing monotheists, or become a self-theist like Trump and polytheists like his supporters if they wish to follow their own desires [9].
Acknowledging the lack of accountability for the majority of self-theists and polytheists as a fact in this world, religion, however, admonishes that in the hereafter they will be held accountable for the type of “self” they become. It does, for example, announce categorically that the purpose of life and death is nothing but to evaluate “sapiens’ behaviour in this world (Q67:2). While the “life” allows sapiens to choose the self they prefer to be through God’s vicegerency, the “death” renders it probationary. It does in fact strip sapiens from whatever abilities they were given in “life” till they are resurrected on the Judgment Day. On this day each self shall see not only a mote’s weight of good but also a mote’s weight of evil it has done (Q99:7-8). These religious statements do, therefore, imply that sapiens may not be accountable to each other here in this world if they choose to do so. They will, however, be held accountable in the hereafter.
For holding every “self” accountable to God in the hereafter biology, psychiatry and psychology either ignore or oppose religion implicitly. Their opposition goes to such an extreme that they do not even pay attention to scientific findings pointing to the accountability of “self” to God. According to the Torah, for example, the prophet Moses [19] and his brother Aaron were sent by God to deliver the Israelites from the bondage of an Egyptian Pharaoh called Merneptah. He succeeded his father, Ramesses II, who died in “1213 BCE” [20]. Both pharaohs were self-theists who killed many young male Israelites to control their population!
The Quran which was first revealed to the prophet Muhammad in “609/610…CE” [21], i.e., more than 1800 years after Merneptah’s death, provides a specific account of his death and foretells a scientific discovery which took place 1289 years after its revelation, i.e., 1898. After the Pharaoh realizes that he could not ward off the plagues inflicted by God, he allows the Israelites to leave Egypt with Moses. However, very soon the pharaoh and his elites realize that they could not do without the slaves. Gathering a large army the pharaoh chases the Israelites to the Red Sea.
“We [God] carried the Children of Israel across the sea, and Pharaoh and his hosts pursued them out of envy and enmity till, when drowning overtook them, he said, “I believe that there is no god but the One in whom the Children of Israel believe, and I am among those who submit.” Now, though previously you disobeyed and were among the workers of corruption? Today We shall save you in your body that you might be a sign unto those who come after you. Yet many among mankind are heedless of Our signs” (Q10:90-92).
The mummified body of Pharaoh Merneptah was discovered by Loret in 1898 at Thebes in the Kings' Valley. He was transported to Cairo where Elliot Smith removed its wrappings on the 8th of July, 1907. Smith later provided a detailed description of this operation and the examination of the body in his book "The Royal Mummies” [22]. In June 1975, along with a team of various expertises Dr. Maurice Bucaille, a medical doctor and surgeon by profession, was allowed to examine the parts of the Pharaoh's body that had been covered until then (Figure 2). He concluded that Merneptah “most probably died either from drowning, according to the Scriptural narrations, or from very violent shocks preceding the moment when he was drowned-or both at once” [23].
Biology, psychiatry and psychology call humans “sapiens” [1] and study them as the lowest taxon of a hierarchically organized structure whose highest taxon consists of living things such as chimpanzees, trees and bacteria having “life” as a common constant. Religion, however, approaches “sapiens” as “God’s vicegerents” (Q2:30; 6:165; 10:14; 35:39) whose psyche not only sets them apart from but also gives them control and mastery over all the living things. In spite of being distinct and separate from all living things, “sapiens”, according to religion, share “life” with them not as a constant but as a variable for “a term appointed” (e.g., Q29:53).
The variable of life for some species of living things is, however, so important that in order to secure it they do whatever they can including “selfing”, i.e., “regularly fertilize their ovules using their own pollen” [2]. Similarly, some “sapiens” commit “selfing” or “incest” along with other behaviours such as exploiting and killing the innocent fellow “sapiens” for many reasons including that of depriving others of their life. Neither psychiatry nor psychology, however, holds these “sapiens” responsible for what they have done. They are at most treated as mentally disordered if they failed in escaping the so called human justice.
Religion, nonetheless, treats the life of “sapiens” not as an end in itself as biology, psychiatry and psychology do, but as a temporary and appointed period of time on the earth during which the “sapiens” can exercise their wisdom consciously and freely to become self-theists, polytheists or practicing monotheists [9]. With death the period ends after which these three selves will be held accountable for what they have done. In order to provide an objective example and show what will happen to self-theists and their polytheistic followers here on this earth, religion relates the case of an Egyptian Pharaoh called Merneptah. His body was discovered by modern “sapiens” after his death more than 3000 years ago and his being drowned was confirmed by medical experts as foretold in the Quran when it was revealed 1400 years ago to the prophet Muhammad.
In contrast to self-theists like Merneptah and polytheists like his followers, religion announces that the practicing monotheists such as Moses, Jesus and Muhammad as well as their followers achieve perpetual life and bliss after their worldly death, e.g., “deem not those slain in the way of God to be dead. Rather, they are alive with their Lord, provided for” (Q3:169). In other words, by following God, “sapiens” acquire some of His attributes such as “wisdom” (e.g., Q3:6) here in this world and “perpetual life” (Q2:255) in the hereafter. The present researchers believe that acquiring perpetual life or complete health is the ultimate goal of all “sapiens” sought through sciences such as medicine, psychiatry, psychology and religion.
Conflict of interest: None
Funding: None
Clearly Auctoresonline and particularly Psychology and Mental Health Care Journal is dedicated to improving health care services for individuals and populations. The editorial boards' ability to efficiently recognize and share the global importance of health literacy with a variety of stakeholders. Auctoresonline publishing platform can be used to facilitate of optimal client-based services and should be added to health care professionals' repertoire of evidence-based health care resources.
Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Intervention The submission and review process was adequate. However I think that the publication total value should have been enlightened in early fases. Thank you for all.
Journal of Women Health Care and Issues By the present mail, I want to say thank to you and tour colleagues for facilitating my published article. Specially thank you for the peer review process, support from the editorial office. I appreciate positively the quality of your journal.
Journal of Clinical Research and Reports I would be very delighted to submit my testimonial regarding the reviewer board and the editorial office. The reviewer board were accurate and helpful regarding any modifications for my manuscript. And the editorial office were very helpful and supportive in contacting and monitoring with any update and offering help. It was my pleasure to contribute with your promising Journal and I am looking forward for more collaboration.
We would like to thank the Journal of Thoracic Disease and Cardiothoracic Surgery because of the services they provided us for our articles. The peer-review process was done in a very excellent time manner, and the opinions of the reviewers helped us to improve our manuscript further. The editorial office had an outstanding correspondence with us and guided us in many ways. During a hard time of the pandemic that is affecting every one of us tremendously, the editorial office helped us make everything easier for publishing scientific work. Hope for a more scientific relationship with your Journal.
The peer-review process which consisted high quality queries on the paper. I did answer six reviewers’ questions and comments before the paper was accepted. The support from the editorial office is excellent.
Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. I had the experience of publishing a research article recently. The whole process was simple from submission to publication. The reviewers made specific and valuable recommendations and corrections that improved the quality of my publication. I strongly recommend this Journal.
Dr. Katarzyna Byczkowska My testimonial covering: "The peer review process is quick and effective. The support from the editorial office is very professional and friendly. Quality of the Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on cardiology that is useful for other professionals in the field.
Thank you most sincerely, with regard to the support you have given in relation to the reviewing process and the processing of my article entitled "Large Cell Neuroendocrine Carcinoma of The Prostate Gland: A Review and Update" for publication in your esteemed Journal, Journal of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics". The editorial team has been very supportive.
Testimony of Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology: work with your Reviews has been a educational and constructive experience. The editorial office were very helpful and supportive. It was a pleasure to contribute to your Journal.
Dr. Bernard Terkimbi Utoo, I am happy to publish my scientific work in Journal of Women Health Care and Issues (JWHCI). The manuscript submission was seamless and peer review process was top notch. I was amazed that 4 reviewers worked on the manuscript which made it a highly technical, standard and excellent quality paper. I appreciate the format and consideration for the APC as well as the speed of publication. It is my pleasure to continue with this scientific relationship with the esteem JWHCI.
This is an acknowledgment for peer reviewers, editorial board of Journal of Clinical Research and Reports. They show a lot of consideration for us as publishers for our research article “Evaluation of the different factors associated with side effects of COVID-19 vaccination on medical students, Mutah university, Al-Karak, Jordan”, in a very professional and easy way. This journal is one of outstanding medical journal.
Dear Hao Jiang, to Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing We greatly appreciate the efficient, professional and rapid processing of our paper by your team. If there is anything else we should do, please do not hesitate to let us know. On behalf of my co-authors, we would like to express our great appreciation to editor and reviewers.
As an author who has recently published in the journal "Brain and Neurological Disorders". I am delighted to provide a testimonial on the peer review process, editorial office support, and the overall quality of the journal. The peer review process at Brain and Neurological Disorders is rigorous and meticulous, ensuring that only high-quality, evidence-based research is published. The reviewers are experts in their fields, and their comments and suggestions were constructive and helped improve the quality of my manuscript. The review process was timely and efficient, with clear communication from the editorial office at each stage. The support from the editorial office was exceptional throughout the entire process. The editorial staff was responsive, professional, and always willing to help. They provided valuable guidance on formatting, structure, and ethical considerations, making the submission process seamless. Moreover, they kept me informed about the status of my manuscript and provided timely updates, which made the process less stressful. The journal Brain and Neurological Disorders is of the highest quality, with a strong focus on publishing cutting-edge research in the field of neurology. The articles published in this journal are well-researched, rigorously peer-reviewed, and written by experts in the field. The journal maintains high standards, ensuring that readers are provided with the most up-to-date and reliable information on brain and neurological disorders. In conclusion, I had a wonderful experience publishing in Brain and Neurological Disorders. The peer review process was thorough, the editorial office provided exceptional support, and the journal's quality is second to none. I would highly recommend this journal to any researcher working in the field of neurology and brain disorders.
Dear Agrippa Hilda, Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery, Editorial Coordinator, I trust this message finds you well. I want to extend my appreciation for considering my article for publication in your esteemed journal. I am pleased to provide a testimonial regarding the peer review process and the support received from your editorial office. The peer review process for my paper was carried out in a highly professional and thorough manner. The feedback and comments provided by the authors were constructive and very useful in improving the quality of the manuscript. This rigorous assessment process undoubtedly contributes to the high standards maintained by your journal.
International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews. I strongly recommend to consider submitting your work to this high-quality journal. The support and availability of the Editorial staff is outstanding and the review process was both efficient and rigorous.
Thank you very much for publishing my Research Article titled “Comparing Treatment Outcome Of Allergic Rhinitis Patients After Using Fluticasone Nasal Spray And Nasal Douching" in the Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology. As Medical Professionals we are immensely benefited from study of various informative Articles and Papers published in this high quality Journal. I look forward to enriching my knowledge by regular study of the Journal and contribute my future work in the field of ENT through the Journal for use by the medical fraternity. The support from the Editorial office was excellent and very prompt. I also welcome the comments received from the readers of my Research Article.
Dear Erica Kelsey, Editorial Coordinator of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics Our team is very satisfied with the processing of our paper by your journal. That was fast, efficient, rigorous, but without unnecessary complications. We appreciated the very short time between the submission of the paper and its publication on line on your site.
I am very glad to say that the peer review process is very successful and fast and support from the Editorial Office. Therefore, I would like to continue our scientific relationship for a long time. And I especially thank you for your kindly attention towards my article. Have a good day!
"We recently published an article entitled “Influence of beta-Cyclodextrins upon the Degradation of Carbofuran Derivatives under Alkaline Conditions" in the Journal of “Pesticides and Biofertilizers” to show that the cyclodextrins protect the carbamates increasing their half-life time in the presence of basic conditions This will be very helpful to understand carbofuran behaviour in the analytical, agro-environmental and food areas. We greatly appreciated the interaction with the editor and the editorial team; we were particularly well accompanied during the course of the revision process, since all various steps towards publication were short and without delay".
I would like to express my gratitude towards you process of article review and submission. I found this to be very fair and expedient. Your follow up has been excellent. I have many publications in national and international journal and your process has been one of the best so far. Keep up the great work.
We are grateful for this opportunity to provide a glowing recommendation to the Journal of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy. We found that the editorial team were very supportive, helpful, kept us abreast of timelines and over all very professional in nature. The peer review process was rigorous, efficient and constructive that really enhanced our article submission. The experience with this journal remains one of our best ever and we look forward to providing future submissions in the near future.
I am very pleased to serve as EBM of the journal, I hope many years of my experience in stem cells can help the journal from one way or another. As we know, stem cells hold great potential for regenerative medicine, which are mostly used to promote the repair response of diseased, dysfunctional or injured tissue using stem cells or their derivatives. I think Stem Cell Research and Therapeutics International is a great platform to publish and share the understanding towards the biology and translational or clinical application of stem cells.
I would like to give my testimony in the support I have got by the peer review process and to support the editorial office where they were of asset to support young author like me to be encouraged to publish their work in your respected journal and globalize and share knowledge across the globe. I really give my great gratitude to your journal and the peer review including the editorial office.
I am delighted to publish our manuscript entitled "A Perspective on Cocaine Induced Stroke - Its Mechanisms and Management" in the Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. The peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal are excellent. The manuscripts published are of high quality and of excellent scientific value. I recommend this journal very much to colleagues.
Dr.Tania Muñoz, My experience as researcher and author of a review article in The Journal Clinical Cardiology and Interventions has been very enriching and stimulating. The editorial team is excellent, performs its work with absolute responsibility and delivery. They are proactive, dynamic and receptive to all proposals. Supporting at all times the vast universe of authors who choose them as an option for publication. The team of review specialists, members of the editorial board, are brilliant professionals, with remarkable performance in medical research and scientific methodology. Together they form a frontline team that consolidates the JCCI as a magnificent option for the publication and review of high-level medical articles and broad collective interest. I am honored to be able to share my review article and open to receive all your comments.
“The peer review process of JPMHC is quick and effective. Authors are benefited by good and professional reviewers with huge experience in the field of psychology and mental health. The support from the editorial office is very professional. People to contact to are friendly and happy to help and assist any query authors might have. Quality of the Journal is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on mental health that is useful for other professionals in the field”.
Dear editorial department: On behalf of our team, I hereby certify the reliability and superiority of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews in the peer review process, editorial support, and journal quality. Firstly, the peer review process of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is rigorous, fair, transparent, fast, and of high quality. The editorial department invites experts from relevant fields as anonymous reviewers to review all submitted manuscripts. These experts have rich academic backgrounds and experience, and can accurately evaluate the academic quality, originality, and suitability of manuscripts. The editorial department is committed to ensuring the rigor of the peer review process, while also making every effort to ensure a fast review cycle to meet the needs of authors and the academic community. Secondly, the editorial team of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is composed of a group of senior scholars and professionals with rich experience and professional knowledge in related fields. The editorial department is committed to assisting authors in improving their manuscripts, ensuring their academic accuracy, clarity, and completeness. Editors actively collaborate with authors, providing useful suggestions and feedback to promote the improvement and development of the manuscript. We believe that the support of the editorial department is one of the key factors in ensuring the quality of the journal. Finally, the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is renowned for its high- quality articles and strict academic standards. The editorial department is committed to publishing innovative and academically valuable research results to promote the development and progress of related fields. The International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is reasonably priced and ensures excellent service and quality ratio, allowing authors to obtain high-level academic publishing opportunities in an affordable manner. I hereby solemnly declare that the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews has a high level of credibility and superiority in terms of peer review process, editorial support, reasonable fees, and journal quality. Sincerely, Rui Tao.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions I testity the covering of the peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, we deeply appreciate the interest shown in our work and its publication. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you. The peer review process, as well as the support provided by the editorial office, have been exceptional, and the quality of the journal is very high, which was a determining factor in our decision to publish with you.
The peer reviewers process is quick and effective, the supports from editorial office is excellent, the quality of journal is high. I would like to collabroate with Internatioanl journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews journal clinically in the future time.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, I would like to express my sincerest gratitude for the trust placed in our team for the publication in your journal. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you on this project. I am pleased to inform you that both the peer review process and the attention from the editorial coordination have been excellent. Your team has worked with dedication and professionalism to ensure that your publication meets the highest standards of quality. We are confident that this collaboration will result in mutual success, and we are eager to see the fruits of this shared effort.
Dear Dr. Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator 0f Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, I hope this message finds you well. I want to express my utmost gratitude for your excellent work and for the dedication and speed in the publication process of my article titled "Navigating Innovation: Qualitative Insights on Using Technology for Health Education in Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients." I am very satisfied with the peer review process, the support from the editorial office, and the quality of the journal. I hope we can maintain our scientific relationship in the long term.
Dear Monica Gissare, - Editorial Coordinator of Nutrition and Food Processing. ¨My testimony with you is truly professional, with a positive response regarding the follow-up of the article and its review, you took into account my qualities and the importance of the topic¨.
Dear Dr. Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator 0f Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, The review process for the article “The Handling of Anti-aggregants and Anticoagulants in the Oncologic Heart Patient Submitted to Surgery” was extremely rigorous and detailed. From the initial submission to the final acceptance, the editorial team at the “Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions” demonstrated a high level of professionalism and dedication. The reviewers provided constructive and detailed feedback, which was essential for improving the quality of our work. Communication was always clear and efficient, ensuring that all our questions were promptly addressed. The quality of the “Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions” is undeniable. It is a peer-reviewed, open-access publication dedicated exclusively to disseminating high-quality research in the field of clinical cardiology and cardiovascular interventions. The journal's impact factor is currently under evaluation, and it is indexed in reputable databases, which further reinforces its credibility and relevance in the scientific field. I highly recommend this journal to researchers looking for a reputable platform to publish their studies.
Dear Editorial Coordinator of the Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing! "I would like to thank the Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing for including and publishing my article. The peer review process was very quick, movement and precise. The Editorial Board has done an extremely conscientious job with much help, valuable comments and advices. I find the journal very valuable from a professional point of view, thank you very much for allowing me to be part of it and I would like to participate in the future!”
Dealing with The Journal of Neurology and Neurological Surgery was very smooth and comprehensive. The office staff took time to address my needs and the response from editors and the office was prompt and fair. I certainly hope to publish with this journal again.Their professionalism is apparent and more than satisfactory. Susan Weiner
My Testimonial Covering as fellowing: Lin-Show Chin. The peer reviewers process is quick and effective, the supports from editorial office is excellent, the quality of journal is high. I would like to collabroate with Internatioanl journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews.
My experience publishing in Psychology and Mental Health Care was exceptional. The peer review process was rigorous and constructive, with reviewers providing valuable insights that helped enhance the quality of our work. The editorial team was highly supportive and responsive, making the submission process smooth and efficient. The journal's commitment to high standards and academic rigor makes it a respected platform for quality research. I am grateful for the opportunity to publish in such a reputable journal.
My experience publishing in International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews was exceptional. I Come forth to Provide a Testimonial Covering the Peer Review Process and the editorial office for the Professional and Impartial Evaluation of the Manuscript.
I would like to offer my testimony in the support. I have received through the peer review process and support the editorial office where they are to support young authors like me, encourage them to publish their work in your esteemed journals, and globalize and share knowledge globally. I really appreciate your journal, peer review, and editorial office.
Dear Agrippa Hilda- Editorial Coordinator of Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery, "The peer review process was very quick and of high quality, which can also be seen in the articles in the journal. The collaboration with the editorial office was very good."
I would like to express my sincere gratitude for the support and efficiency provided by the editorial office throughout the publication process of my article, “Delayed Vulvar Metastases from Rectal Carcinoma: A Case Report.” I greatly appreciate the assistance and guidance I received from your team, which made the entire process smooth and efficient. The peer review process was thorough and constructive, contributing to the overall quality of the final article. I am very grateful for the high level of professionalism and commitment shown by the editorial staff, and I look forward to maintaining a long-term collaboration with the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews.
To Dear Erin Aust, I would like to express my heartfelt appreciation for the opportunity to have my work published in this esteemed journal. The entire publication process was smooth and well-organized, and I am extremely satisfied with the final result. The Editorial Team demonstrated the utmost professionalism, providing prompt and insightful feedback throughout the review process. Their clear communication and constructive suggestions were invaluable in enhancing my manuscript, and their meticulous attention to detail and dedication to quality are truly commendable. Additionally, the support from the Editorial Office was exceptional. From the initial submission to the final publication, I was guided through every step of the process with great care and professionalism. The team's responsiveness and assistance made the entire experience both easy and stress-free. I am also deeply impressed by the quality and reputation of the journal. It is an honor to have my research featured in such a respected publication, and I am confident that it will make a meaningful contribution to the field.
"I am grateful for the opportunity of contributing to [International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews] and for the rigorous review process that enhances the quality of research published in your esteemed journal. I sincerely appreciate the time and effort of your team who have dedicatedly helped me in improvising changes and modifying my manuscript. The insightful comments and constructive feedback provided have been invaluable in refining and strengthening my work".
I thank the ‘Journal of Clinical Research and Reports’ for accepting this article for publication. This is a rigorously peer reviewed journal which is on all major global scientific data bases. I note the review process was prompt, thorough and professionally critical. It gave us an insight into a number of important scientific/statistical issues. The review prompted us to review the relevant literature again and look at the limitations of the study. The peer reviewers were open, clear in the instructions and the editorial team was very prompt in their communication. This journal certainly publishes quality research articles. I would recommend the journal for any future publications.
Dear Jessica Magne, with gratitude for the joint work. Fast process of receiving and processing the submitted scientific materials in “Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions”. High level of competence of the editors with clear and correct recommendations and ideas for enriching the article.
We found the peer review process quick and positive in its input. The support from the editorial officer has been very agile, always with the intention of improving the article and taking into account our subsequent corrections.
