How do we defeat fundamentalism?

There have been several threads running with loose discussion of the dangers of fundamentalism. It seem’s that the consensus is that fundamentalism isn’t a good thing. Correct me if I’m wrong.

Assuming that we can agree that fundamentalism need’s to disappear, how do we define the problem and what is the strategy to begin lessening it’s influence in the world?

First, what is the definition of a fundamentalist? How, exactly, would I know a fundamentalist if I saw one?

Second, where does it come from? What is the human “need” that allow’s fundamentalism to flourish?

Third, who and what can help begin removing fundamentalism as a force in human interaction?

It is one thing to sagely acknowledge that fundamentalism is a problem, it is quite another to begin changing it. Surely, with all the brilliant minds in this forum (not me) there ought to be a common sense approach to this issue that would allow us a plan of action.

JT

Fundamentalism… hmm I think were talking about Islamic Fundamentalism… easy educate those people… What they do is against Islam but they think its permitted so tell them to stop what they are doing. Then everything is okey dokey…

But Christian fundamentalists scare me first they hate the jews but support Israel so that they can heard every last jew into Israel and wait for their “rapture”. Then they want to blow up the Al Aqsa mosque so they can build their “Solomon Temple”. Those people need to lay of the drugs…

Every other fundamentalist as long as they don;t wanna kill people or hurt others let them go nuts…

CyruxMafia:

Christians hate the Jews, Muslims hate Israel……

CyruxMafia:

Intolerable, That is preposterous. the topic is referring to all. And just as Einstein says, I Hatsu says so long as there will be fundamentals there will be quarrel and wars amongst humanity.

Fundamentalism is both good thing and bad thing.

Fundamentalism is stereotypes for Christians, but fundamentalist can be any group or religion who believes in divine beings. A distinctiveness of this kind of belief is they can only explain the impossibility with impossibility thus they defy logic and common scene.

By their beliefs and viewpoint some fundamentalism is also visibly noticeable because of their behavior and clothing.

From the mind.

Need for ultimate knowledge, they turn on religion because they believe it holds all the answers in life.

Hitler did but his doctrine was annihilated. His belief is pretty related to John Lennon, they both believe that in order to re-establish peace only one religion and race should be left.

Obliteration of fundamentalism must start in each and every single mind of us; providentially fundamentalism is gradually disappearing in every society. Time will heal this unawareness and inconsolableness.

I can’t define fundamentalism but several ascepts come to mind.

  1. It is written. Both Christian and Muslim fundamentalist believe that they have the written word of God. That it is the absolute truth and that there can be no contridiction to it. That there can be no interpretation of it, and if there is it is the most ancient and traditional interpretations that are correct. ( Except occassionally when some new Charismatic cult leader is recognized and he can make a new interpretation.)

  2. Fundamentalist are intolerant. Not only is there religion right for them it is right for everyone else. And it is their duty to impose it on others.

  3. I am sure I could not come up with an ideal government, however to me the worse from of government is theocracy, whether it be Catholic Europe under the Inquistion, Geneva under Calvin, Massachusetts Bay Colony under the Purtians or Iran under the Ayatollahs.

Those are connotations if not definitions of Fundamentalism.

shoot em

Fundies give me a headache usually, simply because their is no talking to them. One example is my mother, and Ive learned to just phase out of conversations and just nod. Whats really strange is that somewhere when I was growing up she made the transition from open, ‘hippy’ mother to this ultra conservative fundamentalist. Cant place when, but most of what she says now is in huge contrast with how I was raised. The thought began to worry me, would I too make the similar transition? shudders

Just the other day we were driving down my neighborhood after a mother daughter day, and we drove past a church for Jehovnah’s Witnesses. I dont know why Im surprised anymore, but i was utterly shocked when she said “I cant believe these evil people live near us. I wish they would all just go find another country and live in sin there.” My usual stance of simply ignoring was overcome by my pure shock and dissapointment. I tried to tell her that they are not hurting anyone, they are trying to lead whatever lives they think is right. But it was useless, the only words she had for this was “If you dont believe in Jesus, you are evil.” Yep, where do you go from there? What possible debate could you give to make her change her mind? .

And if I try the only response I get is “Satan is talking through you, you need to go to church.” Which is funny, because no one in my family has gone to church in ages. Hipocracy… Which is why I had kept my past atheism to myself, because there is no telling how that may have ended.

There is no talking to these people, because even if you had undebatable evidence to anything contrary to their believes, its the ‘work of Satan’. They think they have this obligation to cleanse the world of these people, and this is how violence is started.

But how do we get rid of them? Every group has their radicals, its simply part of the dynamic. Even if God himself came down to teach the masses, and it was not the God these fundies have been worshiping, they would chalk it up to mass halucination from Satan to lead everyone astray.

I guess the question is how do we make it to where fundementalists have less say in the running of society. Or is that good? Maybe they are here for some kind of balance…I imagine eveything has its purpose. Although I really wish the violence aspect of the whole thing would simmer down. Be angry and radical if you must, but please do it without taking lives.

I just wonder why people always blame the Impossibility to god, just because you can’t explain something, it doesn’t mean god exist. Like those early people who can’t explain why there’s such a bright round object above in the sky (the sun). Eventually some exceptional minded soul claims that sun was some kind of divine force that regulates their crop growths, in due course people became very fascinated of this contemporary belief, and finally after some time interests for religion begins.

What I’m trying to stress is people are still doing the same preposterous faith (the sun is god) repetitively they must learn from the past. Yes as of now we don’t blame the sun to god anymore but not D.N.A and Duality of Quantum Mechanics.

And your religion CyruxMafia is no exempt here, what I’ll get a chance to screw 72 virgins and I live with those pretty women near a river of my favorite beverages or burn in hell for eternity.

ShadowandLight:

Separation of church and state is an exceptional scheme, but as long as fundamentalist citizens that are being elected/supporters, separation of church and state can never be close reality.

As I said above fundamentalism is gradually disappearing in every society and time will heal this unawareness and inconsolableness.

You can never obliterate this madness instantaneous unless you build another gassed crematoria.

Hi JT,

Firstly, read this book:

"The Battle For God By Karen Armstrong
Alfred A. Knopf, New York, 2000
A Book Review by Darold Morgan, Richardson,Texas

Not often does this reviewer state bluntly that a new volume must be read, but that is precisely the case with Karen Armstrong’s new book on religious fundamentalism. Concentrating on Protestant fundamentalism in the United States, Jewish fundamentalism in Israel, and Islamic fundamentalism in Egypt and Iran, she has crafted a book that is loaded with multiple insights about one of the most provocative and misunderstood movements in the world today. At first glance it appears you have in focus the rich tapestry of the three great monotheistic religions of the world. But the excellent research she has done in the historical backgrounds soon produces a surprising and almost shocking insight into the fundamentalist deviations so common in the religious scene today. Add to that conclusion, one soon senses writing skills which translate into a refreshing readability.

Beginning with the 1492 crisis in Spain (not the departure of Columbus to the New World) when Ferdinand and Isabella drove both the Jews and Moors from their borders, the author deftly brings into startling perspective most of the roots which have ultimately produced this twentieth century phenomenon—massive clashes with modernity brought on by a peculiar religious fear of annihilation. Her writing is replete with innumerable and fascinating vignettes, theological concepts from each of these religious traditions, and cultural asides from these communities that have often been ignored. The result of these clashes is a new expression of the age-old conflict between science and religion, a militant piety popularly known in this generation as “fundamentalism.”

That we are living in a time when scientific and technological breakthroughs are being announced almost daily is a given. A secular modernity seems to be an irreversible trend that gives credence to the oft-quoted designation, “the Post-Christian Age”. Rocket probes to Mars and Jupiter and beyond, cloning of animals, DNA medical research, organ transplants, the information revolution, globalization of the world’s economy are just a few of the developments which are making this current period the most explosive and innovative in history.

For many this secularist hegemony has led to a type of cosmic war between the forces of good and evil. A haunting and strange renaissance of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam is taking place now. It is not conventional, and it is not contrived. Major ethical overtones comprise this struggle; violence, mayhem, murder, and political extremism are part of the vicious reaction to our postmodern world. The author states in the introduction, “Fundamentalism in all three faiths has no time for democracy, pluralism, religious toleration, peacekeeping, free speech, or the separation of church and state.” This disturbing premise stems from the author’s study of the historic roots of these major faiths.

A word to the fainthearted is necessary. Throughout her book Armstrong makes much of two words: mythos and logos. Mythos is not a myth, and here is where the usual “hang up” takes place. Mythos comes from the Greek language and needs immediately to be disassociated from the usual connotation from stories in Greek and Roman mythology. The author uses this word as it relates to mystery and mysticism, rooted ultimately in traditional biblical and Islamic history “which gives meaning to life, but cannot be explained in rational terms.” (p. 376)

The other term is logos, a Greek word that refers to rational, logical, or scientific discourse. This use is not the logos of the Fourth Gospel, but it is a term that almost becomes a synonym for the scientific approach to life apart from the mythos of religious faith. As one works through this book, these concepts move quickly to center stage as the focal point of conflict between science and faith. The difference becomes a life and death issue in all three faiths.

Many secularists and devotees of a scientific approach to life have been unable to grasp the importance of religion to the faithful. Often there has been an arrogance and condescension that is all but completely insensitive to those who feel that their religious faith was in danger of being obliterated. That these theologies and ideologies may be rooted in fear is apparent, but modern secularism is the culprit, having drained life of its meaning and purpose. As millions of people around the globe struggle with seemingly irreconcilable philosophies of life, the rise of militant fundamentalism is inevitable.

There are major strengths in this book. One is the historical treatment of Jewish mysticism. Significantly, the author documents the strange and tragic history of European Judaism from the days of the Spanish Inquisition to the present. One comes away with some very helpful insights about Jewish Hasidism and the mystical tones of Kabbalah, major terms used for years in Orthodox Judaism. These streams of influence are essential as one endeavors to understand modern Israel and the conflicts in Zionism today.

Another strength of the book is the excellent insight the author gives about Islamic history and theology. Frankly, this is one of the finest reviews of this subject, which to many in the western world is very difficult to grasp. The author concentrates on two Islamic countries, Egypt and Iran, which in turn spotlights the major differences between the Sunni and Shiite divisions in Islam. With the increasing numbers of Muslims in both Europe and America, students of the current religious scene simply must expand their understanding of this vibrant faith. Armstrong’s book is a step in the right direction.

Her treatment of Protestant fundamentalism is fair, but not comprehensive. One concludes that she probes more deeply into the Jewish and Islamic areas than the Christian approach. An unexpected strength of her volume emerges in her treatment of millennialism as a major factor in the Christian fundamentalism mind-set.

The major weakness of the book seems to be the lack of a conclusion about the eventual outcome. In a book crammed with brilliant research and analyses, the author comes to the final pages offering only lukewarm appendages which weakly point to the obvious fact that fundamentalism is here to stay. Both the students of religion and science will have to cope with fundamentalism, is her conclusion. The serious reader keeps hoping that Armstrong will provide a third path where those devoted to religious truth and the scientific community can find a respectful and rational compromise. The fact that science and technology will intensify their amoral dominance is obvious. The fact that religious faith is incalculably important, bringing meaning and purpose to life, also is a reality. Thus the book ends! But the book is worth reading, for the challenge it addresses is of tremendous proportions."

Shalom
Bob

Hi Bob,

Ok. Ok. I’ll get the book. I do need a better understanding of the underpinnings of fundamentalism. I’ve always broken the issue into two camps; those capable of spirituality, and those merely capable of religion. Some of us are capable of finding energy in ambivalence, others need a closed full knowledge beginning to end schemata or they can’t function. I think at the very bottom of the issue I am more right than wrong, but there is much more involved than my simple (minded) analysis.

Hey Bob,

Did you see where the Anglican church is hacked at the USA Episcopals for ordaining a gay bishop? European conservatives admonishing those American liberals. How’s that for a switcheroo? Fundamentalism is alive and well wherever you look.

JT

Hatsu,

I hope you’re right, but if fundamentalism is ‘disappearing’ it’s taking an inordinate length of time. Some would argue that it’s going the other way.

JT

If anything I think fundamentalism is on slight increase since 9-11 in the states. in 97 a gallup poll showed that 58% of americans opposed gay marriage, then in 2000 it went down to about 49% then in this year it’s up to 55%.

I don’t see steady decline.

Your petty statistics is quite acceptable… But I wonder why some people Couldn’t remember anything before nine-eleven. I’m talking about significant amount of time here, and I don’t remember reading any statistics about sizeable amount of agnostics and atheist prior to Anno Domini.

Correct me but, I can not understand why some people renounce religion or/and god but still hoping to be saved in rapture. This is totally preposterous.

[size=200]FEAR[/size]

Same reason anyone clutches to ridiculous notions of heaven and hell.

Damn I’m starting to sound like scythekain

no, hatsu trust me you are still your own person that changes the avatar near every day.

from the avatars you choose they are either from anime or games?

I completely agree, and have been trying to tell bob it’s not isolated to the USA.

the universial myth of the golden age… fundamentalism wants to go back to the “fundamentals” of a movement and the dangerousness of it is its closed logic… how do you defeat groupthink? by killing it…

but in all seriousness and practicality because we are in an economic based society i would say that classism is the only way to overcome fundamentalism… get rid of the poor and powerless and you get rid of the need for fundamanetalism… there are both good and evil ways to approach this…

well yes, get rid of the down trodden and it would certainly defeat alot of fundamentalists, but not all of it.

I’ve been re-thinking the whole issue of fundamentalism and I’m not as sure as I was that there is any point in trying to remove it from society. Fundamentalism is an expression of utopian ideals, whether religious or secular is immaterial. Does it really make any difference if those ideals are rational (secular) or non-rational (religious)? I’m not sure. More questions.

It seem’s to me that we can ‘rationalize’ as much human misery as the most rabid irrational religious extremist. Just what the hell do we mean when we say, “collateral damage”? Do the families of the dead accept the rationality of that any more than the families victimized by the suicide bomber seeking paradise?

It isn’t that I don’t see the ‘war’ between the secular world and religion, but what is the mechanism for sorting out which form of violence is acceptable?

JT

well I wouldn’t say there is no point in not removing it, I agree with Harris on that issue, his approach is all wrong though, he is a secularist fundamentalist.

I don’t see fundamentalism as utopian ideals, I see the need for the person or group to place their morays onto the society as a whole, because they feel everyone else is flawed and needs their help to become better, through violence or through non-violence it matters not the end result is the loss of individuality. or the loss of life, in the extreme violent groups.

It’s not just a war between the secular and fundamental worlds, it’s the secular vs the secular and the theist vs the theist. They refuse to see similiarities and continue to hold the view that they alone hold the keys to “utopia”.

in this case the best way to deal with it either secularly or theologically is the following:

it’s better to have an idea than a belief.

Harris believes his way is best
the “fundamentalists” he talks about believe their way is best. (which is true but he doesn’t see his own fundamentalism.)