... a large number of people ... want to be religious and have tried to evolve new forms of faith. Fundamentalism is just on of the modern religious experiments and ... it has enjoyed a certain success in putting religion squarely back on the international agenda, but it has often lost sight of some of the most sacred values of the confessional faiths. Fundamentalists have turned the mythos of their religion into logos, either by insisting that their dogmas are scientifically true, or by transforming their complex mythology into a streamlined ideology. [page 366]
Some definitions:
Logos - a mode of knowledge, and discourse, based on rational and logical; key epistemological stance: Objectivity; "Science".
Mythos - a mode of knowledge, and discourse, based on intutitive insight giving meaning to life; key epistemological stance: Subjectivity; "Art"
Myth - this word has two meanings in English. One is - to put it blunty - (1)a cute or strange story meaning nothing; the other is (2) an explanatory upon which a culture is based.
One must realize neither of these two are found in their unalloyed form. Logos has an underlying mythic component as one must value Objectivity before embarking on an intellectual venture to achieve, however tenuous, Objectivity. Mythos has an underlaying logosic component if one is going to communicate. Classification into these two modes is based on the relative weight, preponderence of, movement towards the pure modes.
Due to the high value placed on Logos in Western Culture and the general acceptance of definition Myth(1) Fundamentalists have drifted into the intellectual bind of Prof. Armstrong's analysis as given in the quote. And further:
[Fundamentalists] have ... conflated two complementary sources and styles of knowledge which the people in the premodern world had usually decided it was wise to keep separate. [page 366]
[Note: I disagree with her here but that's another post.]
By insisting that the truths of Christianity are factual and scientifically demonstratable, American Protetant frundamentalists have created a caricature of both religion and science. Those Jews and Muslims who have present their faith in a reasoned, systematic way to comptete with other secular ideologies have also distorted their tradition, narrowing it down to a single point by a process of ruthless selection. As a result, all have neglected the more tolerant, inclusive, and compassionate teaching and have cultivated theologies of rage, resentment, and revenge. On occasion, this has even led a small minority to prevert religion by using it to sanction murder. Even the vast majority of fundamentalists, who are opposed to such acts of terror, tend to be exlusive and condemnatory of those who do not share their views. [page 366]
Prof. Armstrong does not let Modernism off the hook either.
Despite the cult of rationality, modern history has been punctuated by withc-hunts and world wars which have been explosions of unreason. Without the ability to approach the deeper regions of the psyche ... it seemed that reason sometimes lost its mind in our brave new world. Without the constraints of a "higher" mythical truth, reason can on occasion become demonic and commit crimes that are as great as, if not greater than, any of the atrocitites perpetrated by fundamentalists. [page 367]
The murderous rampages of Forced Collectivizations perpetrated by Stalin and Mao are excellent examples of outbreaks of explosions of logosian unreason or, put another way, humans have an incredible ability to take things to their logical perversion -- no matter how much, or how many, it hurts.
End of Part I
This is a good place to break for comments before moving on to Part II.
