Fundamentalism and free societies - Page 3 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

kerry · #31 11-17-2009, 06:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pj67coll

I have heard something to the effect that islam had it's "reformation" at around that time except that the fundamentalist whackjobs won out and that was the end of any meaningful development in islamic societies since. Thus, once again it's religious fundamentalism winning out that closes the lid on civilizational advance.

In western society the englightenment won out. Possibly because of the precediing reformation which destroyed the credibility of fundamentalist christianity thus opening up the door for reason.

- Peter.

Not sure about the Islamic reformation. Certainly independent philosophical inquiry died out in Islam but I don't think I'd call that the a defeated reformation since the reformation in Christianity wasn't a resurgence of independent philosophical inquiry but a rejection of centralized authority in religious interpretation and politics which Islam never had.

pj67coll · #32 11-17-2009, 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kerry

Not sure about the Islamic reformation. Certainly independent philosophical inquiry died out in Islam but I don't think I'd call that the a defeated reformation since the reformation in Christianity wasn't a resurgence of independent philosophical inquiry but a rejection of centralized authority in religious interpretation and politics which Islam never had.

Don't remember the exact details I'm afraid. . It was either on NPR or some debate Hitchens was in on Youtube and it was a while ago. Basically the contention was that since the hardliners had triumphed in Islam the accpetance of the Koran and it's centralized authority as the only knowledge worth having meant the end of civilizational progress within islamic societies. Whereas in Europe the reformation - by calling religion into question (if you have one contradicting view of the religious authority, then why not a whole lot more) essentially paved the way for secular thought to reject the whole religious edifice altogether, and so you have the rise of science. I'm paraphrasing hugely here but I think the gist is clear.

- Peter.

MS Fowler · #33 11-18-2009, 06:46 AM

Don't underestimate ( or "misunderestimate") the importance of the printing press which allowed the discemination of ideas to an extent not realized before. It also led to the rise of literacy as people learned to read in order to be able to use the Bible that was now available to them. ( The RC chuirch did not encourage people to read the Bible for themselves, but had priests to "correctly" interpret them for the people. The Reformed churches OTOH, believing in the individual priesthood of all believers encouraged all people to read and study the Bible for themselves.)
Once people learned to read the Bible, they could also read ANYTHING.

pj67coll · #34 11-18-2009, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MS Fowler

Once people learned to read the Bible, they could also read ANYTHING.

True. And if one reformed church, why not another, or another? What gives any one of them legitimacy over any other? And so eventually why not reject them altogether?

- Peter.

kerry · #35 11-18-2009, 10:44 AM

I think the issue of language is relevant to the question. Devout Muslims should read the Qur'an in Arabic and not in the vernacular and some even memorize it without understanding Arabic.

But I don't think an Muslim reformation is possible anymore. There was a certain 'natural' progression to European religion where literacy became widespread thru religion and caused religion's diversification and subsequent diminishment. The benefits of modern education and science have been delivered to Islam on a platter from the West, without the internal transformation of traditional religion which occurred in Europe. Islam has been able to externalize the religious costs of modernization, adopting the technological and scientific benefits of Western modernization without have to pay the expense of weakened religion. From what I can see, this has been an effective strategy and I see no strong reason to think it won't continue to function quite well into the foreseeable future.

A cynical way of looking at this would be to say that since about 1450, Islam has been outsourcing all it's metaphysical expenses and research costs to the West. Now that the products of materialist metaphysics are readily available to Islamic societies, they are using the technology to conquer the West which has been weakened by the work it was performing for Islam.