Oxymoron

I've just been half-listening to a radio show, and my ears perked up when I heard one of the interviewees claim that "secularism was responsible for fundamentalism". (This claim was in relation to India, not the West). His argument was that secularism was seen as threatening to theists, as anti-religion, therefore it led them to extreme viewpoints.

Thoughts?

Ovazor

I think that there will always be some people who sees religion in the fundametalist way. However, the popularity of such ideas is very likely to be a reaction to a perceived threat to the religious values. But I don't think that secularism should be seen as "responsible" for fundamentalism in any way.

I think that the extreme views are often more a reaction to secular or liberal ideas within the fundamentalist's religion than outside it, i.e. the fundamentalist is concerned that such ideals will "corrupt" his religion. Most of the fundy message is directed to those who are, at least nominally, already of the same faith.

Seeker630

It makes as much sense as saying that sunrise is responsible for sunset. Offhand it sounds like th usual straw-man BS that fundies are so famous for. But then I suppose it depends on who was making the claim too. You could also say that liberal religions are responsible for fundamentlaism and be just as correct. Or incorrect. I have seen claims that fundamental Islamics feel the same way about Christianity or other religions too. Take your pick--the list goes on and on.

Anytime any group feels threatened by outside influences of any kind--they will start looking for a scapegoat or a target. Just like in this country the fundies need someone to be "agin"--such as homosexusals, or atheists or liberals. Hell they wouldn't have anything to talk about otherwise, would they? They need that endless dichotomy in order to exist--it's their stock in trade. You gotta love xenophobia.

Alonzo Fyfe

We need to keep in mind a distinction between causal responsibility and moral responsibility.

Whether there is causal responsibility may be of interest to sociologists and psychologist.

But the moral responsibility rests entirely with the individual who decides to adopt fundamentalism. It is a complete abdication of individual responsibility for the fundamentalist to say, "The secularists made me do it."

Daggah

The absurdity is obvious when you change a few words around and argue by analogy:

Judaism was seen as threatening to Nazis, as anti-Christian, therefore it led them to extreme viewpoints.

Yeah. Right.

Nira

Acknowledging that others are responsible for their actions does not absolve you of yours.

If your actions have consequences, which it of course have, you have to consider what you do and calculate the greater good.

Albion

According to Karen Armstrong in "The Battle for God," fundamentalism in all the three monotheistic religions starts as a reaction by a hard-line group against perceived liberalisation by the mainstream within that religion. I suppose that if the liberalisation is influenced by secular culture, then secularisation might be responsible. But she traced this trend back several hundred years, when society itself was not exactly secular.

dangin

We feed each other, without a doubt. But if you want to argue that extremist religion exists only because of unbelievers, you are arguing poorly. Liberal religion, moderate religion, even conservative religion is not enough for some people. If everyone fell into one of those three categories(lib, mod, con) there would still be extremists even though there would be no one secular to fuel them.

The pledge decision in california fired up the fundies. It may have even created a few, but they would exist regardless. And their existence and actions will fire up the secular folks, and may even create a few, but we would exist regardless.

Aerion

I don't think there is a CAUSE of fundimentalism. Some people's brains are just wired that way.

Toto

This seems to be the thesis of Karen Armstrong's <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0679435972/internetinfidelsA" target="_blank">The Battle for God</a>.

I think it is just an extension of the idea that every action creates an equal and opposite reaction (e.g., if you try to diet, you end up gaining weight.) You could just as well argue that the excesses of religion produced atheism.