One of the Prevailing Questions Concerning Fundamentalism - Coursework Example

?One of the prevailing questions concerning fundamentalism is whether or not it is at its core an anti-modern interpretations/philosophy. Although the answer to this question may appear as somewhat obvious, it is in fact a nuanced understanding and interpretation that must be engaged in order to discern this question. Prior to delving into an analysis of this question, it is necessary to understand that modernism by its very definition, in firs an approach or belief that relevant theory, discovery, evolution, and other factors of understanding are inherently tied to the times. Within such a way, a person who ascribes to a modernist theory or interpretation is of the belief that situational factors as well as the development of knowledge have a powerful impact on determining the norms and mores of whatever world view they may hold (Eccleshall, 1994). This is not to say that a person who ascribes to a modernist approach is entirely and/or completely tossed by the winds of change. Rather, it merely indicates a worldview that is more cognizant and places a higher level of importance upon the way in which current definitions and understandings can impact upon the way in which their worldview is constrained and develops. Conversely, an individual who ascribes to something of a fundamentalist viewpoint is one who is something of a literalist. Within such a way, fundamentalism, by its very nature, is a separatist doctrine that seeks to separate itself from the mainstream and hearken back to a prior interpretation of the doctrines or teachings of a particular world view/faith. As such, it will be the express intent of this brief analysis to discuss the means by which fundamentalism is by very nature an anti-modern philosophy/approach to any given world view. One of the primary definitions of fundamentalism that is referenced throughout many of the belief systems in the world is the fact that they invariably ascribe to the belief that the “truth” has become adulterated within the modern era and it is necessary to hearken back to a time of prior truth and purity in order to fulfill whatever directive a deity or group of deities might have set forth for them in a simpler and more pure time. This is true regardless of whether one examines an Islamic fundamentalist group or whether one examines a Hindu or Christian fundamentalist group. As such, a further appreciation and definition of the word “fundamentalist” leads one to realize that the fundamentals of a given faith or worldview are the prized possession that these individuals are fully unwilling to part with (Zizek, 1989). Those that ascribe to the fundamentals, those who define what are they based upon a narrow and historical interpretation of a key set of beliefs, question the means by which society and/or culture of the times can help to better them or the faith to which they ascribe. As such, fundamentalists, regardless of their particular variety, are inherently and entirely anti-modern. However, another key element of the fundamentalist worldview is not only the fact that they seek to disengage with modern society and return/recluse back to a prior interpretation of the mores and beliefs of a particular faith. Such a pattern of behavior would not make them anti modern and would not ensure that they came into any level of conflict with those within society that did not ascribe to a limited view of reality (Ball, 2010). Rather, they are invariably interested in alerting others to the ills of modernity and instructing them that the best means of assuring a further level of happiness and/or salvation is to disengage with the modern society and revert back to a literal or figurative interpretation of the means by which a given belief system was understood within the distant or not so distant past. It is this very attitude of disengagement and seeking to encourage or demand that others disengage that is perhaps the strongest argument for the fact that these individuals are invariably anti-modern in their interpretation of the worldview/belief system to which they ascribe. Perhaps the most obvious and salient representation of fundamentalism that exists within the current world is with respect to the Islamic fundamentalists that span nearly the entire globe. Though relatively small in number and percentage, as compared to the whole of the Islamic faith, these extraordinarily vocal and oftentimes violent groups have a disproportionate level of influence as a function of the means of behavior that they ascribe by (Bell, 2000). Regardless of whether they operate within a democracy or within a dictatorship, their presence is known and their demands are ever before the society. This example of Islamic fundamentalism should not be taken to be the only clear and salient example that currently exists within the world. Rather, the type of behavior that is evidenced by this particular group is highly indicative of the type of behavior that is evidenced by fundamentalist groups around the globe and throughout history; regardless of their particular religion or national origin (Eagleton, 2007). Moreover, another rational that can be used to state that fundamentalists are inherently anti-modern is with regards to the type of dogma or religious beliefs that they uphold. Rather than stating that present truth can impact upon the means by which any level of understanding can be affected, orthodox ideology that hearkens back to a prior era is invariably utilized as a means of providing the ethos for the fundamentalist argument. However perhaps the most powerful reason that will be discussed within this brief analysis with regards to why fundamentalism, in all of its stripes, is an inherently a response to modernism (McLellan, 1995). Scholars might argue that merely due to the fact that fundamentalism is a response to modernism and its pressures does not make it anti-modern; however, when one considers the body of evidence and the means by which those who ascribe to fundamentalist interpretations eschew modernity, it becomes patently obvious that it is in fact an anti-modern world view whose sole purpose and intent is to attack the very foundations of modern thought and understanding and instead focus the attention of the individual upon a prior unit of understanding; one that is defined by a period of time in which purer exemplifications of morality and religion were doubtless evidenced (Mannheim, 1955). Regardless of the unit of definition that is applied to these individuals, the fact of the matter is that they are inherently opposed to the means by which current understanding and/or thought is evidenced within the modern world (Hobsbawm, 1992). Rather than merely viewing this as sinful and requiring the individual to withdraw from these ills, the fundamentalist approach takes an active one as it requires the individual believer/adherent to practice a form of evangelism or activism in response to the endemic threat that the modern world poses to the interpretation of religion and purity (Adams, 2001). As such, instead of being merely satisfied with the fact that their own subset of beliefs is incompatible with the current world, the fundamentalist invariably is of the opinion that it is incumbent upon him/her to change the modern world so that it can more effectively mirror the utopia that their particular worldview defines (Heywood, 2003). Naturally, it is not the intention of this brief analysis to indicate whether or not such a hope or eventuality is in fact possible; however, it must be noted that by and large, the efforts that these groups have made in order to effect such an action over the course of the past several thousand years has been mostly ineffective. Regardless of this factor, fundamentalists in all forms are seemingly undaunted by this level of success and still invariably feel that it is their sworn duty as believers to continue to strive to effect a change upon whatever modernity exists and threatens their worldview. Finally, it must be understood that each and every faith or worldview can have a fundamentalist component to it. As such, it has not been the goal or intent of this brief analysis to posit that Islamic fundamentalism is the only form of fundamentalist belief that currently exists within the world. Rather, the case of Islamic fundamentalism was merely used as a vehicle towards helping to define and explain the fundamentalist position in an actionable means so that the reader could come to a more appreciative level of understanding with respect to why fundamentalism is by very definition an anti-modern position; seeking to return to the fundamentals of the faith/worldview and encourage the dissolution of a corrupt and evil system that they invariably view the modern era as. Fundamentalism has changed little over the course of the past several thousand years. However, modernism and the means by which society is structured continues to grow and evolve. It is perhaps this very fact that helps to continue to provide fundamentalism with fresh fuel to wage an incessant war against modernity. Although it would be difficult if not impossible to continue to fight against a particular culture that has pervaded society for a thousand years, the approach of the fundamentalist, and the very existence of culture and the means by which it continually changes, ensures that there will always be a target and an enemy of modernity against which fundamentalism can wage a perpetual struggle. References Adams, I, 2001. Political Ideology Today. 2nd Edition. Manchester University Press. Ball, T. 2010. Political Ideologies and the Democratic Ideal (8th Edition). 8 Edition. Pearson. Bell, D. 2000. The End of Ideology: On the Exhaustion of Political Ideas in the Fifties, with "The Resumption of History in the New Century". 2nd Edition. Harvard University Press. Eagleton, T. 2007. Ideology: An Introduction. New and Updated Edition Edition. Verso. Eccleshall, R. 1994. Political Ideologies: An Introduction. 2 Edition. Routledge. Heywood, A, 2003. Political Ideologies: An Introduction. 3rd Edition. Palgrave Macmillan. Hobsbawm, E. 1992. The New Left Review. “The Crisis of Today’s Ideologies”. 1/192. Mannheim, K. 1955. Ideology and Utopia: An Introduction to the Sociology of Knowledge. 1st Harvest Edition Edition. Mariner Books. McLellan, D. 1995. Ideology (Concepts in the Social Sciences). 2nd Edition. Taylor & Francis Group. Zizek, S. 1989. The Sublime Object of Ideology (Phronesis). Eighth Impression Edition. Verso. Read More