In recent years, 1800 and on,
Fundamentalists have had a lot of explaining to do. Unfortunately for
Fundamentalists, who understand the Bible to be inerrant in nature and completely
true, there have been several movements in science and in history that have
adequately challenged the writings in the Bible. For instance, the discovery of
the legend of Gilgamesh in 1857 abruptly enabled skeptics to argue against the
validity of the story of Noah in the Book of Exodus. In 1859, the publishing of
Darwin’s book, On the Origin of Species, depicting his theory of
evolution by means of natural selection, effectively brought the creation story
of Genesis into a fictional, rather than non-fictional, light. And yet, amongst
a myriad of evidence speaking against the truthfulness of the Bible, fundamentalists
are working harder than ever to convince not only themselves, but others as
well, that evolution is indeed a hoax, and Jesus will indeed return. In her
book, The Age of American Unreason, Susan Jacoby outlines the way in
which America is becoming increasingly anti-intellectual, as well as
antirational. Jacoby illustrates her impressions of where America as a nation
is headed, in terms of intellectual standards, in the introduction of her book.
“…America is now ill with a powerful mutant strain of intertwined ignorance,
anti-rationalism, and anti-intellectualism – as opposed to the recognizable
cyclical strains of the past – the virulence of the current outbreak is
inseparable from an unmindfulness that is, paradoxically, both aggressive and
passive” (Jacoby). Using a multitude of well researched and thought out
examples, Jacoby effectively demonstrates the plethora of ways in which religion,
particularly fundamentalist religion, is helping to hasten America’s
intellectual downfall.
In her book, Jacoby frequently speaks of
the importance of education. It is not a surprise, then, when Jacoby draws
connections between education, or lack thereof, and fundamentalist beliefs. In
the eighth chapter of her book, devoted purely to religion, Jacoby asserts,
“…creationism, which denies the most critical scientific insights not only of
the twentieth but of the nineteenth century, has adversely affected public
education in many areas of the nation and is one important reason why American
high school students know less about science than their contemporaries in
Europe and Asia” (Jacoby). Creationists, by definition, believe in a “God who
is absolute creator of heaven and earth, out of nothing, by an act of free
will” (Ruse). In contrast, Darwin’s theory of evolution uses the evolution of
species over a long period of time through natural selection, or the expulsion
of traits that are unnecessary for survival over a long period of time, to explain
the origins of life. Naturally, creationists and Darwinists do not see eye to
eye. After the landmark Supreme Court decision Engel v. Vitale in 1962, banning the practice of religion by public
officials in public schools in America, Darwin’s theory of evolution became the
main idea behind the origination of life taught in public schools in America
today. Even with the Supreme Court decision of 1962, there is still
fundamentalist influence to be found in schools today, writes Jocelyn Rice, a
reporter for Discovery Magazine, “About one in six of the surveyed teachers espoused
young-earth creationist views, and most of them taught their students those
views. Only 23 percent strongly agreed that evolution was a central theme in
their teaching” (Rice). If certain teachers are unknowingly disregarding the
Supreme Court’s decision, or worse, if these teachers are knowingly
disregarding this decision, should the education of America’s children continue
to be left in their hands? Jacoby doesn’t seem to think so. These educators
may, however, as many fundamental Christians tend to, believe that they are
right and everyone else is wrong. The creationists may even believe they are
saving these children. This belief, however, along with many illogical traits
in many of their practices, couldn’t be farther from the truth.
The
Bible “says” a lot of things. In an article written in 1996, Theodore Drange,
an established professor of philosophy at the University of West Virginia,
seeks out the many claims made in the Bible and provides analyses and arguments
against them. For example, according to the Bible, in a number of places
within the many books, the earth is flat. (Drange) As most properly educated
elementary school children can attest, the Earth is, in fact, round. Drange goes on to explore the myriad of ways,
becoming increasingly specific, the Bible contradicts itself. Even with the
evidence provided by philosophers such as Drange, fundamentalists refuse to
listen, insisting over and over that the fundamentalist belief is fact, as well
as insisting that any nonbelievers are simply sinners, or “anti-Christian”.
This, Jason Long argues, is brought on by cognitive dissonance. Long defines
cognitive dissonance as a “motivation to explain inconsistency and rid oneself
of the dissonance” (Long). The word cognitive refers to brain function, and
dissonance refers to a lack of agreement. “It makes perfect sense,” Long
argues, “for an individual to want to study the issue in question when a
conflict arises, but unfortunately, we often fall victim to confirmation bias
and use illogical reasoning to rid ourselves of the conflict when it manifests
on important issues. In situations where the information cannot support our
decisions, such as the undeniable reality that we have based our religious
affiliations primarily on environmental cues…we often resort to methods that
will increase the attractiveness of our decisions and decrease the
attractiveness of the un-chosen alternatives” (Long). A fair example of what
can only be explained by cognitive dissonance is offered by Jacoby in the third
chapter of her book. Jacoby describes Alexander Winchell, an evolutionist,
Social Darwinist, and eugenicist, “Winchell, being both a eugenicist and
evolutionist, should have been the perfect choice for a southern university
aspiring to greatness, given his belief that Darwin’s theory of natural
selection actually proved the inferiority of the Negro race. Why? Because, as
Winchell argued in an 1878 screed titled ‘Adamites and Preadamites,’ Negroes
were too biologically inferior to have been descended from Adam…” (Jacoby). The
theory of evolution, and the science behind it, creates dissonance in many
Christians, even more so in fundamentalists. Winchell desperately clings to his
creationist beliefs, and searches for any explanation that will include both
creationism and evolution, and such an explanation is offered by Social
Darwinism. So far, many have attested to the backwardness of fundamentalist
beliefs, even the humor behind them, but what of the dangers of strict fundamentalist
beliefs?
In
an interview for Living the Questions, a Christian organization idealizing a
closeness with God rather than a strict interpretation or following of the
Bible itself, John Dominic Crossan, an Irish-American religious scholar, speaks
of the dangers of fundamentalism. Crossan speaks of a “genocidal germ in fundamentalism,”
comparing the rise of Hitler and his description of the Jewish people as “germs,”
to the potential for any type of fundamentalist to rise to power and wreak
similar social and civil destruction. “What if a strict fundamentalist gains
power,” Crossan proposes, “Every religion today must take responsibility for
its own fundamentalists, because, religious fundamentalism is probably the most
dangerous thing in the world right now” (“Dangers of Fundamentalism”). The
question posed by Crossan is very important. What if a fundamentalist rises to
a level with enough power to wreak havoc on the world, with the goal of dispatching
any nonbelievers? George W. Bush, the forty-third president of The United
States, is a fundamentalist Christian. Jacoby mentions the former president George
Bush in the eighth chapter of her book, “My audiences often express surprise
when I offer my opinion that Bush believes every word he says about religion
and that a religious hypocrite might make a less dangerous president. When Bush
famously told Bob Woodward of The
Washington Post that he had consulted a ‘Higher Father’ instead of his
earthly father…about going to war in Iraq, he was offering a key to his
thinking that should have been taken at face value by his opponents as well as
his supporters” (Jacoby). Jacoby goes on to discuss the Bush administration’s
treatment of terrorist suspects, saying, “…the president comforted himself with
the notion that his foreign policy designs might yet be saved by Americans
experiencing a ‘Third [Great] Awakening’” (Jacoby). Could former president
George W. Bush have become the crazed figure of power that Crossan discusses in
his interview? It is certainly possible, but not likely. As Jacoby states,
again, in the eighth chapter of her book, “Apart from Israel, the willingness
of fundamentalist evangelicals to sanction American military and diplomatic
intervention abroad is general limited to situations in which Christians, or
the freedom of Christians to proselytize, are threatened” (Jacoby).
Jacoby, in her book, The American Age
of Unreason, makes quite a few claims. The claims she makes about history
can only be regarded as interpretations, but all of her claims regarding
religion, mainly fundamentalist religion, seem to be right on the target.
Jacoby mentions the link between a rise of fundamentalism and a decline in
quality of proper public education truthfully, the backwardness of the
fundamentalist faith, the growing frailty of the Social Darwinist, and even
touches on what the continuation of a growing fundamentalist body could mean
for America as an intellectual nation. Jacoby’s interpretations are not to be
regarded as fact. They should, however, be regarded as a warning. As Crossan
says in his interview, speaking hypothetically, “If we [fundamentalists] kill
all the people who disagree with us, we alone have the truth” (“Dangers of
Fundamentalism”). This, in essence, is the true danger of fundamentalist
religion. Even if it is not simply human lives being taken, but social or
political ideas being taken, each are equally dangerous, and, as Jacoby
demonstrates, will hasten America’s intellectual downfall.
No comments:
Post a Comment