[Phys-L] Re: judge rejects i.d. in PA case

[John Mallinckrodt <ajm@CSUPOMONA.EDU>]

Steve Clark wrote:

> You've used the term "religious fundamentalist" several times now.
> Would you please define for me what you mean?

I think I mean what most people mean by the term.  I used it
specifically in reference to the charlatans in the Dover case.  I
have a hard time imagining any reason for a group to deploy such
thoroughly dishonest means in an attempt to insert religion into high
school science classes other than the type of rigid, self-absolving
convictions that are associated with religious fundamentalism.

It seems to me that religious fundamentalists distinguish themselves
very clearly from "normal" religious folks in a number of obvious
ways one of which I provided in my first message--"an unshakeable
willingness to let THEIR ends justify ALL means."

I think THAT characteristic in turn results from immersion in a
culture that demands blind acceptance of received knowledge and rigid
obedience to rules that are understood to have been laid down by God
and that are NOT, therefore, subject to question or modification by
individuals or by groups of individuals banded into secular
organizations like, for instance, governments.  Because the REAL
rules come from God and because those rules must be obeyed, even
"so-called" criminal behavior becomes "justified" when the secular
world impinges on the fundamentalist world.  I think this is what we
are seeing in the incessant and otherwise needless battle between
creationism/ID proponents and science.

Lest anyone think otherwise, I recognize that not all religious
people are fundamentalists (although I do fear that a large and
increasing number are.)  I am not religious myself, but I do
subscribe to the newsletter of the National Council of Churches, a
religious group that clearly distinguishes itself from the
fundamentalists precisely through their lack of rigidity and their
tolerance of other views.

I found this definition for fundamentalism on the web:

1. A usually religious movement or point of view characterized by a
return to fundamental principles, by rigid adherence to those
principles, and often by intolerance of other views and opposition to
secularism.
2. a. An organized, militant Evangelical movement originating in the
United States in the late 19th and early 20th century in opposition
to Protestant Liberalism and secularism, insisting on the inerrancy
of Scripture.
    b. Adherence to the theology of this movement.

That sounds about right to me.
_______________________________________________
Phys-L mailing list
Phys-L@electron.physics.buffalo.edu
https://www.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l