Science and the Fundamentalist
"Isms"
Dr. Gerry Lower, Keystone, South Dakota
I was sitting last evening, scratching myself where it counts, and a grand
revelation came unto me, no gods involved, just an ant bite (or is it a sting?)
on the butt. All revelations seem grand and godly, of course, but some are
actually insightful and worthy. This is the way insights come to us, at unusual
and sometimes awkward moments when we are least expecting it. The notion that
someone could have an insight while working behind a desk is almost ludicrous.
Its more like Carl Sagan
described it. You take a stoned shower with your wife, get lost in the romance
of it all, and end up scribbling insights on the shower wall with a bar of
soap. That is pretty much how it works, all right. Too bad for the
fundamentalist folks who already know everything and do not need or seek
insights. They miss the only glory to be found in scratching one's butt.
So, considering the world as a whole, here is the insight born of an itch.
In the Orient, the cultural world is dominated by Hinduism, Confucianism and
Buddhism and their various cultural offspring. In the Occident, the cultural
world is dominated by Judaism, JudeoRomanism and
Islamism and their various cultural offspring. In other words, all traditional
world cultures, both east and west, are "ISMS." That's it. What do
you think? Did you see that little bolt of white light?
The obvious question, then, is what characteristics do these world beliefs have
in common that make them all "isms"? How can cultures as different as
Judaism and Confucianism (which happen to be complimentary cultural opposites)
have anything in common?
One characteristic that comes quickly to mind is the fact that all
"isms" have been maintained over the millennia by fundamentalists,
those who defend their "ism" with incorrigibility, an overt refusal
to consider alternatives that might pose a threat to their "ism." As
a result, all "isms" are "timeless." They are maintained as
fixed belief systems unaffected by the passage of time, unaffected by history
and unaffected by the evolution of scientific thought and human knowledge.
"Isms" are perceived by fundamentalists as being complete and
fully-assembled, right out of the box, as good today as yesterday, as if the world
had not changed at all over the millennia, certainly not enough to require
rethinking and re-evaluating the core "ism." As fixed belief systems,
these cultural "worlds" have not evolved but have served as a stable
base (cultural information content) which has provided for further
differentiation and adaptation (cultural information expression), as these
world cultures have been molded to fit specific times and places and needs.
IDEA is to human culture as DNA is to human biology. It's all information at
the bottom.
Buddhism in
JudeoRomanism, for example, emphasized Old Testament
values to the exclusion of nascent Christian values and it did so for over a
millennium in driving imperialism. Lutheranism and Protestantism joined in for
several centuries to drive colonialism. Parent "isms" also establish
and maintain operational "isms," e.g., imperialism, colonialism,
capitalism, despotism, fascism).
Accordingly, the world has come to be over-endowed with "isms."
Everywhere one looks, there is another "ism," e.g.,
"compassionate" conservatism, Osama bin Ladenism.
And what are all these "isms" doing? They are uniformly holding onto
themselves by their own "isms." Unfortunately, the evidence would
have it that "isms" (all of which are cultural subsets) are largely
unequipped and unable to comprehend and control what is going on in the larger
world of human cultural evolution. The traditional "isms" really have
no option but to play with themselves. They will not accomplish much by doing
this. But, who knows, they might have an insight.
There are, however, human cultures which are not "isms" at all. Has
anyone ever heard of "Christianism" or
"Philosophism" or "Democratism"?
No, of course not (by the same token, no one has ever heard of "Judeocracy" or "Confucianity").
So the next question, then, is what characteristics do these latter day
science-based cultures have in common that disquality
them as "isms"? What is it about Science, Philosophy, nascent
Christianity and Democracy that set them apart from all other world cultures,
apart from all the "isms"?
One characteristic that comes quickly to mind is the fact that these cultures
are uniformly based on dialectic human thought and the values derived therefrom, values which embrace and transcend the values
beneath western religious systems and eastern ethical systems. These are the
values of Science, the values beneath Philosophy, nascent Christianity, and
Democracy, not an "ism" in sight.
Hippocrates was a dialectician. He did not look at the victims of disease with
conservative apathy or liberal sympathy. He looked at them with knowledgable empathy, the dialectic synthesis of these
complimentary opposites. In other words, Hippocrates put himself in the
victim's place and then addressed the issues of causation and course in
earthbound terms so that he could do something about the situation in
earthbound terms.
Jesus was a dialectian. In dealing with social
problems, he did not condemn those who had gone astray or condone their
behavior. He looked at the situation with an eye toward healing, the dialectic
synthesis of these complimentary opposites. In other words, Jesus put himself
in the "sinner's" (or victims) place and then addressed the issue of
causation and course in earthbound human terms so he could do something about
the situation in earthbound terms.
The bulk of western cultural evolution is driven by conceptual evolution in
Science and the impact of scientific values and knowledge on the traditional
western "isms." There was, for example, the rediscovery of Greek
knowledge and nascent Christian values during the 11th and 12th centuries which
nourished the Rennaissance and culminated in the
Reformation. There was
The values of Science, Democracy and nascent Christianity are neither atheist or theist, neither liberal or conservative.
They are dialectic human values designed to avoid the feudal extremes of fundamentalist
western religious systems and fundamentalist eastern ethical systems. The world
views of these scientific, knowledge-based cultures are neither
empirical or transcendental, they are conceptual. They are built on what
we can see and how we integrate and interpret what we "see" in our
minds to maximize the explanatory value of knowledge and its utility in solving
human problems. A long time ago, dialectitions used
to call this approach Philosophy.
So, next time someone tries to sell you a chunk of "ism" with the
sales pitch that this is somehow going to help you survive all the other
"isms," you tell them that I was scratching my butt one night and
decided that the "isms" were all a bunch of fluff.