[mukto-mona] RE: Scientists, Atheists, Fundamentalists

wrt: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mukto-mona/message/50476

Quote from Audrey:

[Fundamentalist atheists such as Dawkins, Hitchens and Harris do not
differ much from fundamentalist religionists. They all believe they
are right and the others are wrong.]

"Dear Audrey,
I am a bit taken aback by your labelling of Dawkins as
Fundamentalist(atheist). As an early member of MM you must have read the
plethora of messages and exchanges (many in which I participated besides
Avijit and many other freethinkers) which clarified the fallacy of this
mislabelling of rationalist views as fundamentalist. So its a bit
disappointing to see you still making this characterization after all this.
Let me try to clarfiy this issue here again."

 

..........   rest of the post deleted for brevity.

 

I agree with all the essential arguments made by Aparthib here.  It is indeed incorrect to call Dr. Dawkins, Mr. Hitchens, etc. fundamentalists just because they believe they are right and others are wrong. I also disagree with Dr. Audrey Manning for invoking a false symmetry between dogmatic religionists and firm atheists, and calling both groups of people fundamentalists.  I say this in spite of the fact that I myself believe in religion.  Let me explain why.

 

I am also a firm believer in semantic and cognitive clarity.   It is semantic confusion that causes a label to be expanded in meaning and distorted beyond recognition.  The term "fundamentalist" was originally coined to denote Biblical literalists.  Then, the term got expanded to mean any combination of the following: any dogmatic person, a fanatic, a bigot, an "extremist," a militant political group and finally, a terrorist.  Among these, dogmatism is closest in meaning to fundamentalism.

 

As Aparthib has correctly pointed out, holding one's own beliefs to be true and those of others to be false is not fundamentalist. Let me expand on this a little further.  If I hold opinion A on issue X, I have to necessarily believe that A is superior to competing or alternative beliefs B,C, etc. Otherwise, say if C was superior to A, I would have chosen C.  Therefore, the very choice of a belief A implies its acceptance and rejection of all others.  If beleiving one is right and others are wrong makes one a fundamentalist, then by the above line of reasoning, everybody holding an opinion or subscribing to a belief is a fundamentalist, which is obviously absurd. 

 

So, if an atheist firmly believes that there is no God and all believers in God are wrong, that by itself does not constitute fundamentalism.  Likewise, if a Christian believes firmly in God and believes that atheists are wrong, that by itself does not make her a fundamentalist. On this particular point, there is some symmetry between an atheist and a theist, and neither can be called a fundamentalist for just holding their respective beliefs to be right and competing beliefs to be wrong.

 

However, there is no symmetry between the two groups when it comes to dogmatism. A typical religious fundamentalist is necessarily dogmatic but a typical atheist is not.  One becomes an atheist after a thoughtful examination and rejection of whatever religious traditions one is born into, while a believer is usually so by birth and as a result of social conditioning.  Therefore, atheists, by their very nature, do not tend to be dogmatic while some or many believers can be dogmatic.  As Aparthib has pointed out, an atheist is open to changing her views based on new information while a dogmatic believer is not. Dogmatism is the primary criterion by which fundamentalism is defined.  So, religious fundamentalism is a legitimate term to characterize a certain group of believers and atheist fundamentalism is not.

 

None of the above should be construed as my support for atheism.  I personally believe in religion and reject atheism.  I also reject religious fundamentalism in any form. I just wanted to say that words should be correctly used, the nature of attitudes should be correctly understood and we should be careful about incorrectly invoking symmetry when it does not apply. 

 

There might be another perspective that Dr. Manning wanted to convey when she called Dawkins et al fundamentalists. Dawkins, Harris and Hitchens' espousal of atheism sometimes goes beyond mere affirmation of their ideals and rejection of religion.  It often takes on an air of hubris, scorn or contempt for believers, and this might have similarities with the attitudes of religious fundamentalists.  This still does not make those atheists fundamentalists but does make them appear intolerant and fanatic, and be perceived as "fundamentalists."  As to the role of science in all this, we should remember that what we are discussing is a philosophical issue, not a scientific one.  In the past, religion has made claims about the operation of the natural world and those have all been proven false by science.  Even now, some pseudo-science (such as intelligent design) tries to explain the material world according to the religious narrative, and it is wrong. Science is the correct tool to understand the natural world. Religion and philosophy (including non-religious philosophy) are the correct tools for navigating the realm of the moral and the spiritual. Religion should stay out of science and science should (and generally does) stay out of religion.  Please note that if my views above sound like the so-called separate majesteria theory, it is close to that but not quite identical. 

 

Dr. Manning is free to correct me if I made any error in characterizing her views.  The same goes for Aparthib. They, as well as others, are also free to offer critical comments on my views.

 

All comments are welcome.

 

Best wishes.

 

M. Harun uz Zaman 

---

Get 5 GB of storage with Windows Live Hotmail. Sign up today. __._,_.___

*****************************************
Sign the Petition : Release the Arrested University Teachers Immediately : An Appeal to the Caretaker Government of Bangladesh

http://www.mukto-mona.com/human_rights/university_teachers_arrest.htm

*****************************************
Daily Star publishes an interview with Mukto-Mona
http://www.mukto-mona.com/news/daily_star/daily_star_MM.pdf

*****************************************

MM site is blocked in Islamic countries such as UAE. Members of those theocratic states, kindly use any proxy (such as http://proxy.org/) to access mukto-mona.

*****************************************
Mukto-Mona Celebrates 5th Anniversary
http://www.mukto-mona.com/Special_Event_/5_yrs_anniv/index.htm

*****************************************
Mukto-Mona Celebrates Earth Day:
http://www.mukto-mona.com/Special_Event_/Earth_day2006/index.htm

*****************************************
Kansat Uprising : A Special Page from Mukto-Mona 
http://www.mukto-mona.com/human_rights/kansat2006/members/


*****************************************
MM Project : Grand assembly of local freedom fighters at Raumari
http://www.mukto-mona.com/project/Roumari/freedom_fighters_union300306.htm

*****************************************
German Bangla Radio Interviews Mukto-Mona Members:
http://www.mukto-mona.com/Special_Event_/Darwin_day/german_radio/


Mukto-Mona Celebrates Darwin Day:

http://www.mukto-mona.com/Special_Event_/Darwin_day/index.htm

*****************************************

Some FAQ's about Mukto-Mona:

http://www.mukto-mona.com/new_site/mukto-mona/faq_mm.htm

****************************************************

VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/

****************************************************

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
               -Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190

Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___