I was also bemused by that view of Islam, David; just one look at
Christendom & its multifarious rivers & tributaries, including quite a few
<regressive fundamentalists from the hills>, will provide sufficient
evidence that such a culture can't be wrapped up like that. Such as Jerry
Falwell, with his attack on gays, modern women (& abortion in particular)
after the 11th ~ I heard of them, but didn't see ~ evince remarkable
similarities to the more fanatical Islamic "fundamentalists", actually.
Otherwise I find Lakoff's take on logic & linguistics very suggestive &
illuminating (in _Women, Fire and Dangerous Things_; never finished it
though, I'm a chronic non-finisher...)
A more general remark: I don't know if anyone else has the same queasy
feeling when "belief" is adduced as a rational motive for human behaviour,
as it sometimes is in discussions of "fundamentalism" and the "rights" of
people not to be offended in their world-view, since it privileges some
world-views over others; I have a problem with the word "believe", which
explains nothing and has only a very vague referent: there's much too much
piety involved in invoking it, I feel. Credo credo. OK in the _Missa
Solemnis_ etc, in life it's dodgy & has become a synonym for "think with a
certain amount of justification" when it's not a magic slogan rationalizing
the irrational. It's certainly vicious to my mind to associate religious
belief & ethics as it were inevitably, as though the latter were invalid
without the former. That attitude is the true irreligious power worship.
Shelley saw that quite clearly.
best
Martin
|