Polar Extremism or the Sociology of Religion?! “Deep in the human unconscious is a pervasive need for a logical universe that makes sense. But the real universe is always one step beyond logic.” --- Frank Herbert “… Christianity offers the only viable, reasonable, definitive answer to the questions of 'Where did I come from?' 'Why am I here?' 'Where am I going?' 'Does life have any meaningful purpose?’…” --- Tom DeLay, House Majority Whip
Transcript
Polar Extremism or the Sociology of Religion?!
“Deep in the human unconscious is a
pervasive need for a logical universe that
makes sense. But the real universe is always
one step beyond logic.”
--- Frank Herbert
“… Christianity offers the only viable,
reasonable, definitive answer to the
questions of 'Where did I come from?' 'Why
am I here?' 'Where am I going?' 'Does life
have any meaningful purpose?’…”
--- Tom DeLay, House Majority Whip
The social-psychology of extremism!
To understand the relationship between two variables – love and fear, for instance – it’s perfectly okay, and perfectly scientific, to simply your model by isolating those two key variables ad ignoring everything else. This way you get to see how they function independently of other variables and so what distinguishes them from each other. We actually do this in economics when talking about market structure:
Polar opposites, yes, but ones...
... that balance and intermingle
Perf
ect
ato
mis
tic
com
pet
itio
n
Mo
no
po
listi
c co
mp
etit
ion
Olig
op
oly
Mo
no
po
ly
PLAYBOY: In Atlas Shrugged you wrote, "There are two sides to every issue. One side is right and the other is wrong, but the middle is always evil." Isn't this a rather black-and-white set of values?
RAND: It most certainly is. I most emphatically advocate a black-and-white view of the world. Let us define this. What is meant by the expression "black and white"? It means good and evil. Before you can identify anything as gray, as middle of the road, you have to know what is black and what is white, because gray is merely a mixture of the two. And when you have established that one alternative is good and the other is evil, there is no justification for the choice of a mixture. There is no justification ever for choosing any part of what you know to be evil.
PLAYBOY: Then you believe in absolutes?
RAND: I do.
PLAYBOY: Can't Objectivism, then, be called a dogma?
RAND: No. A dogma is a set of beliefs accepted on faith; that is, without rational justification or against rational evidence. A dogma is a matter of blind faith. Objectivism is the exact opposite. Objectivism tells you that you must not accept any idea or conviction unless you can demonstrate its truth by means of reason.
PLAYBOY: If widely accepted, couldn't Objectivism harden into a dogma?
RAND: No. I have found that Objectivism is its own protection against people who might attempt to use it as a dogma. Since Objectivism requires the use of one's mind, those who attempt to take broad principles and apply them unthinkingly and indiscriminately to the concretes of their own existence find that it cannot be done. They are then compelled either to reject Objectivism or to apply it. When I say apply, I mean that they have to use their own mind, their own thinking, in order to know how to apply Objectivist principles to the specific problems of their own lives.
PLAYBOY: You have said you are opposed to faith. Do you believe in God?
RAND: Certainly not.
Fundamentalists are like begrieved
lovers!
Dialectics of wartime!
We’ve done this ourselves in relation to Science & Technology, for instance! Never mind Science & Art, and Science & Religion. The point of this exercise is to begin with distinct definitions of the two polar opposites, and then move towards the centre, realising how interrelated and intermingled they are in real life – shades of gray. This is the very essence of extremism, a non-realistic outlook on life tat presumes you can live in a black and white world where you don’t need to make compromises. Fortunately there are plenty of religious cosmological visions that don’t take such a stance. For instance:
Real-life Japanese example, and Chinese fictional antidote!
Elijah Price: “This is an art gallery, my friend, and this is a piece of art. Do you see any Teletubbies in here? Do you see a slender plastic tag clipped to my shirt with my name printed on it? Do you see a little Asian child with a blank expression on his face sitting outside on a mechanical helicopter that shakes when you put quarters in it? No? Well, that's what you see at a toy store. And you must think you're in a toy store, because you're here shopping for an infant named Jeb.” (Elijah and Jeb. Those are religious names, aren’t they?!) Samuel L. Jackson’s character isn’t a religious fanatic at all. He’s an ‘artistic extremist’. His vocation is what defines him, makes him what he is, who he is, and so he’s not about to have that (i.e. him) offended or belittled!
Mishima: I saw that beauty and ethics were one and the same. Creating a beautiful work of art and becoming beautiful oneself are identical.
So, religion and extremism are not one and the same thing since you can get extreme about almost anything, no matter how trivial it may seem to someone else. The key is to understand the psychological process – thought dysfunctions – that go into extremism, and then relate them to the social and physical environments (explored above) that transform this into a social phenomenon worth worrying about.
This is what’s known as ‘lateral thinking’. The classic example of this was Aristotle’s attempt to teach Alexander the Great patience by giving him a knot to unravel. (He was young and energetic, much like many terrorist recruits!) Alexander got his sword and split the knot in two and said the sword is the solution. Unconventional solutions to conventional problems, justified again through a numerical logic – for the greater good!
Oh, and by pure coincidence, the bay/good guy here takes Alexander the Great as his role model, and before him Ramses and the Egyptian Pharaohs! Oh, and a realist view of the world –ruthlessness –encourages this!!
And remember that (secular) totalitarianism also prevents people from choosing for themselves, i.e. being ‘heretics’!
Music is always a problem for extremists of all kinds, not just religious conservatives, never mind books. It ‘is’ true that bad books are like bad food, but you still need to trust the individual to decide, and a couple of vices are better than the totally controlled alternative!
Liberal extremism!
Andy: Now what's wrong? Darrell: How do you think people get sick, huh? Some guy picks his nose or scratches his ass, then he grabs that handle. You touch it and next thing you know, you're bleeding out of your eyes - out of your anus. Go ahead. Be my guest. Touch it. Andy: [puts hand on handle, opens the door and licks his palm] Live Dangerously
Note that Darrell always refers to himself in the third person and gaurds his personal space!
"Do you realize that in addition to fluoridating water, why, there are studies underway to fluoridate salt, flour, fruit juices, soup, sugar, milk, ice cream? Ice cream, Mandrake? Children's ice cream!...You know when fluoridation began?...1946. 1946, Mandrake. How does that coincide with your post-war Commie conspiracy, huh? It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual, and certainly without any choice. That's the way your hard-core Commie works. I first became aware of it, Mandrake, during the physical act of love...Yes, a profound sense of fatigue, a feeling of emptiness followed. Luckily I was able to interpret these feelings correctly. Loss of essence. I can assure you it has not recurred, Mandrake. Women...women sense my power, and they seek the life essence. I do not avoid women, Mandrake...but I do deny them my essence."
Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb
Notice the insect-like legs!
“In the mechanisms we have been discussing, the individual overcomes the feeling of insignificance in comparison with the overwhelming power of the world outside of himself either by renouncing his individual integrity, or by destroying others so that the world ceases to be threatening.
Other mechanisms of escape are the withdrawal from the world so completely that it loses its threat (the picture we find in certain psychotic states …, and the inflation of oneself psychologically to such an extent that the world outside becomes small in comparison. ... another mechanism of escape which is of the greatest social significance.
This particular mechanism is the solution that the majority of normal individuals find in modern society. To put it briefly, the individual ceases to be himself; he adopts entirely the kind of per-sonality offered to him by cultural patterns; and he therefore becomes exactly as all others are and as they expect him to be. The discrepancy between “I" and the world disappears and with it the con-scious fear of aloneness and powerlessness. This mechanism can be compared with the protective coloring some animals assume. They look so similar to their surroundings that they are hardly distinguishable from them. The person who gives up his individual self and becomes an automaton, identical with millions of other automatons around him, need not feel alone and anxious any more. But the price he pays, however, is high; it is the loss of his self.”
--- Erich Fromm, “Automaton Conformity”
Erich Fromm: “Does our analysis lend itself to the conclusion that there is an inevitable circle that leads from freedom into new dependence? Does freedom from all primary ties make the individual so alone and isolated that inevitably he must escape into new bondage? Are independence and freedom identical with isolation and fear? Or is there a state of positive freedom in which the individual exists as an independent self and yet is not isolated but united with the world, with other men, and nature?”
Don’t try this at home!
NB: Used this clip long before that Tunisian kid!!!!
Willing organ donors in Brazil, insisting that it was their decision to do themselves bodily harm, sacrificing their lives and health for their families. Sounds familiar doesn’t it?!
There’s nothing ancient about this, mind you. You can find modern corollaries, provided you find people – especially men – in situation of disempowerment against nature and/or society. If you believe you aren’t going to live long, death becomes a means of immortality. Men of the sea, again, are a good modern example
