Fundamentalism
I've discovered what the definition of Fundamentalism is.
It has nothing to do with scriptural innerancy or literalism, idealizing the status quo, or nostalgia for a possibly-imagined past.
The true definition of Fundamentalism is:
It has nothing to do with scriptural innerancy or literalism, idealizing the status quo, or nostalgia for a possibly-imagined past.
The true definition of Fundamentalism is:
“If you're absolutely certain that you're making the proper decision, and what you're doing is the right thing to do — it doesn't matter if you hurt people in the process. You don't even owe them an apology.”
carved on the walls of the caverns by Steg (dos iz nit der šteg) at 9/23/2008 11:00:00 PM
9 Comments:
The question then is: Is fundamentalism good or bad? After all, sometimes you have to hurt people to help them (think surgery, for example, or raising interest rates to control inflation so people don't lose all their money).
Fundamentalism is bad, because it denies human suffering. The point isn't that sometimes you have to do things that hurt people — the point is that it still needs to matter, and the people you hurt deserve an apology.
I wanna know where that quote is from
i emailed you
I'd also like to know the quote's source. Is there a reason you're not posting it on your blog?
sweetawreet:
It was a private conversation with a rabbi of a community, and i didn't ask if i could publicize it. Especially since i'm demonizing the sentiment.
I'd be more inclined to call this yuhara than fundamentalism.
Larry:
i've never thought of yuhara as something that can hurt other people... just their perception of the one doing the yuhara.
I thought "Fundamentalism" referred specifically to the American Christian movement in the late 19th century that rejected modernism and embraced a "return to fundamentals".
(Hey, if we're going to be semantic-hogs here...)
Post a Comment
<< Home