What is fundamentalism?
Fundamentalism is more than just believing that one is in possession of the truth.,
It is the feeling that all other beliefs contrary (and the people that hold them) are aberrations and therefore must be disposed of - just like one would get rid of rotten tomatoes.
This also gives us a good distinction between dogma and fundamentalism.
A dogmatic person believes that they alone are right, but does not necessarily believe that other beliefs (or people) should be annihilated.
Whereas dogmatism can be purely intellectual, fundamentalism involves the will.
And that is what's so scary about it.
If we hear that so and so is dogmatic regarding a position opposed to our own, we may well just shrug our shoulders and say, "Oh, well - some people are just like that."
Whereas if we hear that someone is a fundamentalist regarding this same issue,an element of fear creeps in. We feel the need to put up our guard - to protect ourselves.
For the fundamentalist is much more likely to actually do something.
Anihilation of the other
Hi Jay,
It is intersting what you are saying. What interests me about the fundamentalist thing is that it channels all sorts of resentments and angers and grudges under one simple banner of belief. Nobody has really examined the psychology of going out like a giant firework knowing that your taking others with you. It seems to me that the religious fundamentalist is a bit like the person that, after many years of brewing internal stresses, runs along a busy street spraying gun fire randomly only they are not giving pseudo religious reasons. I thinkt the religious reasons are bogus but acting as a receptacle for the 'dark stuff' of life that is just unexaminable.
The dogmatic person accepts limits to their behaviour and keeps a sense of the value of life if only mechanically. I suppose you could say they anihilate the other to some degree by holding fixed views.
Annihilation of Anthroposophical Society
You say the fundamentalists annihilate each other through their fixed views. I think you see this playing out in Dornach where the Vorstand leadership is attempting to annihilate their "Christmas Conference" foes through expulsion but they just get hit with another costly lawsuit further threatening the anthroposophical society with bankruptcy.
Rudolf Steiner says the way to peace is finding the truth-value in the view of others. He also says this is the task of spiritual science, to act as peacemakers among the various world-outlooks. This says that we should be communication experts.
These leaders struggling for power over the anthroposophical society imply spiritual superiority yet they appear to lack basic communication skills. This demonstrates the necessity of leadership to have developed the listening and speaking skills of Goethean or contemplative conversation.
To claim that it is all the fault of one side or the other in any communication issue shows a real lack of knowledge about communication. People can become enraged and do crazy things when they are not listened to. The listener and understander (if that is a word) has great power in bringing peace.
The fixed-view fundamentalist will forever be at war until their institutions collapse. We see this all around us today. But new community is also rising built on the Philosophy of Freedom principle of "understanding the others will" and recognizing we are of one spirit through knowledge of the other obtained from broadmindedness and a highly developed communication skill.
"And now try, from what has been explained, to enter into the task confronting Spiritual Science: the task of acting as peacemaker among the various world-outlooks. The way to peace is to realize that the world-outlooks conjointly, in their reciprocal action on one another, can be in a certain sense explained, but that they cannot lead into the inner nature of truth if they remain one-sided. One must experience in oneself the truth-value of the different world-outlooks, in order — if one may say so — to be in agreement with truth."
Rudolf Steiner, Human and Cosmic Thought P. 54
Further reading on anthroposophical society leadership power struggle.
http://www.philosophyoffreedom.com/index.php?q=node/1452
I don't want to say that I
I don't want to say that I am anthroposoph when it close the door people who are not.
I agree with you, Tom, and R.S. and I think that his last citation is one of the most important in our modern world.
Group Identity
I spend a lot of time wondering about this issue of group identification. If I use the term Rudolf Steiner community it seems that this can be a separation from others who may strive for the same ideals but don't consider themselves as connected to Rudolf Steiner.
Even defining yourself as a community creates a separation from others.
I have thought of the term Community of Individuals. This is a paradox and raises a question as to how you can have a community where each can maintain individuality. But a Philosophy of Freedom community would live within that paradox between community and individuality.
My favorite wording is a Rudolf Steiner Community of Individuals. But here again you can support the freedom described in the Philosophy of Freedom without knowing about Rudolf Steiner or The Philosophy of Freedom.
By using the words Rudolf Steiner you catch the attention of many people who may be interested in this freedom described by Steiner and have some spiritual terms in common to communicate with.
I wonder how you can have an identity without seeming to exclude people who share the same striving?
dilemma
I think your concerns are at the heart of the problem. It seems to me that identity around names and concepts can be utterly corrosive.
It seems that the desire for psychological security is a hugely powerful thing. I've never been able to find it myself though this could be partially to do with issues specific to me. My own difficulty in finding personal psychological security has stimulated a lot of questions around identity.
Not having an identity seems, in our culture, an incredibly weak place to be, but is it? In aggressively capitalist societies identifying with personal interests is so powerful that not to be caught up in it is considered a mental health problem. We can see in Anthroposophy that identifying with the Society in a certain way creates division.
The question of living without being 'anchored' to a self is what concerned Krishnamurti for most of his life. Maybe the identity issue is a false problem for if we share the concerns of Freedom then we are connected.
The "bounce"
The identity issue is a false problem from a strictly idealistic or spiritual perspective but to be a realist and communicate what you are doing you have to deal with basic marketing aspects which requires a quickly grasped identity.
A person comes across this web site and will decide in less than a second whether they want to stay and explore it. That means you have to reach an unconscious reactive part of their mind to have the opportunity to present anything more. If that is not done they will be recorded as a "bounce" which means they briefly looked and left.
Each of us experience this when we surf the net.
Hanging one's hat on something
Hi Tom,
I get the impression, looking at the profiles of people signing up, that many who join this site have hardly any knowledge of Steiner. So I'm not sure any collective identity in the 'banner waving' sense would emerge.
Of course to use words means use some form of presentation but it is possible, I think, to use words without psychological identity. This site includes the possibility of questioning identity issues and the negative side of it when it ossifies into something else.
community of free spirits
The diversity is one of the exciting aspects of this web site. We have many of the top leaders involved in the anthroposophical movement from the society, camphill, Waldorf, training centers, publications, discussion web sites, biodynamic farming etc., many people newly involved with Steiner, many parents of Waldorf students, and many people not involved with Steiner but feeling the same free spirit.
Steiner didn't invent anything new. He merely described experiences of the human being in The Philosophy of Freedom that others have also described. You can't place these scientific descriptions of human experience into a group category anymore than you can consider real science as something invented by someone.
A free spirit is also free from any group. So a community of free spirits is a very interesting topic. I think names merely point to something more. So you could come up with various names.
More than identity...? More than free spirits..?
Hi Tom,
This site is great! Like fresh air…
You are doing a really good job.
The identity with Community of Free Spirits, I think it’s wonderful.
People, who think and feel similarly, always find each other. This, of course, is a very important and supporting for us, gives us more power and self-confidence (or not) etc. We can be more or less ready for that, we can be in associations or just participate in some meetings etc.
My reflection was about something more than only identity. When we are (even as a free spirit) among people who think and do the same things – is it not too easy? Is it not a little bit egoistic? I think also about future and our responsibility as free spirits.
In real life we meet very different people. When we meet them and talk with love, our identity becomes less important, backed off… if we want to see the world through another’s eyes… I want to use sublime words – we sacrifice our identity…
In this kind of meeting we can experience the unity and, I can say, something more than only healing.
That’s why, I think, (I don’t mean this site - here we learn a lot - but real life) its good, generally, to be more open without prejudges and stereotypes, to others who are different, who have different life paths…
Maybe in far future, when we comeback to the next level of life’s spiral, when there will be common tolerance and ability for free conversation with everybody, our identity will become more important than in the past (now).
I know, I’m a terrible idealist.
(Maybe my questions are wrong?)
Freiheit Club
How about Freiheit Club?
We can all get together in someone's basement or some other unused facility (works best if underground), take the booksleaves off our books, don our glasses, and really have at each other.
The last world view standing wins.
The first rule is "You must tell everybody about Freiheit club."
The second rule is "You must tell everybody about Freiheit Club."
As occasional assignments for the plebicites, they must engage complete strangers in meaningful conversation, asking them questions like, "Why are you here? What is the one thing you want to accomplish in your lifetime? Why? Does it matter if all that exists is matter?"
And if it turns out that our leader is actually having a psychotic break and is really just one person acting like two ("Yeah - just who is this 'Louie' anyway?")...well, those things just happen sometimes.
I always thought Tom's picture looked suspiciously like Brad Pitt...hmmmm
Title as PoF point of view
Dear Tom,
To get my two cents (or two pence, or two pesos) in, I like the website just the way it is. The title "Welcome to the Rudolf Steiner Community," is warm and inviting and does not imply you have to be a member of the anthroposophical society, or any society, or have read a lot of Steiner or know much or anything about Steiner. What it does imply is that "The Philosophy of Freedom," is the center/heart of the website. What makes the website interesting are the myriad points of view freely expressed, so the website name fits, in terms of a community of free souls/spiritual beings that Rudolf Steiner wanted to encourage through his PoF. One has to start somewhere, and to try and please everyone is an impossibility. Keep up the good work.
Best regards,
patri
Fundamentalism
As you say, it involves the will... one of the clearest examples I recall was in a church I used to attend one day a woman stood up and declared that Carl Jung was a Satanist and so no-one should read his books, practice Jungian analysis etc.
Fundamentalism seems to always mix in a strong moral element... the other is not merely labelled as intellectually wrong but also morally wrong. So for example Al Qaeda label American capitalism as morally wrong and against Islam, Jung is labelled as evil and against Christ and so on...
Fundamental Fundamentalism
Hello Tim,
Your comments ring true to me. It is interesting how communications methods may alter truth. Islamic fundamentalism has it roots in Christian fundamentalism from the American Deep South in the 1930's. Islamic leaders liked what they saw and heard on visit back then and took the principles home. The paradox being that fundamentalism seems to be fighting fundamentalism today. If one speaks out against Israeli aggression they are labeled anti-semetic. Quite a leap for me. Certain factions in Israel have gone to great lengths to have us believe in that twisting of meaning.
I highly recommend the "The Karma of Untruthfullness" Vols. #1 and 2 for those interested in the background to European esoteric politics. It is beyond me how any side of this anthroposophical struggle can use Goya as some kind of symbol. It is the wrong message at the wrong time. Goya is dead, his art is dead and he was the END of an era. The Firing Squad paintings used for political purposes is not only poorly chosen it leaves no room for softening of position and is quite crass. Why not then use Jackson Pollack or something like his art that stands outside the mainstream and was the herald of a new age [in art].
thanks.
Cisco
Fundamentalism vs individual rights
Dear Cisco,
As I understand, the reason the group that sued the Vorstand for members rights to disagree with and stop the Vorstand from changing the Society, used the name of Goya is because of Goya's painting with the title "The sleep of reason produces monsters," meaning (I think) we must be awake and not just stand by while our so-called leaders try to change the Society in so fundamentally important a way without allowing the members to be able to respond and have the opportunity to think it through for themselves and disagree (members rights). Perhaps Goya was not the right person to use, but Goya did create some great paintings and did fight the good fight for the freedom of the individual. I am not a member of this Group and have no desire to be a member, but I respect their right to disagree and I think the Vorstand should have listened to those voices that disagreed with what they were trying to do. As far as fundamentalism, if you look through history their have always been those fanatics who think they have the right (through their religion) to tell others how they should believe and how they should live. All the religious wars, East and West, going back a thousand years and before, long before there was an American South. The question is how do we deal with maniacal fundamentalism in today's world?
Cheers and best regards,
patri
More Freiheit
Hello Patri,
Thanks for the heads up on Goya. Goya's painting says all that? Now I know a picture is worth at least a thousand words.
Funny for me it said, "Bounce over to the Freiheit Club".
Have you heard about Freiheit Club?
Cheers
Cisco
Duhism...
I just recently wrote something on Fundamentalism after thinking on Falwell's passing...
Fear of Death...or Duhism...
So Fallwell being raptured up to the big pearly gates in the sky has me reflecting on something...
I was brought up Baptist. I never really got any
farther than the hell-fire fear part of it. I absolutely did go through
a bit of a spiritual dilemma in college freeing myself from that
framework, and still find dusty corners of my life that haven't been
cleared of the extreme duality of that model. What can I say...it's got
some strong archetypes goin' on.
But anyway, I've pondered alot on it out of the necessity of
determining my own beliefs. And slowly, I've been becoming ever more
comfortable with some form of reincarnation. I've started realizing
that in general, many of my spiritual beliefs rely on some form of an
evolutionary process that requires reincarnation in some sense.
And as I've gone down that road, I've come to a realization...
I used to believe fundamentalists were scared of Death,
...now I believe they are scared of Eternity.
The fundy's believe in a very simplistic sense that if you "get it
right" you go to heaven and if you "get it wrong" you go to hell. In
either case, it's for "eternity."
Now the whole issue I've always had with heaven and hell is that
either one is just one side of the coin.. they don't seem like they
could exist without one another. But let's just consider that you
could "make it" to one or the other. Either way you go, if you go in one direction for eternity, then
you have ceased to change. The dance has stopped. You have arrived, the
game is over and you "won" or you "lost". Pretty unambigous and finite.
However, if you start screwing around with the cosmic,
reincarnated, metaphysical worldview... you seriously got an
existential problem on your hands. The shit NEVER ENDS!! It's eternal!!
It's the ABYSS! And it's tortoises aaaaaaallll the way down. (pardon me
while I go YAK!)
That is some seriously scary stuff, man. There is no resolution.
This is it. This is all there is and all there ever will be. The
journey is the destination. And yet it's infinite.
Now like many of you, I feel like something is going down right
now. I know about all the talk about the consciousness leaps and the
new dimensions and what not. But even if that goes down, I don't think
it's over. It's just maybe a moment where the game is revealed and the
board is changed...Sweet! But the point is that it still goes on. Even
if God wakes up and remembers who he is, I doubt she'd go back to
nonexistence. They'd just big bang again!!
So anyway, I'm not so sure that the fundy's really want eternal
life, I think they just want to get off the f&#king ride....
which is
why there's no "fun" in fundamentalism.
Come to think of it, not a lot of "mental" either.
Just alot of "duh" and "ism."
D'ohism
I think we've just witnessed the birth of a new religion...:-) thanks Shadowboxer I really enjoyed your post!
I think you are dead right, I believe at heart fundamentalists are lazy and suffer from an underlying desire to get out of things as quickly as possible! Just look at such nonsense ideas as the "Christian" "Rapture", Islamic Martyrdom and so on.
A few things come to mind for me after reading your post:
First, the following passage from Rudolf Steiner's book "Theosophy". I give the whole thing so as not to take it out of context too much:
The fifth stage of the soul world is that of Soul Light. In it sympathy with others has already reached a high degree of importance. Souls are connected with this stage insofar as they did not lose themselves in the satisfaction of lower necessities during their physical lives, but had joy and pleasure in their surroundings. Over-enthusiasm for nature, for example, in that it has borne something of a sensuous character, undergoes purifying here. It is necessary, however, to distinguish clearly this kind of love of nature from the higher living in nature that is of the spiritual kind that seeks for the spirit revealing itself in the things and events of nature. This kind of feeling for nature is one of the things that develop the spirit itself and establishes something permanent in it! One must distinguish, however, between such a feeling for nature, and a pleasure in nature that is based on the senses. In regard to this, the soul requires purification just as well as in regard to other inclinations based on mere physical existence. Many people see a kind of ideal in the arrangements of civilization that serve sensuous well-being, and in a system of education that, above all, brings about sensuous comfort. One cannot say that they seek to further only their selfish impulses. Their souls are, nevertheless, directed toward the physical world and must be cured of this by the force of sympathy that rules in the fifth region of the soul world and lacks these external means of gratification. Here the soul gradually recognizes that this sympathy must take other directions. These are found in the outpouring of the soul into the soul region, which is brought about by sympathy with the soul surroundings. Those souls also are purified here that mainly seek an enhancement of their sensuous welfare from their religious observances, whether it be that their longing goes out to an earthly or to a heavenly paradise. They, indeed, find this paradise in the “soul-land,” but only for the purpose of seeing through its worthlessness. These are, of course, merely a few detached examples of purifications that take place in this fifth region They could be multiplied indefinitely.
Secondly, you may be aware of Nietzsche's idea of the "eternal recurrence" - that we must come to terms with the idea that everything we have endured in life will be repeated so that we must steel ourselves to go through it again.
Whatever we may think about the limitations of the idea as presented by Nietzsche, I believe there is an element in his presentation of it which calls on human courage and bravery in the truest and highest sense - we all have experiences we are glad we have passed through and may believe we will never have to go through them again (for many of us, just think of adolescence, for example!). Well maybe, as I think you imply, the powers that be are not quite that indulgent - perhaps they want us to do better than that, to really develop ourselves to pass through all of these things in the right way so that "what has to take place" eventually does take place through us.
Thirdly, again in support of what you are saying, I never forgot a comment from a friend when we were both in a fundamentalist/charismatic Christian church about Christ's deed - his comment was that "Christ got out of it easily"! And I think the Fundamentalist view of the Mystery of Golgotha actually does encourage that view - no wonder extreme sects often end up with suicide pacts, sieges, suicide bombings and so on - as you say, they want out! Very perceptive comments Shadowboxer!
Regards,
Tim Bourke