MODERN TIMES
Art Hobson
ahobson@uark.edu
http://physics.uark.edu/hobson/
NWA Times 10 Oct 2009
Fundamentalism and
modern times
I was disappointed at the response to my August 29 column on religion. I expected lots of disagreement, but I got two letters of agreement, one letter of disagreement, and many emails and verbal comments of agreement. Either those who disagreed weren't stimulated to respond, or people on the other side didn't read it.
The column described Gregory Paul's study of social success and religiosity in 17 prosperous nations. You can find it on the internet by searching on "The chronic dependence of popular religiosity upon dysfunctional psychosociological conditions." The results are striking. By a wide margin, the United States was the least successful nation, especially regarding homicide, incarceration, juvenile mortality, sexually transmitted diseases, teenage abortions, marriage duration, income disparity, poverty, work hours, income inequality, and overexploitation of resources. Also by a wide margin, the United States was the most religious nation, especially regarding belief in God, the literal truth of the Bible, prayer, afterlife, heaven, hell, and creationism. When the "social success" and "religiosity" ratings are compared, the study's central point emerges: A nation's social success is strongly correlated with the extent to which it is non-religious. The most socially successful nations, such as Sweden, Japan, Denmark, and France, are also the least religious. The least successful nations, such as the United States, Ireland, and Italy, are also the most religious.
One perceptive letter to the editor pointed out that "not all religious people are alike. Some of us accept evolution and view the Bible as a source book and not a rule book." It's a good point. In America, at least, any study of religion should note the big difference between liberal and fundamentalist Christians. Paul's scale is primarily a "fundamentalism" scale rather than a general "religiosity" scale. My guess is that liberal Christians (for whom the Bible is largely metaphorical) would be at most moderately religious on Paul's scale, while fundamentalist Christians (for whom the Bible is literally true) would be highly religious.
Why are fundamentalist nations dysfunctional? Paul's guess is that citizens of these nations turn to religion to relieve the fear and pain of dysfunctional conditions. He also hypothesizes that fundamentalist religion tends to be co-opted by business interests which then use the faithful as a bulwark against needed social reforms. Certainly there are good reasons to believe both propositions.
My guess is that the correlation between fundamentalism and dysfunction has a lot to do with our science-based culture. You can't build a technological society in a culture mired in superstition and ignorance. The late scientist and writer Carl Sagan put it this way in his fine book The Demon-Haunted World: "We've arranged a global civilization in which most crucial elements Éprofoundly depend on science and technology. We have also arranged things so that almost no one understands science and technology. This is a prescription for disaster. We might get away with it for a while, but sooner or later this combustible mixture of ignorance and power is going to blow up in our faces."
It's a major contradiction to believe in the literal truth of the Bible and at the same time to rely on modern technology for national prosperity and daily necessities. For example, creationism contradicts biology and astronomy. Ascension into the sky contradicts physics. Rising from the dead contradicts physics, chemistry, biology, and common sense. And so forth. A society in which a major segment of the population believes fervently in such things is not likely to be successful in our science-based culture. A nation cannot live with one foot in the middle ages and the other in modern times.
For decades, polls have shown that about 50 percent of Americans believe humans are biologically unrelated to the other animals. A 2005 Gallup Poll concluded that a third of Americans believe the Bible literally. A 2002 Time/CNN Poll concluded that 59 percent of Americans believe the end-times events predicted in Revelations will come true, and nearly one-quarter think the Bible predicted the September 11, 2001 attacks. It's hard to see how any nation in which so many citizens believe such foolishness can be successful in the modern age. Rationality and reliance on evidence are essential to science, and these popular beliefs fly in the face of both.
Fundamentalist beliefs are inducing a degree of superstition in the American public that's becoming dangerous. Millions of Americans subscribe to the "rapture" theology concocted by a pair of writers who published the Left Behind series of 16 best-selling novels based loosely on the biblical book of Revelations. According to their stories, a Middle East war with Islam is something to be welcomed as an essential part of the second coming. Thus, many fundamentalists have declared solidarity with Israel, defended the Jewish settlements, and backed Israel with money and volunteers. Because it will fulfill their notions of biblical prophecy, these folks actually desire the end of the world and are doing their best to bring it about. If "sin" means anything, this is sinful. As part of this drama, fans fully expect to be "raptured" up into the sky as God's wrath slays us wicked doubters down below. It would be funny, if these folks' actions weren't so serious.
I
don't know how America is going to get out of the hole that fundamentalism has
gotten us into. Reformed
fundamentalist Frank Schaeffer, author of Crazy for God, urges sane Americans to ignore the "village
idiots" in our midst and move on with our lives and with America's
future. But this won't be
easy. There are lots of village
idiots.