Fundamentalist ?

A friend at church emailed this to me today and having read it thought it would be fun to post it and see what reaction (if any) it solicits. Hope you enjoy it as much as I did...

I'm reading some pretty interesting philosophy lately and came across this quote in an academic book on Christian Philosophy. Read it carefully and seriously... ; )

Plantinga and the "Real" Meaning of Fundamentalist
Having just stated that his Aquinas/Calvin model involves his belief in the “internal instigation of the Holy Spirit,” noetic effects of sin, and other specifically Christian beliefs, Plantinga writes this bit on what it really means to be called a “fundamentalist,”

"But isn't this just endorsing a wholly outmoded and discredited fundamentalism, that condition than which, according to many academics, none lesser can be conceived? I fully realize that the dreaded f-word will be trotted out to stigmatize any model of this kind. Before responding, however, we must first look into the use of this term 'fundamentalist'.

On the most common contemporary academic use of the term, it is a term of abuse or disapprobation, rather like 'son of a bitch', more exactly 'sonovabitch', or perhaps still more exactly (at least according to those authorities who look to the Old West as normative on matters of pronunciation) 'sumbitch.' When the term is used in this way, no definition of it is ordinarily given. (If you called someone a sumbitch, would you feel obligated first to define the term?) Still, there is a bit more to the meaning of 'fundamentalist' (in this widely current use); it isn't simply a term of abuse. In addition to its emotive force, it does have some cognitive content, and ordinarily denotes relatively conservative theological views. That makes it more like 'stupid sumbitch' (or maybe 'fascist sumbitch'?) than 'sumbitch' simpliciter. It isn't exactly like that term either, however, because its cognitive content can expand and contract on demand; its content seems to depend on who is using it. In the mouths of certain liberal theologians, for example, it tends to denote any who accept traditional Christianity, including Augustine, Aquinas, Luther, Calvin, and Barth; in the mouths of devout secularists like Richard Dawkins or Daniel Dennett, it tends to denote anyone who believes there is such a person as God. The explanation that the term has a certain indexical element: its cognitive content is given by the phrase 'considerably to the right, theologically speaking, of me and my enlightened friends.' The full meaning of the term, therefore (in this use), can be given by something like 'stupid sumbitch whose theological opinions are considerably to the right of mine'"
(Warranted Christian Belief, pp. 244-245).


Post a Comment

Thanks for stopping by and leaving a comment, we really appreciate it!

Anyone can comment and all comments will appear immediately with no word verification or other layers of nonsense, but please note we will delete anything inappropriate such as spam or profanity. In fact blogger seems to have a penchant for removing spam which often saves us the hassle.

Thanks again.