Berger, P.relativism

8/6/2019 Berger, P.relativism

1/9

A utumn (September /O ctOber ) 2006

Rel ig ion & Pol i t ics

Between Relativismand Fundamentalism

peter L. berger

C on m o a y cul u (and y no m ansonly in Am ica) a a s o in hi of wo s min ly con adic o y fo c s. On ush s h cul u owa d la iv-ism, h vi w ha h a no a solu s wha -

v , ha mo al o hiloso hical u h is inac-c ssi l if no illuso y. th o h ush s owa da mili an and uncom omisin affi ma ionof his o ha (all d) a solu u h. tha idioma ic fo mulas fo o h la ivism and

wha is commonly call d fundam n alism: Lus a o disa as a ains You jus don

i .b wa of concludin oo quickly ha

o h can l i ima com on n s of civildiscou s : Ima in h fi s in h s onso an in locu o who favo s do hil a ,h s cond u d y som on who favo s h

mass mu d of infid ls. ra h , o h fo mulasmak civil discou s im ossi l , caus o h(al i fo o osi asons) clud a commonand ason d qu s fo mo al o hiloso hicala m n . r la ivism is ad fo civili y causi clud s h mo al cond mna ion of vi u-ally any hin a all. Fundam n alism is ad focivili y caus i oduc s i solva l conflic

wi h hos who do no sha i s li fs. Ando h a ad fo any ho of a ivin a valid

no ma iv conclusions y m ans of a ionaldiscou s , la ivism caus h is no will osuch a discou s , and fundam n alism caus

h is no way o i .Fo asons ha may no imm dia ly

o vious, la ivism and fundam n alism as cul-u al fo c s a clos ly in link d. this is no

only caus on can mo h and, mo of nhan may a cia d, do s mo h in o h

o h : In v y la ivis h is a fundam n al-is a ou o o n, and in v y fundam n al-is h is a la ivis wai in o li a d

Mo asically, i is caus o h la ivismand fundam n alism a oduc s of h samoc ss of mod niza ion; ind d, o h a in-insically mod n h nom na of oin o x-

m s. Wha follows is an a m , y m ansof a sociolo ical analysis, o show how h wo

h nom na a la d.this is no o su s ha , havin ain d a

und s andin of h si ua ion, on willknow jus wha o do a ou i . His o y is nomad y commi s of sociolo is s o hiloso-

h s. t u h may s many f , u ason hasa mo l d ack co d. Many la ivis s canno

dissuad d f om h i osi ion unl ss h y conf on wha h y a qui c ain is a mo alou a ha is, a ha oin wh h y aunlik ly o say, W ll, h is h vic ims na a-

Peter L. Berger is director of the Institute on Cul-ture, Religion and World Affairs (CURA) at BostonUniversity and author, most recently, of Qu s ionsof Fai h(Blackwell, 2004).


2/9

10 t he A mericAn intereSt

religion & Politics

iv , and h is h a is s na a iv , and o ha qually valid. A cis ly his oin h y may com a conv o his o ha v sion of fundam n alism. Of n h only way o in ac

wi h a fundam n alis is y h ins um n s of

viol nc a which oin h fundam n alis ,lookin a h sham l s of an in nd d u o ia,may la s in o la ivism. How v , i is o -a ly saf o say ha mos human in s, usy livin h i liv s, avi a owa d a mo a-sona l middl ound, hou h usually wi h-ou in a l o jus ify o v n a icula why

h y li v and ac as h y do. th y cons i uh o n ial cons i u ncy fo a much-n d d

d cla a ion of civil mod a ion.

The Relativizing Process

In h 1950s many social sci n is s vi w dmod niza ion as a unifo m and i v si loc ss. th y li v d ha v y soci y had o

ass h ou h a s i s of dic a l s a s ha , whil am na l o som local modifica ions, would ss n ially s m l h d v lo m nof h W s n wo ld. I is in his h o icalcon x ha h -sociolo is of ha a,talco pa sons, call d Am ica h van ua dsoci y.

this h o y of mod niza ion ovid dmany valua l insi h s, and was much oocavali ly dismiss d y h n o-Ma xis and os mod nis h o i s ha hav mo -c n ly lac d i . S ill, i is fai o say ha h

h o y is much l ss lausi l oday. th localmodifica ions hav n fa oo many and ooasic o in d as mino va ia ions on a

dominan h m . I u ns ou ha mod ni y isno a s aml ss o . Social sci n is s oday amo lik ly o a wi h Shmu l eis ns ad ,

who su s d h adv n of mul i l mod ni-i s (o , if on f s, al na mod ni i s).

thus, o ak on of h mos im o an cas s, Ja an is a ho ou hly mod n soci y y any in-dica o , u i is c ainly al na com a d

wi h h W s . An im o an com on n of h a li vi w

of mod niza ion has n so-call d s cula iza-ion h o y. Sim ly u , i o os d ha h

mo a soci y cam mod n, h l ss wouldi li ious. this vi w, of cou s , was con -

nial o an enli h nm n hiloso hy of o -ss wi hin which h d clin of li ion was

w lcom d as a li a ion f om su s i ion andcl ical y anny. How v , many of hos whou h ld s cula iza ion h o y did no w lcom

i a allind d, many w Ch is ian h o-lo ians. th y jus hou h ha h vid nc ,unfo una ly, oin d in his di c ion. A ain,i is fai o say ha sinc h 1970s his h o y has n massiv ly falsifi d: Fa f om in in-c asin ly s cula iz d, h con m o a y wo ldis h sc n of no mous x losions of li ious

assion.1 Mod ni y is no only qui va i a -d u , in mos lac s, comfo a ly com a i l

wi h li ion of on kind o ano h . A l as in h social sci nc s, i is ud n

no o h ow ou h a y wi h h a hwaas on h o ical a adi m follows ano h .S cula iza ion h o y had on hin i h :Mod niza ion und min s ak n-fo - an d

li fs and valu s. bu h h o y was mis ak nin assumin ha his oc ss of la iviza ion

would n c ssa ily l ad o a d clin of li iono , fo ha ma , of o h his o ical claims

o u h. In os c and h , f ankly, Imalso in conf ssional in ms of my caas a sociolo is h mis ak was ound d ina sim l confusionnam ly, w n s cula -iza ion and lu aliza ion. Mod ni y do s non c ssa ily s cula iz ; how v , o a ly n c s-sa ily, i do s lu aliz .

Wha do s his m an? th ou h mos of human his o y, mos o l hav liv d in com-muni i s in which h was a v y hi h d

of cons nsus on asic co ni iv and no ma ivassum ions. this cons nsus is d nd n ons on a i s of s a a ion, o a hical osocial, w n h m m s of h communi y and ou sid s. giv n such a i s, wo ldvi wand mo ali y nd o ak on a s lf- vid nquali y. Whil his was h usual si ua ion in

1th a wo xc ions o his s a m n : ono a hicalw s n and c n al eu o ;

h o h sociolo icala hin u influ n-ial in na ional in lli n sia ha is ind d

h avily s cula iz d, v n in s on ly li ioussoci i s such as h Uni d S a s. Analyzin

h s xc ions, hou h h y a k y o any sociolo y of con m o a y li ion, is yond

h sco of his ssay.


3/9

A utumn (September /O ctOber ) 2006 11

Between relativism and Fundamentalism

-mod n im s, on mus no xa ahis o s va ion. th co ni iv and no ma iv

cons nsus was chall n d in va ious lac s anda va ious im s y such coll c iv x i nc sas in cul u al mi a ion, fo i n invasion

o na u al ca as o h . And on may su osha h hav always n individuals, suchas Soc a s o S inoza o eins in, who qu s-

ion d vailin o hodoxi s and mana d o h a d. bu such individuals w a and

v y of n h y w v n d f om havinh i say. thus, whil lu alism is no a uniqu -

ly mod n h nom non, mod ni y has no -mously inc as d i s sco and acc l a d i sim ac . today i is a lo al h nom non. ev n

h mos z alous omo s of hno- ou ismhav a ha d im findin is in villa s wi hcul u s un ouch d y h u ul n lu al-ism of h con m o a y wo ld. (And if h y do find any, h y and h i cli n s will almosins an an ously d s oy h is in quali y!twix i al villa and i al h m a k is asho s , ind d.)

plu alism is a l ss han fo una m.th ism su s s an id olo ical osi ion, as

was in nd d y h Am ican hiloso h ,Ho ac Kall n, who coin d i in h 1920s oc l a hnic and li ious div si y. I us h

m h as i is now commonly us d, nam ly o d sc i no an id olo y u an m i ical

fac . plu aliza ion is mo fac ual-soundin ,u i is also mo awkwa d. I usually mak s

li l s ns o fi h common usa , so l lu-alism s and. How v , h is a mo cis

d fini ion of i : plu alism is a si ua ion in whichdiff n hnic o li ious ou s co- xis un-d condi ions of civic ac and in ac wi h

ach o h socially. th la h as is im o-an . th a si ua ions in which ou s liv

sid y sid ac fully, u hav no hin o do wi h on ano h h adi ional Indian cassys m in a ood xam l . Such a i s oin ac ion v n co ni iv con amina ion(a h as I inv n d in an a li fi of mi-nolo ical n husiasm), which ha ns wh n

h li fs and valu s of o h s und min hak n-fo - an d s a us of on s own.

th is no a mys y as o why mo-d ni y n a s lu ali y. Mod ni y has l d

o massiv u aniza ion, wi h hi hly div sou s h own in o in ns con ac wi h ach

o h . Un c d n d a s of in na ional mi-a ion and av l hav had simila cons qu nc-

s. Mass li acy has ou h knowl d of o h- cul u s and ways of lif o num ous o l .

And of cou s , such knowl d has n a ly

ma nifi d y n w info ma ion chnolo i s:l hon , adio, movi s, l vision and now,x on n ially, h com u volu ion. ev y-

on now alks a ou lo aliza ion, and h h -nom non is al nou h. bu i only s n sa vas am lifica ion of h mod nizin oc ss

ha an wi h h a voya s of discov y and h in in ss. th info ma ion ch-nolo y of h lo aliza ion a has ou h hdynamics of lu alizin mod ni y o all u

h mos mo co n s of h wo ld.plu alism la iviz s. I do s so o h ins i u-

ionally and in h consciousn ss of individuals.

this la iviza ion is o viously nhanc d wh nh s a do s no y o im os unifo mi y of

li fs and valu s y m ans of co cion. How-v , as h fa of mod n o ali a ian im s

illus a s, v n wh n h s a mak s his a -m , i is v y difficul o lock ou v y

fo m of co ni iv con amina ion. th is nowa v i a l ma k of wo ldvi ws and mo ali i s.

ev y func ionin soci y qui s a c ain d - of no ma iv cons nsus, l s i fall a a .No soci y can ol a a lu alism of no msconc nin in acommuni y viol nc say, I

li v in my i h o shoo anyon who ak smy a kin s ac . bu wi hin h s limi s a

wid div si y is ossi l . th Am ican idiomcon ains h v alin h as li ious f -

nc a ma k m if v h was on .bu h a also mo al, lif s yl , hnic and

v n s xual f nc s (and an accom anyinco a indus y of couns lo s and h a is sassis in consum s in s l c in h f nc s

ha a suma ly i h fo h m).th ins i u ional cons qu nc s of lu alism

a mos cl a ly vid n in h cas of li ion. Wh h h y lik i o no , and no ma

There is now a veritable

market of worldviews

and moralities.


4/9


religion & Politics

wh h his acco ds wi h h i h olo ical s lf-und s andin , all chu ch s comvoluntary associations in os - adi ional soci i s. th ilay m m s com consum s of h s vic s

ovid d y h cl y and, in h oc ss, -

com mo ass iv . Am ican Ca holic w i shav d sc i d his oc ss as p o s an iza-ion. th m is misl adin if i f s o som

doc inal adum a ion of p o s an ism, u iaccu a ly d sc i s how h social o aniza ionof Ca holicism has com o s m l h volun-

a y cha ac of p o s an d nomina ions in Am ica.

bu h sam mov f om ak n-fo - an dall ianc o f ly chos n a ici a ion c a svolun a y d nomina ions in a as o h han

li ion. p o l volun a ily adh o his oha mo al li f sys m ( ha is wha h Am -

ican cul u wa is a ou ), his o ha lif s yl( h cul of w lln ss has all h ma kin s of achu ch), hnic s lf-id n ifica ion (Micha l No-vak sh wdly o os d y a s a o ha hnici y has com a ma of choic in Am ica), and

v n s xual id n i y ( hus many f minis s havm ac d h no ion ha nd llin ly a

m d iv d f om h a i a y alm of am-ma is a social cons uc ion). Inthis s ns(and in his s ns only) o a a h as rich-a d Nixon on K yn sw a all p o s an snow!

bu lu alism also has ofound cons -qu nc s fo individual lif . As v -wid a asof lif los h i ak n-fo - an d no ms, hindividual mus fl c u on and mak choic s

amon h al na iv s ha hav com avail-a l . Ind d, mod niza ion can d sc i das a i an ic shif in h human condi ion f omon of fa o on of choic . this shif has n

l an ly d sc i d y A nold g hl n in hiswo k y ca o i s of d -ins i u ionaliza ion

and su j c iviza ion. D -ins i u ionaliza ionf s o h oc ss wh in adi ional ins i-

u ional o ams fo individual havio af a m n dwh viously h was on

ak n-fo - an d o am fo , say, aisin chil-d n, h now a com in schools of child-hood duca ion. Su j c iviza ion f s o h

oc ss wh in ins i u ions los h i all do j c iv s a us so ha h individual is h own

ack u on hims lf in cons uc in his own a chwo k of m anin s and no ms.

th n ff c of his ansfo ma ion can summ d u husly:Certainty becomes much

harder to achieve . this m ans ha v n if hsam adi ional li fs and valu s con inu

o affi m d, h mann of affi ma ion has

chan d. pu sim ly, hwhat of li f may nochan , u hhow do s. Fo many o l , al as a an a ly s a of h oc ss, his chanis x i nc d as a a li a ionas ind di is. bu s cially af a whil , i may x -

i nc d as a u d n f om which on wan s o f d. th nsu s an of n d s a qu s foc ain y, and wh h is a d mand, som -on will off a su ly. this is wh h fun-dam n alis s com in.

The Fundamentalist Response

Lik lu alism, h m fundam n alismis no a fo una on , hou h fo diff nasons. Fi s , i has acqui d a jo a iv qual-

i y, and ha is n v a ood hin if on wan so und s and an m i ical h nom non. (Af

on has und s ood i , of cou s , on can asjo a iv as on wish s.) S cond, i com s f om

an isod in h his o y of a ly 20h-c n u y Am ican p o s an ism wh i has v y s -cific m anin s, and m anin s ha a misl ad-in wh n a li d o mov m n s un la d o

ha his o y. On may as w ll o wi h commonusa , u a ain wi h a mo cis d fini ion:Fundamentalism is the attempt to restore or create anew a taken-for-granted body of beliefs and val-

ues.In o h wo ds, fundam n alism is alwaysreactive , and wha i ac s a ains is cis ly h afo m n ion d la iviza ion oc ss.

I follows ha , how v adi ional i s h o-ic may , fundam n alism is in insically

a mod n h nom non; i isnot adi ion. Amos i can call dneo adi ional, u ha

fix d no s an a yss of diff nc . th dif-f nc is cis ly w n wha is ak n fo

an d and wha is d li a ly chos n. Wha is ak n fo an d is y d fini-

ion n v o j c ifi d in o a nuin qu s ion.bu v y choic can in inci l vok d,and ha is wha mak s v y fundam n alis

oj c in vi a ly f a il and, fo ha v y ason, inclin d owa d in ol anc . In a uly adi ional communi y, hos who do no sha


5/9



h vailin wo ldvi w a no n c ssa ily ah a h y a an in s in oddi y, ha sv n amusin . In h fundam n alis wo ldvi wh un li v is a h a ; h o sh mus con-

v d ( h mos sa isfyin o ion), shunn d o

limina d, i y x ulsion o hysical liq-uida ion. this is no o say ha h was nofana icism o in ol anc in -mod n im s.th s a mos lik ly o found, how v , in

h a ly s a s of a mov m n fo i hass l d down in o a ak n-fo - an d com-muni y. Wh n h la d v lo m n has oc-cu d, a a m asu of ol anc com s

sycholo ically f asi l .th is a wond ful 19h-c n u y s o y ha

nic ly illus a s his diff nc w n adi-ion and fundam n alism, al i in a con xha has no hin o do wi h li ion. th em-

ss eu ni , h wif of Na ol on III, wason a s a visi o London. Now i so ha ns

ha eu ni s ack ound was a h unsa-vo y and, hou h m ss, sh was v y muchan u s a . No so, of cou s , Qu n Vic o ia,h hos ss. th wo a nd d Cov n ga d nO a o h . eu ni mad an a a anc ,ma nific n ly al. Sh n d h oyal ox,

aciously acknowl d d h a laus , look dhind h and slowly sa down. th n Vic o-

ia n d, jus as al. Sh oo aciously ac-knowl d d h a laus and sa down slowly.bu sh did no look hind h . Shknew ha

h chai would h.th d fini ion of fundam n alism su s -

d h , in addi ion o f in h conc f om

jo a iv associa ions and f om i s a icula Am ican con x , has h advan a of makincl a ha i can f o s cula as w ll as li-

ious mov m n s. All so s of s cula wo ldvi wsand valu sys ms can iv is o fundam n al-is mov m n s adical na ionalism, oli icalid olo i s, sci n ism, v n s cula ism as h

li f ha li ion should i o ously xclud-d f om u lic lif . In s v al coun i s oday,

s cula and li ious fundam n alis s a i da ains ach o h oli icallyfo xam l intu k y and in F anc , and ind d in h Uni dS a s. thou h h i oli ical a ndas a dia-m ically o os d, h i social and sycholo i-cal ofil s a ma ka ly simila . bo h hav a

lack-o -whi c ion of soci y, o h ndo d moniz hos who o os h m, and o h

would d liv h sam und lyin m ssa oo n ial conv s: Com join us, and w williv you c ain y as o wha o li v , howo liv , and who you a . th is a v y la

ma k ou h fo his m ssa .

Fundam n alis s of wha v s i mussu ss dou (in sycholo is s a lanc , h y mus avoid co ni iv dissonanc ). I will allowmys lf a sonal an cdo h . Sho ly afI cam o Am ica as a v y youn man I hada f w da s wi h an a ac iv and in lli nyoun woman. I soon discov d ha sh wasan a d n m m of h Am ican Commu-nis pa y, which som wha dam n d ou

la ionshi . Of cou s w a u d a ou his.Sh was unwillin o acc any n a iv info -ma ion a ou h Sovi Union. Wh n I s oka ou a oci i s in Sovi -occu i d eas n eu-

o , sh ask d m wh h I had sonally wi n ss d h s a oci i s. Wh n I said no, shsaid, W ll, I ally would lik o m som -on who has. I quickly said, this could a an d. W ll, a an i I did, and i was a

v alin v n .I was fri ndly wi h a young cou l r c n ly

arriv d from La via. th y invi d m and my

communis no -qui -girlfri nd o su r. Af rsom awkward chi cha , I ask d h m o alk a ou h Sovi occu a ion of La via. th y

old on horror s ory af r ano h r. My da saqui ly a firs , h n cam incr asingly agi-

a d. Af r almos an hour sh u h r hands oh r ars and said, I don wan o h ar any morof his. As w walk d away from my fri ndsa ar m n , I ask d h r if sh hough ha h y w r lying. No, sh r li d, h s o l did noim r ss h r as liars. bu h n sh add d, Youknow, I hink ha h r is som hing, if wcould only find i , ha would com l ly chang wha h y w r saying. evid n ly sh had founda magical ill agains cogni iv dissonanc . thpar y was w ll- qui d o rovid such m di-cin . Sh n v r agr d o s m again.

Come join us, and we will

give you certainty. There is a

large market for this message.


6/9


religion & Politics

to s a h a um n : th fundam n al-is oj c is h s o a ion, o h c a ionde novo,of a ak n-fo - an d d fini ion of ali y in h wak of la iviza ion. this oj c can

aliz d in wo ways, on mo am i ious

han h o h .th mo am i ious v sion is o mak ann i soci y h asis (in sociolo ical mi-

nolo y, h lausi ili y s uc u ) of a n wly ak n-fo - an d co ni iv and no ma iv o -

d . this is wha mod n o ali a ianism sou ho achi v . I qui s an no mous x cis of

viol nc , no only in s a lishin h n w o d ,u in main ainin i a ains h v - s nh a of co ni iv con amina ion. V y im-o an ly, h mana m n of h oj c ( ho ali a ian im ) mus con ol all communi-

ca ions wi h h ou sid wo ld and all dissid n

sou c s of communica ion wi hin h soci y.th his o y of o ali a ianism in h 20h

c n u y d mons a s how difficul such afundam n alis oj c is. If aliza l a all, ica i s wi h i no only hu cos s in humand ada ion and o ssion, u also h cos

of conomic s a na ion and d clin . No h Ko-a is h s cu n xam l of his. Wh na im is unwillin o una l o a h scos sand s cially wh n i wish s o mod-

niz i s conomy and is h fo o li d ohav x nsiv communica ions wi h h ou -sid wo ldco ni iv con amina ion und -min s h fundam n alis o d . th in naldisin a ion of h Sovi Union is h s

xam l of his; h c n his o y of Chinacould d sc i d (so fa ) as a -mana dv sion of a simila oc ss.

th li ious his o y of eu o is full of a -m s o s o a chall n d ak n-fo - an -

d o d . Soon o la , h y all fail d. thlas si nifican Ch is ian v sion of h o ali-

a ian oj c was h Na ionalis mov m n in

h S anish Civil Wa and h F anco imha sul d f om i s vic o y. bl ss d y h

Ca holic Chu ch a ha im (such a l ssin would un hinka l oday), h mov m nin nd d h conqu s (reconquista) of S ain

f om wha i c iv d as h fo c s of a h ismand immo ali y. D s i a sava a a a us of ssion, h F anco vic o y u n d ou o

h m al. As soon as S ain o n d i s lf ocon ac s wi h h ou sid wo ld, v n hou hini ially his o nin was o limi d o co-nomic la ions, h id olo ical uni y sou h

y h im disin a d a idly. No similaoj c has sinc n a m d in a Ch is ian

v in. (th hav n som nois s of his soin russian O hodoxy, u h y a unlik ly o

o v y fa unl ss condi ions in russia a ly d io a .)

r li ious o ali a ianism, of cou s , cha -ac iz s adical Islam. Wi h h xc ion of

h sho -liv d tali an im in Af hanis an,h hav n no succ ss s. th I anian aya-ollahs may n ain o ali a ian id als, uh y also wan I an o conomically succ ss-

ful, and h s wo oals a sha ly con adic-o y. Und mod n condi ions, any oj c of

full-sco i o ialreconquistais i h un al-iza l o fo iddin ly cos ly.

th is a l ss am i ious and som wha moaliza l v sion of h fundam n alis oj c .

tha is o aliz i no in an n i soci y, uin an nclav wi hin ha soci y. this could

call d h s c a ian o su cul u al v sion of fundam n alism. Wi hin h nclav , a ak n-

fo - an d wo ldvi w is s a lish d; h s of soci y is, as i w , a andon d o i s a h odi ion. th ci fo h main nanc of a

fundam n alis su cul u is sim l nou h:Con ol all communica ions w n youm m s and h ou sid wo ld, and s cially con ol all social la ions wi h ou sid s. th

a ly Ch is ian mov m n was jus such a su -cul u o s c , and h A os l paul was ac-

icin ood social sycholo y wh n h wa n dCh is ians no o yok d o h wi h un-

li v s. In an h o olo ical a lanc : Nocomm nsali y and no connu ium wi h ou sid-

sdon hav h m fo dinn , and c ainly don o o d wi h h m! this kind of con-

ol is asi s o achi v if h su cul u al com-muni y is hysically s a d f om h la

The religious history of

Europe is full of attempts to

restore a challenged taken-

for-granted order.


7/9



soci yof n in mo u al villa s o , l ssff c iv ly, in com ac u an n i h o hoods. If hysical s a ion is no ossi l , con ols ov

in ac ion and info ma ion hav o a icu-la ly s in n .

Now, h his o y of li ion is full of suchs lf-isola ionis oj c s, and som of h m hav

n succ ssful ov consid a l iods of im . bu his kind of su cul u al fundam n-alism com s v mo difficul und mod-

n condi ions, caus h walls of s a a-ion f om h ou sid wo ld hav o k

v y s on and in ood ai . Allow onli l ach, and h u ul n fo c s of la-ivizin lu alism will com su in in. Wha

has o main ain d, if you will, is a so of mini- o ali a ianismno asy o achi v in amod n soci y. In sum, fundam n alis s now-adays inh n ly hav a ha d im achi vin

h i o j c iv s. this is h ood n ws. th adn ws is ha in h m an im h y can caus an

no mous amoun of dama .

A New Normative Agenda

If on a s wi h an a nda of a icula in amiddl ound w n la ivism and fun-dam n alism, s v al disc issu s n d ad-

d ss d. th is h co ni iv la ivism, mosloqu n ly x ss d y so-call d os mod n-

is h o i s, which d ni s h v y ossi ili y of o j c iv c i ia of u h o v n validi y. In hfinal so , his is a hiloso hical o l m hacanno discuss d a l n h h . Wha can

said, how v , is ha in h human sci nc s,no l as in sociolo y, his y of la ivismhas don imm ns ha m. I mak s sci nc i s lf an im ossi l oj c , sinc h is no lia l

way of dis in uishin acc a l and unacc -a l o osi ions a ou h m i ical wo ld. In

ac ic , wha s ill o s und h nam of sci-nc com s an unfalsifia l x cis in o a-anda, o ha s, if on is in a n ous mood,o y.

I s ms o m ha c n d a s a ou hossi ili y of sci n ific o j c ivi y a in a

fa l ss so his ica d way wha was discuss d ina d ail in h social sci nc s a ou a hun-

d d y a s a o, and h m hodolo ical w i -in s of Max W s ill ovid h s uid

h ou h his h o ical la y in h. Wi houoin in o his vas ody of ma ials, l m

m ly a wha I of n say o s ud n s whocom ayin o m wi h os mod nis id as:Su os ha I u n a m a o you wi ha failin ad and a no ha ads, I should

iv you a much ad , u I ha you

A fast food restaurant in a Muslim enclave outside Paris, France AFP/Getty Images


8/9


religion & Politics

u s, so h . You will sc am loody mu d ,o o h d an, ossi ly su m . Wha is h

assum ion hind you ou a ? O viously,you x c m o ad you a fai ly hais, objectively a dl ss of my f lin s a ou

you. bu why do you d mand his of m as aach whil d nyin my a ili y o do i as as a ch ?th n h r is h issu of moral r la iv-

ism, again a philosophical pro l m ha can-no d v lop d h r . I can formula d

wi h gr a rudi ion, u in h nd i com sdown o h philosoph r saying o h canni-

al: You li v i is righ o cook p opl anda h m. I don . L us agr o disagr . I

s ms o m ha h r is an impor an diff r-nc w n moral r la ivism and cogni iv

r la ivism. Sci nc can n v r giv us c r ain-

y, i only provid s pro a ili i s, and i musalways op n o h possi ili y ha i s hy-po h s s may falsifi d. bu h r ar moral

judgm n s which, v n if on und rs ands hah y ar con ing n on on s posi ion in im

and spac , a ain a high d gr of c r ain y.Slav ry and or ur provid good xampl s.I am no pr par d o say ha my moral con-d mna ion of or ur is a ma r of as or

ha i is a m r hypo h sis. I am c r ain haor ur is a o ally unacc p a l moral vil. And any argum n o h ff c ha I wouldhav a diff r n vi w if, say, I liv d as a magis-

ra in tudor england will no mov m fromhis convic ion. Moral judgm n s com ou of

sp cific p rc p ions of h human condi ionform d in h cours of sp cific his orical d -v lopm n s, u his g n sis do s no xplainaway h ir validi y. eins in would no havcom upon h h ory of r la ivi y if h hadliv d as a p asan in anci n egyp , u hiso vious o s rva ion do s no invalida h

h ory. eins ins sci n ific insigh s ar no hsam as his moral li fs, u n i h r can valida d or invalida d y poin ing ou h irsocial and his orical con x .

th a mo al c ain i s ha wi hs andla iviza ion. th is h isod conc nin

g n al Na i who conqu d h ion of Sind fo h b i ish raj in India. U on s a -lishin con ol ov his a a, h did wha h

b i ish usually did in h i m i h l f lo-cal cus oms y much as h y w , xcfo a v y f w h d m d o ally unacc a l .

Amon h s wassuttee h u nin aliv of widows. A d l a ion of b ahmin i s s cam

o s him and said, You canno ansuttee . Iis an anci n adi ion of ou o l . Na i

li d, W b i ish also hav ou anci n a-di ions. Wh n m n u n a woman aliv , whan h m. L us ach follow ou adi ions.I s ms ha Na i was no la u d y mo al

la ivism.My own in s has n mainly in h -

li ious as c of h la ivis -fundam n alisdicho omy. My su osi ion, a ain, is ha

o h x m s a unacc a l : h la ivisvi w ha finally all li ions a qually u(qui a a f om h olo y, a hiloso hically un na l vi w); and h a ssiv and in ol-

an fundam n alis claim o a solu u h(which v n a mod s acquain anc wi h his-

o ical schola shi a ou li ion mak s v y ha d o main ain). I is ossi l and d si a l

o s ak ou middl osi ions ha us h -sou c s availa l f om wi hin h majo li-

ious adi ions. th adi ions comin ou of sou h n and as n Asiano a ly Hindu-ism, buddhism and Confucianismhav n v-

had much difficul y doin his h o ically

( u which, y h way, did no s o h m f omin sava ly in ol an in ac ic f om imo im ). th A ahamic adi ions m -

in ou of w s n AsiaJudaism, Ch is ian-i y and Islamhav had a difficul i s.Mono h ism do s no asily d v lo an hosof ol anc , s cially wh n i is ins i u ional-iz d and li ally a m d wi hin h con x of a s a . Y sou c s fo such an hos can found in ach adi ion. Wha is mo , mod-

n id as of human i h s, includin li iousli y, a his o ically oo d in h an h o-

olo ical id as of h s adi ions and, in -c n im s, hav n x lici ly l i ima d y

h s id as (as, fo xam l , in h unfoldin of Ca holic social doc in sinc h S cond Va i-can Council).

There are moral certainties

that withstand relativization.


9/9



Why is such a li iously found d middlound im o an ? Fi s , of cou s , fo h o -

vious ason ha so much con m o a y fun-dam n alism has li ious con n (and noonly amon Muslims): On canno o os i

wi hou conf on in i s li ious claims. thmiddl ound is hus oli ically im o an as ad f ns a ains h hi hly d s uc iv o n ialof li ious fana icism. bu his middl oundis also im o an fo in ll c ual and s i i ual

asons. I can h loca ion of hos who wan o li ious li v s wi hou mi a -in f om mod ni y.

p o s an ism, as Max W and e nst o l sch show d in h a ly 20h c n u y,has had a s cial la ionshi wi h mod ni y.I s lon s u l wi h h s i i of mod ni y canno lica d in o h adi ions, u in v h l ss holds l ssons fo h la . On

is h adin ss o hav fai h wi hou lay-in claim o c ain yf om hsola fide of

h Lu h an r fo ma ion o paul tillichsp o s an inci l . Ano h l sson is him o anc of comin o ms wi h mod n

his o ical schola shi . p o s an ism was hfi s li ious adi ion ha u n d h c i ical ins um n of his schola shi on i s ownsc i u san his o ically un c d n d

v n , mos of i ca i d on in 19h-c n u y theological ins i u ions y individuals who didno wan o und min fai h u , on h con-

a y, wan d o s n h n i y showin i shis o ical d v lo m n .

th is a chall n in a nda h , on of a in s o h o li ious li v s and

o h s conc n d wi h s vin a soci y in which div s o l can liv o h in civic

ac . I is an a nda w mus advanc .

Ma m d M dd Way

Maimonid s . . . ass s ha h a wo y s of id al, wo mod ls of h li ioussonali y. H calls h m s c iv ly hhakhamand h hassid , s c iv ly hsa and h sain .

ev y son whos cha ac ai s all li in h m an is call d a sa . Who v- is xc din ly sc u ulous wi h hims lf, inclinin a li l owa d on x m

o h o h , away f om h cha ac ai of h m an, is call d a sain .

Maimonid s favou d h sa ov h sain . The sage is concerned with the perfection of society. The saint is concerned with the perfection of self.th sa knows ha in any humanou h a conflic sof m am n and convic ion, in s and am i ionand

h y can only solv d y alanc , com omis and m dia ion. tha is h if of hsa . His wisdom is o iv ach son and si ua ion i s du : o wa d h ood, discou -a h ad and nsu ha d cisions a ak n ha nhanc h ou a h han akin

h sid of on individual a ains ano h .

th sa has h social vi u s: jus ic , fai n ss, in i y, a i nc , a lov of ac ,an a ili y o h a o h sid s of an a um n and w i h conflic in si ua ions. H o shdo s no ac ou of mo ion u on h asis of ca ful d li a ion of wha is s fo allconc n d. A z alo , said h r of Ko zk, canno a l ad . to a l ad on has

o cul iva hos ai s h to ah asc i s o god: com assion and ac , a i nc andfo iv n ss, and h o h a i u s of m cy.

Rabbi Jonathan Sacks , To Heal a Fractured World (random Hous , 2005)

Berger, P.relativism

Documents

Transcript of Berger, P.relativism