So much of what is written about modern psychology and politics neglects an exploration of the human need for meaning in our lives. This is part and parcel of the neo-Marxist mechanistic world view which attributes agency to impersonal structures (capitalism, workers, oppressors, identity groups, etc) and severs the link between human beings and any concept of a Deity (beyond their own ideas, of course, which are treated as received truth, as in the Marxist derivative and still unproven theory of "anthropogenic global warming.")
On this Blog I write from a rational, scientific, and confirmed agnostic point of view; faith is independent of science and is not required for science to continue to make progress in understanding our world.
(At the same time, it is necessary to recognize that it was a change brought about by faith, ie that there exists a rational, rule-based, approachable, God established universe that man could attempt to understand, that led the way to the development of the scientific method upon which our current prosperity and comfort rests.)
While I will continue to write from an agnostic position, I do believe there are excellent, highly rational reasons to support the notion that a belief in God offers a significant survival advantage to those who have such faith. Since evolution is yet another concept that is deified by the left this leads to a delightful irony which perhaps finds its clearest expression in "the Roe effect."
As I have written elsewhere, human beings need to believe that their lives have meaning. Without meaning, there is very little margin of error to protect such vulnerable and frail creatures from falling into despair and depression.
Resolving the issue of meaning is a common aspect of the developmental progression from adolescence to adulthood. This offers a way to view the results of the Pew Survey of attitudes of Muslim Americans that has been recently reported; Yahoo news off3ers a lead that soft pedals the results:
One in four younger U.S. Muslims said in a poll that suicide bombings to defend their religion are acceptable at least in some circumstances, though most Muslim Americans overwhelmingly reject the tactic and are critical of Islamic extremism and al-Qaida.
Michelle Malkin is quite alarmed:
That's about 29 percent of U.S. Muslims surveyed who have favorable or unknown views about al Qaeda.
Headline: Nearly Three in Ten U.S. Muslims have favorable views/no opinion of al Qaeda.
Yes, that's hair-raising.
Ed Morrissey digs a little further:
I would recommend that people read the entire study. It's a fascinating and in-depth look at a community that has received a lot of attention but not much study. Even though they tend to have very socially conservative views, they also trend heavily to the Democratic Party -- most likely as a result of the Iraq war, which they reject in higher numbers than the rest of Americans. They also oppose the war in Afghanistan, which indicates that they will not approve of any military action against Muslims regardless of the provocation.
They also tend to wallow in conspiracy theories. Only 40% believe that "a group of Arabs" committed the 9/11 attacks. Thirty-two percent either said they didn't know or refused to answer. Seven percent claimed that George Bush committed the attacks. Even Nigerians scored better on this question, with 42% acknowledging that Muslims carried out the attacks. Great Britain's Muslims scored the worst among Western nations on this question; only 17% believe the truth.
Interestingly, there tends to be a divide between native-born Muslims (mostly African-Americans) and emigrés. For instance, on the question of whether anti-terrorism policies single out Muslims, a thin majority of all Muslims say yes (54%). Native-born Muslims have a much bigger chip on their shoulders (72%), while recent Muslim immigrants seem to have the least amount of problem with it (40%).
It is telling that within the West, it is the native born who tend toward a fascination and attraction to the extreme forms of Islam. There are many reasons for this, but we cannot discount the fact that by allowing an extreme secularism to dominate our national discourse, we have existentially offered our young a pathway devoid of meaning. The young are left to find meaning within themselves or the false Gods of ideological utopianism (the only choices left to those for whom "God is dead"), usually a problematic source of greater truth.
Siggy posted a beautiful disquisition on the essential message that is offered by the three great monotheistic religions. In Ties That Bind, Ties That Free, he points to the meaning that the religions offer their adherents:
We have noted that Judaism, Christianity and Islam have the significant and important concept of Imitatio Dei, the deliberate choices we make in imitating or assuming Godly behavior. We are after all, ‘Created in His image’ and charged with living our lives in a Godly fashion. This is a basic tenet for all who claim faith.
God, as accepted by Jews and Christians is limited in his interaction with us, in that laws of nature, once established, are part of His Dominion. He has sympathy for man and suffers when we do. (For example, when a infant drowns in a swimming pool, God cries with us. In the laws of nature, infants cannot swim. Islam sees the death differently. The death of that child, for example, is clearly a punishment.) We believe in a rational God. Muslims insist on an authoritarian God. One could argue that they must so believe and accept their lot as a Divinely bestowed. Otherwise, it would be incumbent upon them to free themselves from the shackles of tyranny.
Christians and Jews believe that God takes pity on the disenfranchised and the persecuted. He thus clearly identified as a God of mercy. The Christian God came to earth and foretold of his own crucifixion and even welcomed it. The poor and the weak elicit God’s love most deservedly and most clearly. Jewish and Christian theologians speak of “divine humility”.
These notions are completely foreign to Muslims today and have been for a while.
In fact, it has become clear that many Muslims now believe that only through violence, strength and forcefulness that can be considered a Believer in God. They believe that they must force themselves and their beliefs on others with no quarter for mercy or compromise. Many Muslims believe that they speak for God and in doing so are fulfilling their destiny as God’s agents on earth. Apparently, God no longer can speak for Himself.
Agree or disagree, his post offers a cogent argument that the meaning our culture offers us is a powerful motivator for behavior. Islam offers its followers a well described and well structured position in a great endeavor. Membership in the Ummah transcends national origins, ethnicity, prior status and belief. As such, to a disaffected youngster, especially to the adolescent who is so often insecure and conflicted in his relationships and his place in the world, the allure is unmistakable. When the belief structure offered is a radical form of Islam that promises to deliver unimaginable riches in the next world and power to the impotent in this world, the countervailing promises of a materialistic, determinedly secular, hedonically organized society pale in comparison.
The West's problem remains two-fold. Assimilating our new neighbors into a society which is worth defending and offers meaning (or at least a way to incorporate whatever meaning one chooses in a tolerant and respectful fashion) and deterring those who see no other source of meaning beyond an intolerant supremacist version of Islam that is incompatible with liberal democratic values.
Recent Comments