There has been much talk about fundamentalism of late. To most people, the word conjures up images of Islamic fundamentalism in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks against the USA, the ongoing war in Iraq, or the suicide bombings in the Middle East, London, Madrid and elsewhere. However, beyond what seems to be a ‘clash of civilizations’, there is another, home‐made strain of fundamentalism, right at the heart of Western democratic societies, that is affecting science and its relationship to society in a way that may have dire long‐term consequences.
The Oxford Dictionary of the Social Sciences defines fundamentalism as “a movement that asserts the primacy of religious values in social and political life and calls for a return to a ‘fundamental’ or pure form of religion” (Calhoun, 2002). Of course, religious fundamentalism has always had a history of antagonism with science and—even before the birth of modern science during the Enlightenment—with philosophy, humanity's age‐old proven method to exercise critical and rational thinking to solve problems and pursue knowledge. In its broadest sense, however, fundamentalism is a form of ideological intransigence, which is not limited to religion, but includes political or social positions as well—for example, some extreme positions taken by ‘environmentalists’ or animal‐rights activists.
In the USA, the modern version of this old conflict between science and religious fundamentalism is epitomized by the infamous Scopes trial. In 1925, John Scopes, a high‐school science teacher in Dayton (TN, USA), was charged with illegally teaching Charles Darwin's theory of evolution (Larson, 1997; Pigliucci, 2002). This battle is still being fought; for example, in Dover (PA, USA) at the time of writing, a court is deciding the legitimacy of teaching ‘intelligent design’—a form of creationism—alongside the theory of evolution in public schools. These relentless attacks by religious fundamentalists on one …
[1]
E. Larson,et al.
Scientists are still keeping the faith
,
1997,
Nature.
[2]
B. Forrest.
Methodological Naturalism and Philosophical Naturalism: Clarifying the Connection
,
2000
.
[3]
W. Walker,et al.
Science education is no guarantee of skepticism
,
2002
.
[4]
M. Pigliucci,et al.
Is Knowledge of Science Associated with Higher Skepticism of Pseudoscientific Claims
,
2004
.
[5]
E. Scott.
Antievolution and Creationism in the United States
,
1997
.
[6]
David Hume.
A Treatise of Human Nature: Being an Attempt to introduce the experimental Method of Reasoning into Moral Subjects
,
1972
.
[7]
J. Edwards.
Denying Evolution. Creationism, Scientism and the Nature of Science
,
2002,
Integrative and comparative biology.
[8]
R. Alfaro-LeFevre.
Critical thinking.
,
1997,
Nursing spectrum.
[9]
Peter Weingart.
Die Stunde der Wahrheit
,
2001
.