Why Fundamentalists Can’t Read Books

Chris —  July 11, 2011 — 4 Comments

I recently bought a book off of Amazon that was so marked up I almost couldn’t read it.

My friend and fellow MAGL cohorter Margaret Yu suggested I check out Peter Palmer’s Let Your Life Speak.  Palmer is a Quaker, which is really the closest thing that Protestantism has to a mystically tradition.  Mystic’s are concerned about the inner journey, and are often having a much different conversation than fundamentalists are.

The previous owner of the book marked almost every page in pencil with a clear and effeminate script.  For the statements she agreed with there were little checkmarks.  For those she disagreed with, she cross them out and write a diatribe, including scripture references to prove the author wrong.  Time and again, she would argue with a word, phrase, or her misrepresentation of Palmer’s point.

My definition of a fundamentalist, whether it be Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Marxist, Atheist or Anarchist, is a person who is so rigidly committed to a set of beliefs and practices, that they are unable to accept, converse with or perhaps even live near someone who doesn’t agree with them.  For a fundamentalist, life is a constant witch hunt.

Reading a book is really no different than having a conversation. You engage the other person by listening to what they have to say.  The goal of reading a book should be to gain some sort of insight in to how another person sees the world, which may at some point help you navigate it yourself.

The previous owner of my book was incapable of listening to what Palmer has to say.  For her, you can only listen to a person who agrees with how you see the world.  Because of this, she’ll never see beyond herself, will understand very little of how the world works, and will never grow into a better person.

A fundamentalist can’t read a book because they don’t want to learn.  They just want to be affirmed in how they already see the world.  Learning doesn’t meant that one cannot hold to a lifestyle or worldview.  It means that one values another’s ability to think, their life experiences and imago dei enough to put their desires on hold and listen.

This is too bad.  Because there’s a lot you can learn from a book. Or a person.

If you enjoyed this post, please consider leaving a comment or subscribing to the RSS feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.

Related posts:

Post comment as twitter logo facebook logo
Sort: Newest | Oldest

I've had similar experiences with books I've ordered off amazon. I have a preacher friend who will mark sections of a book and write in the margin, "I don't agree with this." He doesn't want others who may borrow his book (which I was doing) and think he agreed with certain material in it.

Interesting concept. The worry seems like a bit much, though, don't you think? Why would anyone expect you to read just people you'd agree with? I've learned a ton from those I disagree with, and I could probably do more to read & listen to them.

I don't think being a 'fundamentalist' in theory is always bad. I mean, the idea at the start is that some things are so 'fundamentally important' that they are worth contending for. I think everyone in every culture believes that about something. The problem that you describe is that the contentious 'position' of mind, becomes a 'posture' - the habitual, normal position that they stand in/move from and to. It's really kind of tragic, to let one's-self or one's intellectual forebears become one-dimensional, and in a sense define themselves primarily by opposition to people or ideas. Now that I think about it, it's dehumanizing; not just of others but one's self. I hope that lady was at least honest about the condition of the book when she sold it. "Marked to death" doesn't equal "Excellent condition."

I agree with you that having your fundamentals isn't a bad thing. A lot of it depends on what the fundamentals are. You could argue that the Amish are fundamentalist, and they aren't hurting anyone. I do, however, believe there is an important distinction between adherence to fundamental beliefs and being a person/community shaped by the story of Jesus. That's a much bigger topic.