Home | Reviews | Blog | Daily | Glossary | Orrin's Stuff | Email

-Philosophical Quote of the Day (Philosophers Magazine, 4/29/03)
A healthy appetite for righteousness, kept in due control by good manners, is an excellent thing; but to 'hunger and thirst' after it is often merely a symptom of spiritual diabetes.
--Charlie D. Broad, Attributed

Modern culture has cut out the highest part of the human soul, the part that longs for eternity and for spiritual transcendence of the here and now, the part that seeks the presence of the Incarnate God in worship and daily life and even hopes for a dim reflection of the city of God in social and political institutions. Instead of focusing on eternal life, we have become absorbed in one-dimensional materialism, trivialized life and death, and learned to avoid thinking or talking about life after death.
-Robert P. Kraynak, Christian Faith and Modern Democracy

Ms Armstrong argues that we are in a "period of transition":
Its roots lie in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries of the modern era, when the people of Western Europe began to evolve a different type of society, one based not on an agricultural surplus but on a technology that enabled them to reproduce their resources indefinitely. The economic changes over the last four hundred years have been accompanied by immense social, political, and intellectual revolutions, with the development of an entirely different, scientific and rational, concept of the nature of truth; and, once again, a radical religious change has become necessary. All over the world, people are finding that in their dramatically transformed circumstances, the old forms of faith no longer work for them: they cannot provide the enlightenment and consolation that human beings seem to need. As a result, men and women are trying to find new ways of being religious; like the reformers and prophets of the Axial Age, they are attempting to build upon the insights of the past in a way that will take human beings forward into the new world they have created for themselves. One of these modern experiments--however paradoxical it may superficially seem to say so--is fundamentalism.

We tend to assume that the people of the past were (more or less) like us, but in fact their spiritual lives were rather different. In particular, they evolved two ways of thinking, speaking, and acquiring knowledge, which scholars have called mythos and logos. Both were essential; they were regarded as complementary ways of arriving at truth, and each had its special area of competence. Myth was regarded as primary; it was concerned with what was thought to be timeless and constant in our existence. Myth looked back to the origins of life, to the foundations of culture, and to the deepest levels of the human mind. Myth was not concerned with practical matters, but with meaning. Unless we find some significance in our lives, we mortal men and women fall very easily into despair. The mythos of a society provided people with a context that made sense of their day-to-day lives; it directed their attention to the eternal and the universal. It was also rooted in what we would call the unconscious mind. The various mythological stories, which were not intended to be taken literally, were an ancient form of psychology. When people told stories about heroes who descended into the underworld, struggled through labyrinths, or fought with monsters, they were bringing to light the obscure regions of the subconscious realm, which is not accessible to purely rational investigation, but which has a profound effect upon our experience and behavior. Because of the dearth of myth in our modern society, we have had to evolve the science of psychoanalysis to help us to deal with our inner world.

Myth could not be demonstrated by rational proof; its insights were more intuitive, similar to those of art, music, poetry, or sculpture. Myth only became a reality when it was embodied in cult, rituals, and ceremonies which worked aesthetically upon worshippers, evoking within them a sense of sacred significance and enabling them to apprehend the deeper currents of existence. Myth and cult were so inseparable that it is a matter of scholarly debate which came first: the mythical narrative or the rituals attached to it. Myth was also associated with mysticism, the descent into the psyche by means of structured disciplines of focus and concentration which have been evolved in all cultures as a means of acquiring intuitive insight. Without a cult or mystical practice, the myths of religion would make no sense. They would remain abstract and seem incredible, in rather the same way as a musical score remains opaque to most of us and needs to be interpreted instrumentally before we can appreciate its beauty.

In the premodern world, people had a different view of history. They were less interested than we are in what actually happened, but more concerned with the meaning of an event. Historical incidents were not seen as unique occurrences, set in a far-off time, but were thought to be external manifestations of constant, timeless realities. Hence history would tend to repeat itself, because there was nothing new under the sun. Historical narratives tried to bring out this eternal dimension. Thus, we do not know what really occurred when the ancient Israelites escaped from Egypt and passed through the Sea of Reeds. The story has been deliberately written as a myth, and linked with other stories about rites of passage, immersion in the deep, and gods splitting a sea in two to create a new reality. Jews experience this myth every year in the rituals of the Passover Seder, which brings this strange story into their own lives and helps them to make it their own. One could say that unless an historical event is mythologized in this way, and liberated from the past in an inspiring cult, it cannot be religious. To ask whether the Exodus from Egypt took place exactly as recounted in the Bible or to demand historical and scientific evidence to prove that it is factually true is to mistake the nature and purpose of this story. It is to confuse mythos with logos.

Logos was equally important. Logos was the rational, pragmatic, and scientific thought that enabled men and women to function well in the world. We may have lost the sense of mythos in the West today, but we are very familiar with logos, which is the basis of our society. Unlike myth, logos must relate exactly to facts and correspond to external realities if it is to be effective. It must work efficiently in the mundane world. We use this logical, discursive reasoning when we have to make things happen, get something done, or persuade other people to adopt a particular course of action. Logos is practical. Unlike myth, which looks back to the beginnings and to the foundations, logos forges ahead and tries to find something new: to elaborate on old insights, achieve a greater control over our environment, discover something fresh, and invent something novel.

In the premodern world, both mythos and logos were regarded as indispensable. Each would be impoverished without the other. Yet the two were essentially distinct, and it was held to be dangerous to confuse mythical and rational discourse. They had separate jobs to do. Myth was not reasonable; its narratives were not supposed to be demonstrated empirically. It provided the context of meaning that made our practical activities worthwhile. You were not supposed to make mythos the basis of a pragmatic policy. If you did so, the results could be disastrous, because what worked well in the inner world of the psyche was not readily applicable to the affairs of the external world. When, for example, Pope Urban II summoned the First Crusade in 1095, his plan belonged to the realm of logos. He wanted the knights of Europe to stop fighting one another and tearing the fabric of Western Christendom apart, and to expend their energies instead in a war in the Middle East and so extend the power of his church. But when this military expedition became entangled with folk mythology, biblical lore, and apocalyptic fantasies, the result was catastrophic, practically, militarily, and morally. Throughout the long crusading project, it remained true that whenever logos was ascendant, the Crusaders prospered. They performed well on the battlefield, created viable colonies in the Middle East, and learned to relate more positively with the local population. When, however, Crusaders started making a mythical or mystical vision the basis of their policies, they were usually defeated and committed terrible atrocities.

Logos had its limitations too. It could not assuage human pain or sorrow. Rational arguments could make no sense of tragedy. Logos could not answer questions about the ultimate value of human life. A scientist could make things work more efficiently and discover wonderful new facts about the physical universe, but he could not explain the meaning of life. That was the preserve of myth and cult.

By the eighteenth century, however, the people of Europe and America had achieved such astonishing success in science and technology that they began to think that logos was the only means to truth and began to discount mythos as false and superstitious. It is also true that the new world they were creating contradicted the dynamic of the old mythical spirituality. Our religious experience in the modern world has changed, and because an increasing number of people regard scientific rationalism alone as true, they have often tried to turn the mythos of their faith into logos. Fundamentalists have also made this attempt. This confusion has led to more problems.

We need to understand how our world has changed. The first part of this book will, therefore, go back to the late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries, when the people of Western Europe had begun to develop their new science. We will also examine the mythical piety of the premodern agrarian civilization, so that we can see how the old forms of faith worked. It is becoming very difficult to be conventionally religious in the brave new world. Modernization has always been a painful process. People feel alienated and lost when fundamental changes in their society make the world strange and unrecognizable. We will trace the impact of modernity upon the Christians of Europe and America, upon the Jewish people, and upon the Muslims of Egypt and Iran. We shall then be in a position to see what the fundamentalists were trying to do when they started to create this new form of faith toward the end of the nineteenth century.

Fundamentalists feel that they are battling against forces that threaten their most sacred values. During a war it is very difficult for combatants to appreciate one another's position. We shall find that modernization has led to a polarization of society, but sometimes, to prevent an escalation of the conflict, we must try to understand the pain and perceptions of the other side. Those of us--myself included--who relish the freedoms and achievements of modernity find it hard to comprehend the distress these cause religious fundamentalists. Yet modernization is often experienced not as a liberation but as an aggressive assault.
Without the constraints of a 'higher,' mythical truth, reason can on occasion become demonic and commit crimes that are as great as, if not greater than, any of the atrocities perpetrated by fundamentalists.


Grade: (D+)


See also:

Karen Armstrong (2 books reviewed)
Karen Armstrong Links:

    -EXCERPT: Introduction to Battle for God by Karen Armstrong
    -EXCERPT : PREFACE from Islam : A Short History
    -EXCERPT : from Battle for God
    -BOOKNOTES : Sunday, October 22th, 2000 Title: Islam: A Short History   Author: Karen Armstrong  (CSPAN)
    -ESSAY: Believers in the lost Ark: Treating myth as fact misunderstands the meaning of religion (Karen Armstrong, August 9, 2003, The Guardian)
    -ESSAY: Faith and Freedom (Karen Armstrong, May 8, 2003, The Guardian)
    -ESSAY : The True, Peaceful Face Of Islam (KAREN ARMSTRONG, TIME)
    -ESSAY :  Fundamentalism - The US is the true home of religious extremism, which begins not as a crusade against outsiders, but as hatred of those of the same faith. (Karen Armstrong, New Statesman)
    -ESSAY : Islam's Stake : Why Jerusalem Was Central to Muhammad (Karen Armstrong, TIME)
    -REVIEW : of On Pilgrimage : A Time to Seek by Jini Fiennes (Karen Armstrong , Sunday Times of London)
    -REVIEW: of The Cross and the Crescent: Christianity and Islam from Muhammad to the Reformation by Richard Fletcher (Karen Armstrong, The Guardian)
    -INTERVIEW: A Conversation with Karen Armstrong, author of The Battle for God (Book Browse)
    -PROFILE: In the name of the father: Ex-nun Karen Armstrong tells Nicholas Wroe why Buddha is so refreshing (Nicholas Wroe, April 13, 2002, The Guardian)
    -INTERVIEW : Divine Reticence : A conversation with Karen Armstrong, biographer of the Enlightened One (Harvey Blume, Atlantic Monthly, March 2001)
    -INTERVIEW : with Karen Armstrong :  author of The Battle for God (Book Browse)
    -AUDIO INTERVIEW : Religious & Spiritual Diversity in Our World : Series Show #2 - Karen Armstrong, "The Battle For God: Fundamentalism in Judaism, Christianity and Islam" (Author-Author with Joe Skelly)
    -AUDIO INTERVIEW : Karen Armstrong (Fresh Air, August 2001)
    -Modern Library Authors : Karen Armstrong
    -PROFILE : Karen Armstrong: A Profile in Literary Diversity (M. M. Ali, February 1993, Washington Report on Middle East Affairs)
    -PROFILE : Karen Armstrong's Unscholarly Prejudices (Andrea Levin, On Camera, March 19, 2001)
    -Profile of Karen Armstrong : Mary Rourke meets the author of "Islam, a short history" (Los Angeles Times, October 9, 2000)
    -ESSAY: Karen Armstrong has a . . . well . . . interesting take on Islamic terror (The American Spectator)
    `-ARCHIVES : "karen armstrong" (Find Articles)
    -ARCHIVES : "karen armstrong" (Mag Portal)
    -SLATE BOOK CLUB : Karen Armstrong's Islam: a starting point for thousands of infidels. the book club Judith Shulevitz, Geraldine Brooks, Christopher Caldwell, Chris Suellentrop, and Ted Widmer, Nov 7, 2001
    -REVIEW : of Islam : A Short History (WILLIAM H. McNEILL, NY Times Book Review)
    -REVIEW : of Islam: A Short History by Karen Armstrong (Nicholas Bagnall, booksonline)
    -REVIEW : of Islam : A Short History (Daniel Pipes)
    -REVIEW : of Islam : A Short History (Jonah Blank, BeliefNet)
    -REVIEW : of Islam : A Short History (L.S. Klepp, Entertainment Weekly)
    -REVIEW :  A History of God: The 4000-Year Quest of Judaism, Christianity and Islam by Karen Armstrong (Mark M. Arkin, New Criterion)
    -REVIEW : of A History of God (
    -REVIEW : of  Muhammad : A Biography of the Prophet (
    -REVIEW: of Battle for God by Karen Armstrong (Chris Hedges, NY Times Book Review)
    -REVIEW: of Battle for God (C. P. Farley,
    -REVIEW: of Battle for God (Darold Morgan, Christian Ethics Today)
    -REVIEW : of  The Battle for God By Karen Armstrong (Laura F. Winner, Washington Post)
    -REVIEW : of Battle for God (AMY RYCE , Book Page)
    -REVIEW : of The Battle for God (Kim Allen)
    -REVIEW : of Battle for God (BILL MAXWELL, St. Petersburg Times)
    -REVIEW : of JERUSALEM  : One City, Three Faiths.  By Karen Armstrong (Serge Schmemann, NY Times Book Review)
    -REVIEW : of Jerusalem : One City, Three Faiths By Karen Armstrong (Janice Penkalski, Book Page)
    -REVIEW : of Jerusalem (Imad-ad-Dean Ahmad, MIDDLE EAST AFFAIRS JOURNAL)
    -REVIEW : of Buddha by Karen Armstrong (Laura Miller, Salon)
    -REVIEW : of Buddha (David Cortesi, Hundred Mountain)
    -REVIEW : of Buddha (Jane Lampman, CS Monitor)
    -REVIEW : of Buddha (BOB TRIMBLE / The Dallas Morning News)
    -REVIEW : of In the Beginning: A New Reading of the Book of Genesis by Karen Armstrong (Chaim Bermant, booksonline)
    -REVIEW : of In the Beginning: A New Interpretation of Genesis by Karen Armstrong (Christian Zabriskie, Boston Book Review)

Book-related and General Links:
-REVIEW: Terror in the Name of God: Why Religious Militants Kill By Jessica Stern (Jason Thompson, August 24, 2003, San Francisco Chronicle)