Some will disagree with my characterization of the Maute band as an Islamic extremist group. And one particularly testy issue is whether or not Islam is determinative of their extremist posture, or whether it is merely a fortuity that they are Muslims. The Regional Darul-if-Ta of the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao took an official stand and ruled that the mayhem that Maute visited on Marawi had nothing to do with Islam. But the militants apparently slash and burn in the name of Islam, as do other extremists in other parts of the world. Just as many who swear that the Bible is God’s word have invoked its passages to perpetrate the most horrendous acts. For a person of faith, having what he believes to be God’s word—the ultimate rule of life—can be very assuring. It gives one the existential compass one always needs. But it is dynamite in the hands of the reckless, because it can be wielded as a sword against one’s enemies, those who differ in belief and in persuasion. And the way, I think, to address this impasse is not to take up the battle-cry for a religionless society—a thoroughly secular community that clamps down on all overt expressions of sectarian affiliation. That would be extremism of the opposite kind and would only fan the flames of religious militancy more. Religion, after all, is a stubborn phenomenon!
What is needed is for leaders and teachers of religion to foster the critical moment, the inquiring spirit, the rational examination of one’s beliefs. Irrational religion, after all, is not worthy of the human person! Our seminaries will have to do philosophy more seriously and theology should truly be the rational and critical reflection on faith. And even if logical analysis is not the favorite tool of theologians, they might learn valuable lessons from the basic precept that one must be thoroughly responsible about the use of terms and account for them in a manner that it can be determined whether any given proposition is true or false. For all that has been said against it, Descartes’ methodic doubt is still a strong purgative! Similarly, Islamic scholars might want to pass the recondite reflections that they do and that they publish in treatises to the level of madrasahs so that it is not mere rote memorization of passages of the Sacred Qur’an that becomes the determinant of accomplishment.
Extremism, for one thing, is an intellectually comfortable position. An extremist sees only polar opposites. His square of opposition is limited only to contradictories: Either P or not P. The modal is unknown to him: Need not be P, can be P, and still less, the nuances that is the language of prudent, humble but earnest inquiry: Perhaps, it seems likely that. The immortal Aristotle believed in the golden mean—virtus in medio—and while that may not necessarily be the best ethical norm to live by (because it leaves one ceaselessly calculating), it takes intellectual subtlety to be able to admit qualifiers, entertain rebuttals and concede modifications.
Extremism partners with militancy particularly when a religion, a world-view fights for its survival and is threatened radically. Obviously if this point has been validly made, then it will go a long way towards fending off extremism not to make any following believe that its religion, its beliefs and its world-views are radically threatened or compromised. Sometimes, the issue is demographic—in that a minority group lives in the midst of an overwhelming majority of a different religion. But even in such situations that generosity of spirit that manifests itself in a culture of mutual respect and tolerance should not be empty desiderata. And enforcing public secularism or a religionless public space—as some our jurists believe is the way to go—is certainly not it! Suicide bombers are the best proof of what people are willing to give up for the cause of their God and their faith!
Gadamer’s “fusion of horizons” is a powerful suggestion. The radical hermeneutic continuity that assures us, human persons, that for all our differences, we remain human, and can communicate with each other, also indicates that our horizons can fuse, that our world-views need not be impermeable and that, in the very least, we can be respectful and considerate of each other. And that is of course both an ethical and a cultural issue. It has to do with the way we rear our children, with the attitudes we foster in them, and with a culture that puts a premium on respect for differences.
Extremism will not be solved in the long-term by extreme measures—because that is exactly that it feeds on. It will be effectively checked by a studied, deliberate, government-led, law-backed direction of national culture towards mutual respect.
rannie_aquino@csu.edu.ph
rannie_aquino@sanbeda.edu.ph
rannie_aquino@outlook.com
