Aakash singh | NIT Srinagar (original) (raw)

Papers by Aakash singh

Philosophia, 2015

The collection of papers presented in this issue of Philosophia represent a sample of writings ar... more The collection of papers presented in this issue of Philosophia represent a sample of writings arising from an early stage of the newly emerging international and multidisciplinary research project called BReopening the Fundamentalism Project.^The project is spearheaded by the International Research Network for Religion and Democracy (IRNRD). It is an Bearly stage^because within the overarching task of reopening such a vast project, we begin by carefully rethinking it. And that is what the papers in this collection dothey force us, in various ways, to rethink or reconsider the dominant views, both academic and quotidian, about what fundamentalism is, means, and does, and the environment, both academic and quotidian, wherein this all happens. With very few exceptions, throughout the 1960s and 1970s, there was academic consensusincluding philosophers, social scientists, and grudgingly even theologians that modernity inevitably brought secularization. In the late 1970s, however, the new visibility or re-emergence of fundamentalist movements in mainstream societies across the world led to gradual erosion of that consensus. The rise of the American BMoral Majority,^the Islamic Revolution in Iran, the new patterns of post-colonial immigration and the public increases of Muslim agitation in Europe, along with other manifestations of religion in the public sphere, began to convince philosophers, sociologists, political theorists, theologians, and other scholars that religious identity was not on the brink of disappearance, but on the contrary, was showing indications of both growth and push back. Within the context of this slow shift of academic awareness, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences commissioned the original BFundamentalism Project.^That project hypothesized that fundamentalism could be taken as a Bfamily resemblance^concept, identifying and at times even linking the genesis and evolution of fundamentalist developments across numerous religious traditions around the world. The premise was simply this: manifold religious movements emerging in different cultures across the globe exhibited discernible, common traits, and thus could be collectively subsumed under the category Bfundamentalism.^Though controversial,

Philosophia, 2015

The collection of papers presented in this issue of Philosophia represent a sample of writings ar... more The collection of papers presented in this issue of Philosophia represent a sample of writings arising from an early stage of the newly emerging international and multidisciplinary research project called BReopening the Fundamentalism Project.^The project is spearheaded by the International Research Network for Religion and Democracy (IRNRD). It is an Bearly stage^because within the overarching task of reopening such a vast project, we begin by carefully rethinking it. And that is what the papers in this collection dothey force us, in various ways, to rethink or reconsider the dominant views, both academic and quotidian, about what fundamentalism is, means, and does, and the environment, both academic and quotidian, wherein this all happens. With very few exceptions, throughout the 1960s and 1970s, there was academic consensusincluding philosophers, social scientists, and grudgingly even theologians that modernity inevitably brought secularization. In the late 1970s, however, the new visibility or re-emergence of fundamentalist movements in mainstream societies across the world led to gradual erosion of that consensus. The rise of the American BMoral Majority,^the Islamic Revolution in Iran, the new patterns of post-colonial immigration and the public increases of Muslim agitation in Europe, along with other manifestations of religion in the public sphere, began to convince philosophers, sociologists, political theorists, theologians, and other scholars that religious identity was not on the brink of disappearance, but on the contrary, was showing indications of both growth and push back. Within the context of this slow shift of academic awareness, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences commissioned the original BFundamentalism Project.^That project hypothesized that fundamentalism could be taken as a Bfamily resemblance^concept, identifying and at times even linking the genesis and evolution of fundamentalist developments across numerous religious traditions around the world. The premise was simply this: manifold religious movements emerging in different cultures across the globe exhibited discernible, common traits, and thus could be collectively subsumed under the category Bfundamentalism.^Though controversial,