What Is Fanaticism?

Fanaticism is used in some cases as an adjective to describe the nature of certain behaviors that people recognize as cultic. Fanaticism can be described as passionate and unconditional adherence caused by excessive enthusiasm or persistent monomania on certain issues in stubborn, indiscriminate, and sometimes violent ways. A person engaged in fanaticism can be called a fanatic because he or she and their behavior and beliefs are described as fanatical.

Fanaticism (from the Latin adverb fanatice (fren) and fanaticus (enthusiastic, ecstatic, angry, fanatical, angry) is any belief or behavior that involves uncritical zeal or obsessive enthusiasm. Fanaticism involves a state of excessive, uncritical, or intense interest in a particular idea or theme. It can be a religious or political thing, or, in the case of sport, an obsessive enthusiasm for a pastime or a hobby.

Fanaticism is an unusual level of devotion to a particular subject, ranging from sports teams to science fiction franchises. Because of the strong emotions that surround fanaticism, people often feel emotionally connected to the subject and devote considerable time to researching and learning about it.

In a comprehensive review and synthesis of existing literature, this article identifies some of the key features of consumerism. Fanaticism, fan or fanatic, can be defined across disciplines in contradictory, or non-discriminatory ways. While the term is most often associated with religious fanaticism, many other subjects can become the object of fixation or obsession.

Fanaticism refers to behavior motivated by extreme and unconditional enthusiasm, devotion, and zeal for something like religion, a political stance, or a cause. In modern parlance, fanatics mean the possession of a religious, nationalist, racist, political, or ideological system. In sport, fanaticism is the high level of intensity that surrounds a sporting event.

The prospect of a terrible existence drives poor creatures to sacrifice more for love than religious fanaticism. This sacrifice is voluntary but requires active government intervention to prevent it. However far-fetched and extravagant the idea of the danger to the freedom of the militia may be, it is not possible to treat it with the weight of a camp, or to regard it as a mere test of skill and paradox; but the most serious offspring of political fanaticism is the insincere rhetoric of fomenting prejudice at all costs.

The fanatic says that his reason stems from absolute truth, not from reason and science, but from practical practice, from what we have learned and applied in the laboratory, and admits that the last word today is only a presumption that can be improved by ongoing investigations. The sustained reason, hard work, and addiction to fanaticism can set us free.

We are helpless in the face of the rise of fanaticism if we do not understand its political, economic, religious, and psychological roots. The emergence of fanaticism as a political and not just a religious idea. Our own understanding of fanaticism makes us think about a bipolar vision of the world, with armed prophets, Islamic terrorists, and a global policy of militarized liberal humanitarian and military regimes. We can’t forget the dangers of fanaticism in democratic politics.

The transcendent manifestations of hurt, mistrust, and hostility in fanaticism can be overcome only by understanding their human sources. Fanaticism will continue to flourish if we do not tackle its causes: population inequality and deterioration. There is no need for an AA-style safe haven to win back political and religious fanatics, ideologues, and absolutists. The strange step of replacing God with reason is strange, reinterpreting the AA model of the fanatic as anonymous and the AA capitulation of God as a notorious excuse for fanaticism and its sordid history.

What seemed like a victory of rational thought over religious doctrine, the eighteenth-century Enlightenment promised a possible diminution of the power of fanaticism. But the reign of terror at the end of the French Revolution proved that secular fanaticism can be as deadly as religious fanaticism.

Hitler was, in his own way, a fanatical architect and a true believer, but his fanaticism had nothing to do with logic, reason, or cold, clear thinking. Andre Haynal, the world expert on fanaticism, was a close observer of fanaticism for 80 years. He remembers Hitler’s terrifying speeches hailing the German takeover of Austria and experienced three different fanatical regimes in Hungary: the Nazis, the Communists, and the Hungarian fascists.

Leave a Comment