Cultic Studies Review, Vol. 5, No. 2, 2006, Page 74
It appears, then, that survey data do not support the notion that Islam and the West are
headed toward an inevitable war of civilizations. This does not mean that frightening
problems do not exist in the relationship of Islam and the West or, more specifically,
between certain Muslim nations and the West or between certain radicalized movements or
mosques and the West. We should be careful, however, not to overgeneralize these
problems, for doing so can contribute to a self-fulfilling alarmism that could precipitate an
avoidable clash of civilizations. Unfortunately, the Jihadists, at least some of whom may
welcome a clash of civilizations, probably realize that more 9/11-scale attacks on the United
States could move U.S. public opinion toward this self-fulfilling alarmism. That is why the
first priority of all Western and Islamic nations should be to prevent such attacks from
occurring.
Those of us outside the security arena can also contribute to the reduction of self-fulfilling
alarmism. All who communicate to the public—Western and Islamic—need to be precise
about the sources of conflict. So much of what we think we know about the world rests
upon the media‘s focus on emotion and conflict. The journalistic cliché, ―if it bleeds, it
leads,‖ implies that violent extremists will get much more attention than peaceful
moderates. We must all, then, constantly remind ourselves about how the media can
mislead as well as inform. If, for example, certain Jihadists use an extremist interpretation
of the Koran to justify their well publicized terrorism, moderate Muslims should openly
challenge that interpretation and Westerners should not construe it as ―the‖ Muslim view of
what the Koran says.
Western and Islamic journalists should make an extra effort to pay more attention to these
moderate Muslim voices. The ―if-it-bleeds-it-leads‖ mentality causes journalists to become
part of the causal nexus that gives rise to the phenomena they observe and on which they
report. Because in free societies journalists have special status and privileges, they also
ought to have, it seems to me, a special ethical obligation to resist the bottom line of
ratings when rating-friendly sensationalism, simplification, or selectivity can have
deleterious effects on the body politic or when journalists are obviously used by publicity-
hungry extremists.
Recommendation One
More high-quality survey research should be conducted so as to provide reliable data
on the attitudes of Muslims and Westerners in various countries. Given the
importance of the issues related to the clash of civilizations, the research database
appears to be very inadequate.
Recommendation Two
Muslim and Western journalists, policy makers, and others should examine media
reports with a critical eye for self-fulfilling alarmism and inaccuracies.
Understanding Other Worldviews: Methodological Self-Doubt
The fundamental assumptions that underlie our worldview can bias us to perceive another
according to how his or her actions make sense in our, but not the other person‘s, view of
the world. This bias manifests whenever we take in information about the world outside
ourselves, whether through interaction with others, reading, observations, or other means.
Once we become aware of the unavoidability of personal bias, the question arises: ―How do
I find out if what I believe to be true is indeed true?‖
The answer to this question is to follow an epistemology of methodological self-doubt (or, in
religious terms, humility in the arena of belief and faith, not merely the arena of lifestyle,
with which most religions associate ―humility‖). Methodological self-doubt does not mean
that one rejects one‘s own worldview. Within philosophy, for example, a distinction is often

Cultic Studies Review, Vol. 5, No. 2, 2006, Page 75
made between philosophical and methodological naturalism. The former is a metaphysical
position that all of reality, including consciousness, can be explained as material events, as
―atoms and the void.‖ The latter is an epistemological principle of investigation that even
deeply religious scientists can follow to learn more about natural phenomena.
I believe that an epistemological principle of methodological self-doubt lies at the heart of
the ―deep communication‖ that enables two people to understand each other at a
fundamental, worldview level. ―Deep communication‖ refers to the nonjudgmental sharing
of fundamental, close-to-the-heart perceptions, beliefs, values, goals, and feelings. Deep
communication is perhaps most conspicuous in the psychotherapeutic process, in which
therapists place their own fundamentals in ―suspend mode‖ and nonjudgmentally open
themselves up to their clients‘ inner selves. Therapists show an interest in and willingness to
learn from clients through the clients’ words and actions within the therapeutic relationship.
Therapists do not allow their ―theories‖ to force clients‘ into categories that are inconsistent
with the clients‘ view of the world. Nevertheless, therapists do more than help clients see
themselves in a psychological mirror. Therapists use their own understanding of the world—
their own worldviews, which change constantly as a result of dialogue with their clients—to
help clients learn about themselves. Thus, the methodological self-doubt of psychotherapy
is not linear, as is methodological naturalism. Psychotherapy is an oscillation. Therapists
temporarily suspend their own worldview to try to enter the worldview of clients, but then
therapists return to their own worldview, enriched by their encounter with clients, to figure
out how to help clients address the issues that generated enough conflict to bring them into
therapy in the first place. During this back-and-forth process, therapists engage clients in a
dialogue that opens up both to other perspectives, and gives clients the confidence to try
new behaviors. In short-term psychotherapy, this process is a form of mutual problem-
solving. In long-term psychotherapy, it can, for all intents and purposes, result in a
conversion, a worldview shift of the client that enables him or her to lead a more rewarding
life.
A successful psychotherapeutic endeavor rests on respect (Langone, 1992), which honors
the client‘s
 mind, the capacity to reason.
 autonomy, the right to run one‘s own life.
 identity, however dysfunctional that identity may be.
 dignity, the need to feel worthwhile.
A psychotherapist cannot penetrate a client‘s worldview unless the client permits the
therapist to enter the client‘s inner sanctum. During successful therapy, clients slowly
disclose beliefs, sometimes beliefs that have been ―secrets‖ or beliefs of which clients have
been previously unaware, as the therapist earns their trust over time. This trust is not likely
to develop except in a context of respect. If a therapist were to demean clients‘ minds,
disregard their autonomy, assault their identity, and trample on their dignity, clients would
not trust the therapist enough to engage in any deep communication (although there are
cultic scenarios in which unscrupulous therapists can persuade vulnerable people to put up
with abuse that would not normally be tolerated).
Respect is even more important to deep communication in nontherapeutic settings, for the
other person is not coming to an expert for help. For example, a clergyman, a teacher, a
police officer, or a parent who wants to ―get through‖ to a youngster who is troubled or is
flirting with a cultic or extremist organization must begin with respect, which, as I tried to
explain above, is not the same as merely having ―good intentions‖ toward the person. These
well-intentioned people should be more ready to listen and to ask questions than to lecture
and offer opinions. They should be patient and earn the right to be admitted to the youth‘s