Talk:Fundamentalism: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Peter Jackson |
imported>Martin Wyatt |
||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
:I see the definition above calls it a sect, which is absurd. In the narrower sense it's a movement. | :I see the definition above calls it a sect, which is absurd. In the narrower sense it's a movement. | ||
:More generally, it's often used as a generalized term of abuse, like fascist, homophobe, holocaust denier &c. As I understand it, sociologists use the term to refer to a certain psychosocial attitude, self-conscious holding on to beliefs in reaction to | :More generally, it's often used as a generalized term of abuse, like fascist, homophobe, holocaust denier &c. As I understand it, sociologists use the term to refer to a certain psychosocial attitude, self-conscious holding on to beliefs in reaction to changes in the social milieu, or something like that. [[User:Peter Jackson|Peter Jackson]] 15:48, 11 March 2013 (UTC) | ||
::I agreed with you about the definition and have ventured to change it.--[[User:Martin Wyatt|Martin Wyatt]] 16:09, 11 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 10:09, 11 March 2013
Why Christian?
Is not Salafism and Haredi Judaism fundamentalist? Howard C. Berkowitz 22:07, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
- Well, there is a distinciton between fundamentalism and Fundamentalism just as there is between lower-case and upper-case conservatism, communism, catholicism and so on. Every religion can have it's fundamentalists, but only Protestant Christianity has Fundamentalism. Perhaps we need some disambiguation. –Tom Morris 22:16, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Further enlargement
I came across this page because under the heading of Gujarat I had written of Hindu fundamentalism, and I found what is here good so far as it goes. I have added additional clarification to reflect normal usage, but I also wanted to add something to the Generic section, for which I do not have any references: it seems to me that "fundamentalism" is also used to refer to teachings which have no "scriptural" support. For instance the Koran/Quran does not endorse intolerance of Judaism or Christianity, but many Muslim so-called fundamentalists do endorse it. --Martin Wyatt 21:13, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
- I see the definition above calls it a sect, which is absurd. In the narrower sense it's a movement.
- More generally, it's often used as a generalized term of abuse, like fascist, homophobe, holocaust denier &c. As I understand it, sociologists use the term to refer to a certain psychosocial attitude, self-conscious holding on to beliefs in reaction to changes in the social milieu, or something like that. Peter Jackson 15:48, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
- I agreed with you about the definition and have ventured to change it.--Martin Wyatt 16:09, 11 March 2013 (UTC)