NationStates Jolt Archive

I've seen a lot of people on this forum and other places throw about the word "fundimentalist" as a general insult against religious people, the idea being that to call them that suggests they are unreasonable and therefore not worth listening to. But the word in itself suggests that there is a dichotomy between fundimentalists and moderates, but given the way I have seen the word used, people dont seem to be able to do that. I would therefore ask people to defend their overuse of the word fundimentalist by clarifiying what exactly it means?

it's not a dichotomy it's an extreme. anyone who expresses religious views based on a literal or extreme interpretation of their holy book is a fundamentalist. i suppose properly the word should only be used for people who base their views on a literal interpretation but the meaning of words change with popular usage. now religious extremists, whether they twist them meaning of their holy book or not, are called fundamentalists.

it'now religious extremists, whether they twist them meaning of their holy book or not, are called fundamentalists.

Extremeist and fundimentalists are interchangable, unless you can demonstrate the diffrence

Extremeist and fundimentalists are interchangable, unless you can demonstrate the diffrence

well as i see it, fundamentalists believe everything in their holy book and take it literally. extremists pick out certain bits, like hating gays or jihad for example, and fixate on those while ignoring or just paying lip-service to the rest. but yes, in common usage 'fundamentalist' and 'extremist' are interchangeable.

"fundimentalist" is not a word. Fundamentalist on the other hand...

"fundimentalist" is not a word. Fundamentalist on the other hand...

Well it is a word - in that it is a collection of letters and is pronounceable. It just happens to be one that has no meaning attributed to it yet.

I've seen a lot of people on this forum and other places throw about the word "fundimentalist" as a general insult against religious people, the idea being that to call them that suggests they are unreasonable and therefore not worth listening to. But the word in itself suggests that there is a dichotomy between fundimentalists and moderates, but given the way I have seen the word used, people dont seem to be able to do that. I would therefore ask people to defend their overuse of the word fundimentalist by clarifiying what exactly it means?

I tend to agree with your observation.
When I speak of an extreme member of any movement(religious or otherwise) I tend to not use the word "fundamentalist" as the the very nature of an extreme radical is opposite of a fundamentalist.

Being a fundamentalist(if we are using the word correctrly and not with it's media driven lazy mouthed common usage) would be being someone who adheres to the fundamentals of a prticular system...be it religion, conservatism, basketball, hai ku, or Wu Shu....
Example you have a basketball player who is good but he is not passing and rebounding, he doesnt stick to his man (or zone) his general skill set is outstanding but he is being beaten by inferior players...because he isnt playing fundamentals--the basics--the root.

A Christian seeks to be good and follow his "religion" but he throws fake blood on women going to get abortions and tells people they ARE condemned to hell and that God will smite them or their wicked ways...he is not following fundamentals...because obviously to be Christian means to aspire to be Christ-like and none of the above behaviors exemplify that...they need to return to fundamentals...kindness and tolerance.

It works with just about anything the Media has labelled as ..I love this..."Fundamental Extremists".

"Radical Extremist" is much more appropriate in my understanding of the meaning of the words.

Except where they are trying to say a specific persons behavior is Fundamentally Extreme--as in no matter what they do it is done on the basic premise of extremism.

Extremeist and fundimentalists are interchangable, unless you can demonstrate the diffrence
Extremist is being at edge of any spectrum of belief.

Fundamentalists believe in the very literal basics of a religion or line of belief. These beliefs are very conservative and inflexible, usually backed up by doctrine that is hundred of years old.

Extremist is being at edge of any spectrum of belief.

Fundamentalists believe in the very literal basics of a religion or line of belief. These beliefs are very conservative and inflexible, usually backed up by doctrine that is hundred of years old.

Right.

Some fundamentalists are extremists, but not all. For example, I think few people would accuse the Amish of being 'extremists'. They are, however, fundamentalists.

Conversely, some extremists are fundamentalists, but some are not fundamentalists. For example, secular terrorist organizations.

I personally disagree with the idea that they are interchangable, as you can see.

A lot of people say "fundamentalist" when they mean "theocratic".