The idea of Fundamentalism refers to religious or political groups adhering to a rigid, traditional interpretation of their particular belief system.
In Christianity, some fundamentalists seem to believe that they take the Bible literally. But as human beings it is arguably impossible for any religious person to escape the interpretive process.
It seems reasonable to say then, that fundamentalists adhere to an interpretation of scripture that they suppose is literal but which is selective and slanted to suit a particular psychosocial agenda.
A similar critique could be leveled against Christian liberals and other denominations.
The current split between Fundamentalism and science has deep roots, going back to the Scopes trial of 1925 in which Democratic Presidential candidate William Jennings Bryan argued for a Biblical view over Darwin’s theory of evolution. Bryan’s campaign fought for banning evolutionary theory from American classrooms.
As for Islamic fundamentalism, the Oxtord Dictionary has this to say:
Islamic fundamentalism appeared in the 18th and 19th centuries as a reaction to the disintegration of Islamic political and economic power, asserting that Islam is central to both state and society and advocating strict adherence to the Koran (Qur’an) and to Islamic law (sharia).¹
Skip O’Neill, a leader of the fundamentalist Church of Bible Understanding’s branch here. November 12, 1976. (Photo by Jerry Engel/New York Post Archives / (c) NYP Holdings, Inc. via Getty Images)
More recently, the term fundamentalism loosely refers to any kind of strict cultural preference. So we have Hindu fundamentalists who insist on the historicity of their sacred myth, Star Trek fundamentalists who accept nothing after TOS, Disney fundamentalists who maintain that anything after hand-drawn cartoons are bogus, and so on. These types of fundamentalists hearken back to a supposed “original” or “golden age” within whatever activity inspires them.