Fundamentalism is such an interesting topic, and an interesting word.
I might frame myself as an exceedingly non-traditional fundamentalist, so love this topic.
If folks will bear with me, I’ll ramble a bit about what this thread brings to mind.
First: Examination of the word…
I find it interesting that “Fundamentalist” is almost exclusively used as a pejorative, often equated with “Shallow, unyielding, dogmatic literalist”. Etymologically, “Fundamentalist” (like “Radical”) is one who believes in the importance of embodying the [I]fundamentals[/I] of whatever their particular belief or practice is. Of course, different folks will take different things to be at the core.
Second: Discrimination of its varied implications
I think more often than not use of the word “Fundamentalist” makes easy the sort of Verbal Delusion that Patanjali identifies as a “painful thoughtwave”.
Perhaps there are at least three different strands that get woven into the connotations around “Fundamentalism”:
Strand one (as above): Shallow, dogmatic, closed minded adherent of a particular path.
Strand two: A judgemental evangelical of their particular path
Strand three: Someone whose goal is a life infused with, informed by, and embodying their particular path, as they understand it.
These three strands may be present or absent in any combination, but it’s easy to over-assume information about all three from evidence of one or another. For example,
mistaking (3) for (2) - A meat eater being angry at a vegetarian for thinking they are superior… as evinced solely by their vegetarianism.
It’s possible to construct an example for mistaking any one of the above for the others, but I find it interesting that in my life I’ve found it most effective to presume the third if I think I see evidence of any of these forms of Fundamentalism. It lets me engage more deeply with the person and understand where they are coming from.
Third: Joyful Peace
It doesn’t seem to benefit me a whit when I get fussed about other people’s practice. Righteous indignation is an easy trap, and one of the most humorous (how easy it is to get righteously indignant over another’s righteous indignation).
That’s not to say it isn’t useful to try to discern what I seems to be effective or ineffective in another person’s practice. As InnerAthlete points out, initially it’s by observing the results of a given practice that we can discern its effects (not an easy process, but there it is).
Fourth: Awareness of individuality (yeah I know… these headings are a stretch)
Finally, it seems to me that anything one practices which is outside the statistical norm of one’s surroundings is going to get judged by some folks.
If you are seen practicing yoga, then eating a hot dog, some folks may work themselves into a lather about how outrageously hypocritical you are. (Person A thinks: “Outrageous… that person pretends to be spiritual while defiling themselves with that devil-tube”… Person B thinks: "How lame! That guy is eating a hot-dog just like a regular joe, when really he’s some sort of new age nut!)
Perhaps the best we can do is to try Strand three: strive continually to live the life that makes the most sense to us, not worry too much if it makes sense to others, and let our interactions with others serve as a mutual reality-check.
Anyways, I’ve rambled enough. A fun topic!