Idea
This claim describes contemporary fundamentalisms as not living by a complete adherence to tradition alone, but by selecting from it what serves them and using it in a practical way. They may display religious conservatism, yet at the same time benefit from some products and tools of Western modernity. This makes them closer to utilitarian selection than to a comprehensive epistemic commitment to history, philosophy, and interpretation.
Concise Formulation
Contemporary fundamentalisms: based on pragmatic selective piety
Its Place in the Book’s Argument
This claim serves the book’s argument because it deconstructs the image of fundamentalism as a pure return to origins. From this perspective, the issue is not an innocent return but a selective construction that uses the past and the present together. Hence the book places fundamentalism in a broader context linking religious discourse with the interests of the present, not only with the purity of origins.
Why It Matters
The importance of this claim lies in the way it reveals the tension within fundamentalisms themselves: they reject modernity in theory while benefiting from it in practice. This helps explain them as a complex phenomenon rather than as mere simple religious attachment. It also clarifies an important aspect of Arkoun’s critique, namely the refusal to turn identity into a closed selective discourse.
Brief Evidence
The rise of contemporary fundamentalisms is linked to pragmatic selective piety. They do not live by complete adherence to tradition alone, but by choosing from it what serves them and employing it practically. They may combine outward religious conservatism with benefiting from some products and tools of Western modernity.
Reading Questions
- How does fundamentalist discourse combine rejecting modernity with benefiting from it?
- What does describing fundamentalism as selective reveal about its relationship to history?
Degree of Documentation
High: the claim appears in a clear location in the book’s material.