Would you agree that fundamentalism is a style of thinking and not a particular religious movement?

Yes, I would agree with that. Fundamentalism in any area of thought can contain such features as:

-black and white "us versus them" thinking

-oversimplification of complex issues

-an intense need for certainty (especially in matters of authority)

-behavioral double standards (outsiders are faulted for behavior that is accepted, ignored, or minimized within the group)

-a failure of imagination when it comes to seeing things from other perspectives

-the desire to punish potential deviants within the group for their (real or imagined) disloyalty

-avoidance or outright rejection of information undermining the fundamental ideas, and social pressure on other members of the group to do likewise.

-

Yes, I would agree. Fundamentlaism has more to do with having a closed mind than with anything else. When Carl Sagan spoke out against fundamentalism, he was not speaking out against Christianinty, but against such closed minded thinking, including that which is common for atheirsts. And, as you said in your reply to GIP, many atheists claim to have the only truth.

Its both to Christianity and Islam. Only Christ is Lord to Christians. Only.

Only Allah is God's true name to Muslims. Remember?

Atheists have every right to say simply prove it or get lost.

You sophists can leave free thought out of it!

-naturalist

"plenty of atheists who do (claim to have the only truth)" well yes, 2+2=4 but that's no reason to pin dogmatism on them as a negative simply for being rational and apparent in some things . They are simply unmaking religious claims. That's not unreasonable to ask for proof they cannot provide.

If "There is no God" is actually "wrong", you are free to prove it actually incorrect. The gnostic atheist is then apparently the default position.

And, honestly, I don't know any Muslims who openly claim they "don't have the only truth". Quite the opposite.

(not hating, just debating)

It's a style of NOT thinking.

Yes. The fundamentalist versus modernist movements in Christian religion(s) have basically absorbed the term "fundamentalist" and "modernist", but those words existed prior to this usage, and do not only refer to how religious dogma is followed.

Hence, it needs disambiguation:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamentalism_(disam...

Atheist or theist, religious or not, black or white, alive or dead... well maybe not the last one... but otherwise it doesn't matter. Anyone is capable of fundamentalist thinking.

It would seem to be a desire to have all the facts in a nice little rule book, all trotted out for you to see, no romance, no passion, no art, no fervor. Just read the book, accept the book, obey the book. Or else, death by horrid torture.

Everything's simple, straightforward, black and white.

Makes me want to blow lunch. begging your pardon, but such a view is a desecration of all that God gave us when She created us!

It's both.