What, then, are the real questions at issue? and how should we set about discussing them? Here we are confronted with a remarkable fact. When ‘anti-fundamentalists’ generalize about ‘Fundamentalism’, they use, as we saw, very strong language; they describe it as ‘obscurantist’, ‘heretical’, ‘sectarian’, ‘schismatic’, ‘crude’ and ‘atavistic’, and its influence as ‘disastrous’. Nothing seems too bad to say about it! But when, after this, they come down to details, they are suddenly