superstition and democracy

M

Michael

歌舞伎
Valued Senior Member
I was thinking about democracy while cycling the other day. It seems like the idea of democracy may be facilitated within a polytheistic society? Polytheism did have Zeus, so it wasn't ideal, but then again, having multiple Gods opens up many avenues of debate. It also means the Gods have mortal characteristics and while they should be appeased, it's really up to us mortals to make a better way for ourselves. These ideas open the way for ideas like democracy - rule of the people by the people.

monotheism on the other hand may stifle such ideas. One there is a Pope or a King, appointed BY the ONLY GOD, then it's going to be difficult to get around this one persons opinion. Wouldn't you think?

That said, it's not so simple, but, another variable that has a direct effect on the idea of democracy.

I see it in the ME where a religious leader can halt community debate by pulling the Allah-card.


anyway, just something I was thinking about that I don't think we have debated before?

have we?!?!?!?
 
What gave you the idea? The slavery in Greek society? The barbarians in Rome? The caste system in India or the serf system in China?

anyway, just something I was thinking about that I don't think we have debated before?
Click to expand...

For such original ideas, we need to first get a mild concussion.
 
I think you are more on about how a religion is played in a political field. Whatever one can achieve by playing the "allah" card in a particular environment can just as easily be achieved by playing a "zeus" card in a similar one.

:shrug:

(edit - in fact the same card is played by anyone who has access to some sort of over-arching value system that permeates a social group. Its not exclusively a religion thing )
 
It seems I may still have a mild concussion :)

Anyway, I have read the development of democracy and yeah, they didn't mention anything about Gods. But, it got me to thinking that given the role Gods play in our lives, that, indeed it would have an effect on whether or not democracy as an idea percolated .. wouldn't it?

Yeah, the Zeus card is a big play, BUT, Zeus is sometimes bested by coalitions of other Gods (well, at least tricked). And also, this whole way of thinking about Gods puts them somewhat on par humans. Meaning that yeah, Priests have a say but not the ONLY say.

With a mono-God, I think the Priests have the only say? That's why, after all, the Church of England broke from Catholicism. It's also why there was constant intrigue between kings and the pope.

Now that I think about it, while not monotheism per say, when we think about it, aren't the Emperors of say China, or Japan really the same as a Pope? I mean, while they were strictly monotheists they kind of where. I mean, they played the role of the Pope, only the role was for all of the Gods?

... omg, i'm procrastinating....
 
And the Pashtunwalli of the Afghans is the oldest known system of democratic process. If we can consider the Greeks democratic for omitting women and the Romans for omitting slaves [as well as the US constitution and Israeli apartheid with their respective notions of exclusiveness], it would seem democracy is a rather flexible term.

The origin of Afghani Loya jirga is unknown but they have found it compatible with whatever religion is predominant in their times.
 
S.A.M. said:
And the Pashtunwalli of the Afghans is the oldest known system of democratic process. If we can consider the Greeks democratic for omitting women and the Romans for omitting slaves [as well as the US constitution and Israeli apartheid with their respective notions of exclusiveness], it would seem democracy is a rather flexible term.

The origin of Afghani Loya jirga is unknown but they have found it compatible with whatever religion is predominant in their times.
Click to expand...
Self determination while living under the rule of a Persian Emperor? Seems oxymoron.
 
On a side note, it's interesting to see an Indian denigrate the most famous Indian philosopher and his philosophy. There's nothing wrong with it of course - discourse is fine. But, as you're a monotheist, well, it has that monotheistic sort of smash up the other peoples stuff sort of way about it - a flavor really.

You know what I mean?

Especially as Buddhism has seemingly matured into a pretty peaceful and tolerant belief system.
 
Especially as Buddhism has seemingly matured into a pretty peaceful and tolerant belief system
Click to expand...

Where?

On a side note, it's interesting to see an Indian denigrate the most famous Indian philosopher and his philosophy.
Click to expand...

Buddhist ideology is separate from the lack of empirical evidence for the presence of a historical Buddha.

If the philosopher never existed, he can hardly be "denigrated" by addressing the lack of historical evidence for his earthly existence.

The Indians will continue to worship "him" as the ninth avatar of Vishnu, regardless. He'd have to be something special to catch up to Ganesha

Ganesh and also known as Ganapati, Vinayaka, and Pillaiyar, is one of the best-known and most widely worshipped deities in the Hindu pantheon.[5] His image is found throughout India.[6] Hindu sects worship him regardless of affiliations.[7] Devotion to Ganesha is widely diffused and extends to Jains, Buddhists, and beyond India
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top