Mlister's scatola di sabia

jarvis dora said an hour ago: okay just got your .tell about Greek theology and stuffs and well… I mean, that's about 500% all the things I strongly disagree with? Like, the notion that Greek mythology has nothing to do with religious belief
10:18 jarvis dora said an hour ago: I mean, what is a theology? don't have time to pull up the dictionary definition rn, but surely a definition would be something along the line of "a theory about the divine - a set of suppositions and expectations about the divine, constructed in a way so as to have an internal logic of its own".
10:18 jarvis dora said an hour ago: in which case, yes, stories about the gods are definitely sites wherein such suppositions about the gods and heroes and other supernatural factors can and do get encoded - things like "Zeus is the protector of Sacred Hospitality, if you're a Bad Host and abuse strangers and beggars you'll incur divine emitiy"
10:18 jarvis dora said an hour ago: okay I think I shall be totally cliche and bring up Herodotus 2.53 here
10:18 jarvis dora said an hour ago: it's telling what the things Herodotus credited to the storytellers are - where the gods came from, what their names are, what their functions are, how they look like -i.e. all the points a modern observer may slot under the heading of theology
10:18 jarvis dora said 41 minutes ago: I suppose the problem isn't "taking mythology for religious belief" as such, the problem is more the supposition that one can take mythology for any single thing - mythology can contain religious beliefs, but equally not everything included in the heading of "mythology" is a religious belief. Storytelling is multifaceted, after all.
10:18 jarvis dora said 39 minutes ago: you can tell a story for fun, for a laugh. you can tell a story that imparts valuable information (about morality, about oral history, about scientific facts even). You can tell a story that does both. And equally, mythology, like all form of storytelling, can include metaphors, imageries etc. that are not supposed to be read (primarily) literal
10:18 jarvis dora said 26 minutes ago: in which case, the citeria to judge "they weren't dumber than us" can be misleading - were they dumber than us for entertaining the possiblity of theology contained in a narrative traditions, or are we dumb for ignoring the methods and contexts the Greeks navigated their stories with, & then laugh when said stories then make no sense to us?
10:19 jarvis dora said 21 minutes ago: also, "they weren't dumber than us, they invented philosophy" is a bit of a strange argument to my ears, tbh. Like, to begin with, on top of my head - Mesopotamian thinkers had been thinking about the problems of ethics and cosmology and stuffs for ages before Greece was a thing
10:19 jarvis dora said 19 minutes ago: about half of the major pre-socratic philosophers were from the Ionian coast & developed under the context of intense contact with Persia. And in China the Hundred Schools of Thought were roughly contemporary to Greek philosophy
10:19 jarvis dora said 16 minutes ago: to say the Greeks "invented philosophy" is… well, it's a proposition that involves gaming one's definitions a 'lil bit. Also, I'm not Christian so I'm not terribly familiar with the terminologies, but "comparing hagiography to theology" seems a weird opposition: what is hagiography, if not a subset of theology?

Salvo diversa indicazione, il contenuto di questa pagina è sotto licenza Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License