03-31-2023, 02:14 PM
(This post was last modified: 03-31-2023, 02:20 PM by Rhythmcs.)
How to cut the Bronze Age loose forever.
How to cut the Bronze Age loose forever.
(03-31-2023, 02:09 PM)isbelldl Wrote:Not at all. The bolded bit describes what I'm referring to as a religion. Things that fit -that- criteria...however different they may be in this or that respect, are equivalent in those particular respects. That isn't a redefinition.....it's an observation.(03-31-2023, 01:46 PM)Rhythmcs Wrote: Short and sweet, in americana-
Christ is traditional religion, john henry is civil religion, and trump is political religion. Christmas is traditional religion, the 4th of july is civil religion, a campaign hate rally is political religion. Normative deference to the christian god is traditional religion, normative deference to the will of the people is civil religion, normative deference to the power of the state in the person of Dear Leader is political religion.
The point of these categories is not their difference, though, but in their similarities and equivalencies. All three can be demonstrated to satisfy durkheims definition of a religion even though they have divergent aims and disparate content-items. A unified system of beliefs and practices relative to sacred things, that is to say, things set apart and forbidden – beliefs and practices which unite into one single moral community called a church, all those who adhere to them.
You've probably heard people talk about the shock of an attack on the temple of our democracy? That is an explicit invocation of civil religion. Of the war on christ? Traditional religion. That trump is being persecuted? Political religion. What do you think is forbidden? The war on christmas, the prosecution of the great man, or the subversion of a representative democracy? When you look around you, would you say that you are normatively united in/as your community by whatever belief you hold on that count? When you gather with neighbors, friends, and family for whatever holidays you celebrate, do you reaffirm the values they represent and do you, perhaps, discuss your rejection of antithetical values?
I still think this is a worthless redefinition of religion. You're basically claiming that anything we value is a religion. Doing so renders the idea of a religion as meaningless. I think your argument in nonsense.
I value black sex linked chickens. This is not a religion. I value the quiet time between when my fam goes to bed and when I finally pass out. I value vanilla icecream, it's better than chocolate. I value curly hair, kissable lips, adequate breasts, and child bearing hips. These are not religions. Okay, maybe the last one...