Entries By Type / Discussion

This is the discussion related to the wiki page Entries By Type.

Categorization [IC Discussion]

fade 30 Dec 2007 20:53

If our esteemed editor has seen fit to organize such a vast array of items under the heading of "Social Movements," I can see no plausible explanation for why "Divinities" gathers its own category. Surely these mythical personages may be suitably classified either as "People" when they can be traced to an actual historical figure, or under "Social Movements" again as a mere detail of religion.

- Dame Helwin

Last edited on 30 Dec 2007 20:53 by fade Show more

Re: Categorization [IC Discussion]

cappadocius 30 Dec 2007 21:08

My colleague of the north falls prey once more to those heresies and false beliefs so common in those lands. While the divine can, if one desired to blaspheme, be traced to their "historical" origins, they contain that spark of original creation that mere men cannot possess, and are thus qualitatively different than "People" - social movements are born in reaction to the touch of the divine, not the other way around, my dear Dame Helwin.

- Ae of the Third Eye

Last edited on 30 Dec 2007 21:09 by cappadocius Show more

Re: Categorization [IC Discussion]

PatPandaHat 31 Dec 2007 03:35

While I would in normal practice agree with our respected colleague, Dame Helwin, I feel that her suggested classifications neither clear up the matter nor provide an accurate definition of the works involved. "Divinities", as such, are not simply a matter of a social movement! To regard craven bowing to the gods as something on the level as a man's rite of passage or the political movement against clerics in society misses the point of both matters.

I would instead put forward that to reduce the loaded terminology of 'divinities', we utilize 'mythology' as the proper heading. In this fashion, we can accurately connect such ideas as Askari, Alkemy of the Soul, or any of the as yet incomplete works regarding faiths and religions of the world at large.

- Anatjari Toogee

Re: Categorization [IC Discussion]

yalenusveler 31 Dec 2007 03:42

Alkemy of the Soul, is quite sadly, not mythological. In fact, I've a few of the changed acting as junior scribes in my library. I agree with it being classified as a Social Movement. As for the Divine not deserving its own category, surely the cold has frozen the good Dame's brain in a mindset of atheist claptrap. I've no doubt her soul will be reincarnated into some strange form of dung eating animal.

-Relti Cyen Hri

Re: Categorization [IC Discussion]

cappadocius 31 Dec 2007 03:51

We will respect our fellow scholars, Magus Cyen.

Last edited on 31 Dec 2007 03:54 by cappadocius Show more

Re: Categorization [IC Discussion]

fade 31 Dec 2007 03:57

Oh, I take no offense. My theoretical soul may do whatever it likes after I am done with it, and it's no concern of mine. I would, however, invite the learned Magus to come visit my homeland one of these days, in hopes that such a scholar might find the cold night air a bracing reminder of the inevitable frailty of human flesh.

We also have bears, for those who prefer them to the wind.

- Dame Helwin

Re: Categorization [IC Discussion]

yalenusveler 31 Dec 2007 04:08

My apologies, Dame Helwin, even if no offense was taken. I did let my words escape before my temper had time to be controlled. A fault I must sadly admit to. As for needing a reminder of the frailty of human flesh, having died before, I do believe I'll pass.

-Relti Cyen Hri

Re: Categorization [IC Discussion]

fade 31 Dec 2007 03:43

"Mythology" covers a vast array of hypothetical beings and what not that almost always ultimately fall once more under the category of religion. And religion, of course, is merely one of the more pervasive types of social movements out there, if one frequently justified by idle scholars with talk of the "touch of the divine" rather than their taking sufficient time to study and explore all of the complex underlying causes for what is then lumped into a broad name of some hypothetical god or what not. However, under the circumstances, I am willing to concede that the respectable Anatjari's suggestion is less likely to lead to pointless contention over organization, and it is not an unsuitable name for that class of events, people, and so forth as might be gathered together in a category of scholarship.

- Dame Helwin Helwindotter

Re: Categorization [IC Discussion]

cappadocius 31 Dec 2007 03:50

To put it bluntly, divinity is the subject, mythology or religion or whatever term is currently in vogue among young scholars is the object.

I am willing to create a religion or mythology category to differentiate from purely secular activities, but divinity remains separate.

- Ae of the Third Eye

Last edited on 31 Dec 2007 03:52 by cappadocius Show more