[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Re(2): Re: Religions in freeciv?

[dnh <dnh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> I catch it, but I don't see it working.  Judaism does not involve personal
> salvation.  Nor (to the best of my understanding)  do Islam, Taoism,
> Shinto, or Neo-paganism.  A higher being offering forgiveness is (to the
> best of my knowledge) an exclusively Christian idea.  Personal salvation
> is limited to Christianity, Hindu, and Zoroasterianism.  I may be missing
> a few exceptions, but I stand by my main point that most of the world's
> religions don't meet your definition.

Please note.. I have etc etc there. Religions can provide their followers
with MANY things. Salvation is but one thing, and by the way I think
judaism does believe in heaven.. so I would imagine the believe in
salvation.
 
> No definition is true, but some may be more useful than others.  My
> previously offered definition (a set of unjustified beliefs that effect
> how one lives one's life) has the advantages that it includes most
> self-described religions and that it suggests the role that religion can
> play in a world with significant science (e.g. the real one).  It has the
> disadvantage that it counts many things which insist loudly that they are
> not religions (e.g. capitalism, psychoanalysis), though I consider them
> such.

Yes, that is an excellent definion, and one which I think would be best
for freeciv to adopt. OTOH I don't like the use of the word religion in
this case.

> The American Heritage Dictionary offers these definitions (religion being
> the union of them):
>       Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as
> creator and governor of the universe.

Note: this is the REALLY important line. All religions believe in higher
powers.

>       A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and
> worship.
>       The life or condition of a person in a religious order.
>       A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a
> spiritual leader.
>       A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious
> devotion.
> Number 5 strikes me as extremely broad, but as long as we're throwing
> around definitions without justification, we might as well appeal to an
> authority ;).  Confucianism clearly falls under number 4.  Of course, I
> have no idea where American Heritage got these.
> 
> 
> In any case, the definition that is relevant to the general discussion
> here (i.e. how to improve Freeciv) is something like this:
> 
>       any set of beliefs and structures that are likely to be shared by a 
> large
> percentage of a nation and of significant enough effect to be included in
> Freeciv.
> 
> One might propose using some name other than religion ("culture" was
> suggested), but I can't think of anything that does as good a job as
> "religion".  Most of the systems described are widely viewed as religions,
> and argument could be made for most of the others.  Culture is too complex
> for this (it includes language, art, food, even government!).  I can't
> think of anything better than "religion" and Roget's Theosaurus is no help.

My thoughts entirely, the use of culture, belief... is what is important.

> It does occur to me, though, that if just discussing religion causes this
> much argument here, think how much trouble there would be actually adding
> it to the game!

Not at all, once all the silly argueing has been done you can go about
adding it to your hearts content. ;)

dnh

> --Daniel Speyer
> "May the /src be with you, always"
>