The semantics of Paganism

[TeaDidikai]

Recursive Paradox

Tikat

To Everyone:
Show of hands please.
Who here thinks their faith is validated for being old?

Old doesn't have anything to do with validity. So no.

Seconded.

Tikat

Who here thinks they are practicing an old religion?

Old... as in a living cultural theology. It's a living organic tradition- it adapts. It isn't what was practiced by folks five hundred years ago, but that's not really a problem.  

[Recursive Paradox]

Ishtar Shakti

Language exists for both practices.

No. It exists for articulation and communication. It also is used for posterity, but even that involves articulation and communication, just to future generations.

Quote:

But you are also making the assumption that definitions have to use words.

They don't. They can also use symbols, concepts, music, etc. But that doesn't change the fact that the concepts themselves can not change if you still wish to communicate. Unless such change occurs so slowly and so widespread that society is able to catch up. You are not doing such a thing however, therefore, your attempts to shift the language don't work.

Quote:

Also please take into consideration the difference between talking within a small group of people (such as a religious sect) and working with a larger group that may not have the same contextual frame work as yourself.

I have. That does not change the fact that words have meanings and definitions do not change just because we feel like it. In fact, outside of a small group it's even more important for concepts to be concrete and not in immediate flux, because those larger groups will not be familiar with your "personal" definitions.

Quote:

The definitions which exist within a small group and the definitions which exist outside of that group may be different.

And quite often, one of those sets of definitions is wrong. Which is the point, isn't it? The one you're refusing to accept.

Quote:

Such as within Group A may read a text and consider it a valid text that accurately depicts the state of a religion and thus they may call themselves Pagan as they would consider it accurate. While Group B may think that the text isn't an accurate depiction and thus they might call themselves Neo Pagan as they don't believe they are accurately portraying that religion.

None of this involves changing definitions. However, the word Neo is being used incorrectly by you.

Quote:

Neo= New which means that its not traditional, even if both group A+B are practicing in the exact same manner.

New can still be a tradition. Traditions are not defined by being old. Etherism is only 8 years old at best, 5 years at worst, it is a very young religion. Yet it has traditions. These traditions are young but they do exist.

Quote:

Understand?

I understand that you've yet to actually dispute anything I've said regarding the necessity of not randomly changing definitions of things.

Quote:

Also people may have disputes concerning the terms, what the terms mean, the level of validity needed, etc. etc. etc.

All of which means that either someone is mistaken or people are confused, not that there are multiple valid meanings. Unless a word possesses multiple concepts attached to it, there are no multiple meanings to it, and furthermore even if it has multiple concepts attached to it, only those concepts are usable with it. They are not interchangeable with other concepts because the word has several concepts.

Quote:

I mean Really? What constitutes a proper definition?

A definition chosen by experts in the field in question that does not act in such a way to promote or facilitate marginalization or oppression of those who are not part of the dominate groups.

Oh look, that was easy.

Quote:

I could go into specifics but I don't feel like getting sucked into the general mess that people make of the matter.

It's only a mess because people like you have a bad habit of not accepting reality because it contradicts what you want from the situation.

Quote:

There are huge flaws in believing in objective definitions mostly if your trying to cross language or cultural barriers.

How do you think translation works? It takes objective definitions and concepts and then finds the words in the other language to describe it, allowing the two set of terms, phrases or wordings to be correlated together.

Transliteration works by applying this for words, translation works by applying this for structure, words and other concerns of the language. But in all cases, the concepts don't just magically change.

The closest you'd get is a concept that doesn't exist in another culture. And in that case, you'd describe it in base terms and then use a term from the culture it is from in order to mention it. None of that acts as evidence that definitions are subjective. Frankly, it acts as evidence against.

Quote:

I mean, is their only one definition for god?

Deity has several concepts attached. These concepts do not change however.

Quote:

Is their only one definition for transubstantiation?

That one I believe only has one concept attached. Which also does not change.

Quote:

Is their only one definition for right? One definition for wrong?

Three concepts for right (one a direction, one a statement of proper morality and one a statement for proper action), two concepts for wrong (one for morality and one for a lack of proper action).

These concepts do not change. And I caught what you're trying to do here. Right and wrong, when it comes to morality, means the morality or ethical structures that is beneficial and acceptable and the ones that are not. In no way do the words themselves actually have the moral structures they are used to gauge in their definitions. You fundamentally lack understanding of how those two words work.

Quote:

One definition for family?

See above.

Quote:

It seems conceited to me to try to limit people by imposing my definitions on them.

Gosh, how conceited, wanting to communicate with other people in a reliable way or have integrity in my information. Gosh, I'm just a giant self centered b***h for wanting people to know what the ******** I'm talking about, right?

Quote:

Intellectual Honesty would take into account your own bias', to deny they exist and not take them into account seems to imply that you wouldn't be intellectually honest

Ironically, this is exactly what you're doing.

Quote:

I try to embrace my own bias' and acknowledge them and the bias' of others. I try to acknowledge the limits of communication. The limitations of language and definitions. The inconsistencies and evolution of communication, and the way that people internalize information.

And yet you still attempt to twist language to fit what you want by claiming definitions are subjective, against all evidence presented, of which you have none to act as a counter or a rebuttal.

You're not doing a great job of acknowledging the bias you have towards twisting language and calling out for subjective ethics, reality and definitions when all of that is self contradicting.  

[Gho the Girl]

Ishtar Shakti

I personally don't follow any religion and believe strongly that people should just believe what they feel is right.

I believe raping children is cool. May I ******** your son now?

Quote:

I try to be practical

A man is hungry, and out of work. What's the most practical solution? Kill him. Now he shall never need to eat, or work.

Practicality is a piss poor justification.

Quote:

and look at results,

Ends justify the means now?

I want some money. Lemme take yours. Hey, I got results!

Quote:

as long as their belief system works for them isn't causing any sort of psychological issues,

It's usually the other way around, raping children doesn't cause me any psychological issues.

Quote:

is fulfilling their needs,

Yeah, cuz as long as I get off, that's all that matters, yes?

Quote:

and they aren't harming others,

Wait, what?

Who are you to tell me what you think is right?
Who are you to deny me my beliefs?
Who are you to tell me what I think is wrong? Who made you judge? I thought we were all free to do as we desired to, that we could define things any way we wanted to, and believe whatever we wanted to.

Aren't you now placing your own bias into this definition, you indoctrinated fool? Maybe if you weren't so rigid in your definition of what was right and wrong, we wouldn't be having this argument, would we?

Quote:

why should we really care what they call themselves.

Because lies cause harm, whether we are aware that we are lying or not.  

[TeaDidikai]

Gho the Girl

Wait, what?

Who are you to tell me what you think is right?
Who are you to deny me my beliefs?
Who are you to tell me what I think is wrong? Who made you judge? I thought we were all free to do as we desired to, that we could define things any way we wanted to, and believe whatever we wanted to.

Aren't you now placing your own bias into this definition, you indoctrinated fool? Maybe if you weren't so rigid in your definition of what was right and wrong, we wouldn't be having this argument, would we?

Moral Relativism. It's the New Win.  

[Gho the Girl]

TeaDidikai

Gho the Girl

Wait, what?

Who are you to tell me what you think is right?
Who are you to deny me my beliefs?
Who are you to tell me what I think is wrong? Who made you judge? I thought we were all free to do as we desired to, that we could define things any way we wanted to, and believe whatever we wanted to.

Aren't you now placing your own bias into this definition, you indoctrinated fool? Maybe if you weren't so rigid in your definition of what was right and wrong, we wouldn't be having this argument, would we?

Moral Relativism. It's the New Win.

Everything being cool wouldn't have any jarring repurcussions, would it?  

[TeaDidikai]

Gho the Girl

Everything being cool wouldn't have any jarring repurcussions, would it?

None whatsoever!  

[TeaDidikai]

Celeblin Galadeneryn

If I see you having a bath while eating bear meat (or is it horse? I forget) I'm ******** leaving.

Both actually.  

[TeaDidikai]

Celeblin Galadeneryn

TeaDidikai

Celeblin Galadeneryn

If I see you having a bath while eating bear meat (or is it horse? I forget) I'm ******** leaving.

Both actually.

Let's make it a bear and horse kebab then. I'd still be leaving.

But... it'll be delicious with sumac! After all, as long as it feels good... that's the important part.  

[Recursive Paradox]

Celeblin Galadeneryn

TeaDidikai

Celeblin Galadeneryn

TeaDidikai

Celeblin Galadeneryn

If I see you having a bath while eating bear meat (or is it horse? I forget) I'm ******** leaving.

Both actually.

Let's make it a bear and horse kebab then. I'd still be leaving.

But... it'll be delicious with sumac! After all, as long as it feels good... that's the important part.

Excuse me while I go sodomise baby rapists then.

*hands you a baseball bat*

What? Would you rather use your hands?  

[Collowrath]

Celeblin Galadeneryn

Well, I was going to use a morning star, but if you insist it be smooth...

Perhaps she meant a Viking bat...?  

[Recursive Paradox]

Celeblin Galadeneryn

Recursive Paradox

Celeblin Galadeneryn

TeaDidikai

Celeblin Galadeneryn

Let's make it a bear and horse kebab then. I'd still be leaving.

But... it'll be delicious with sumac! After all, as long as it feels good... that's the important part.

Excuse me while I go sodomise baby rapists then.

*hands you a baseball bat*

What? Would you rather use your hands?

Well, I was going to use a morning star, but if you insist it be smooth...

With the lack of sanding this baseball bat has, it's anything but smooth. Splinters, it's all about the splinters.