Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id NAA21867 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Fri, 17 Nov 2000 13:44:45 GMT Message-ID: <A4400389479FD3118C9400508B0FF2300410EB@DELTA.newhouse.akzonobel.nl> From: "Gatherer, D. (Derek)" <D.Gatherer@organon.nhe.akzonobel.nl> To: "'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Subject: RE: religion/spirituality Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 14:40:18 +0100 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
Vincent:
First, people in polytheist religions don't follow all the gods, but tend to
follow particular ones (or groups of gods), and preferencing one god (or set
of gods) over another is a major factor in ancient social conflict.
Derek:
Do you have any concrete examples of this? I think that ancient Rome was
_less_ prone to religious civil strife than the Christian Europe that
succeeded it. How do you explain the Donatist controversy, which broke out
even before Christianity had become the official religion of the Empire?
The relatively tolerant Romans had seen nothing like that before. Maybe you
can prove me wrong on that one. I'd be interested to know. In any case,
avoidance of social conflict is not a strong evolutionary selective
pressure, as benefits at the level of the individual will always subvert the
good of the group as a whole. Monotheism may (although I doubt it) maintain
social cohesion, but it won't persist for that reason alone, as it isn't an
evolutionarily stable state (ESS).
Vincent:
The less complex the basic elements of the religion the broader base it can
potentially reach. This doesn't mean it will though.
Derek:
But if it doesn't, would you accept that this invalidates your proposition?
I'm wondering if your sentence 'The less complex the basic elements of the
religion the broader base it can potentially reach.' is an a priori or
whether you believe it to be derived from empirical data.
Vincent:
the judeo-christian-islamic body of religions ..... success was undoubtedly
the
unifying aspect of the monotheism,
Derek:
Well, it depends what you mean by monotheism. There's no doubt that the
first and the third are strictly monotheistic, but Christianity? Early
Christianity was a mixture of Pharisaic mystical Judaism with Platonism and
Mithraism.
Vincent:
just as the 20th century saw political
ideologies of fascism and communism utilise similar appeals to unity through
a single 'correct' path.
Derek:
Hmm..... but was that really how Christianity spread through the Roman
world? It's been estimated that after the Diaspora in the late first
century, as many as one in 10 of the Roman Empire's population were Jews, at
a time when there were only a few hundred Christians at most. If the Roman
world was ripe for conquest by a monotheistic religion, why didn't Judaism
do it?
===============================================================
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Nov 17 2000 - 13:46:16 GMT