[lit-ideas] Re: Roman Superstitions
- From: "" <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> (Redacted sender "Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx" for DMARC)
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 23 May 2014 07:05:25 -0400 (EDT)
We are considering the implicatures of 'superstitious'.
The Aztecs thought that the Conquistadores were an army of 'demons'. This
was possibly superstitious, but on the other hand, the Conquistadores made
the most of the superstition. They did NOT go, "We are not the demons, just
regular soldiers". The Aztecs also identified the Conquistadores with their
(the Aztecs') divinities, which was possibly also superstitious, to the
Conquistadores's beliefs.
To use another example (adapted from Helm): Most Ancient Romans thought
that the Christians were superstitious (and illegal) and as a consequence,
some Christians adopted the religion of the Romans (which the Christians
possibly thought superstitious -- what, with that army of gods on Mount
Olympus
and their interactions with humans). When Christianism was legalised, the
ideas of 'superstition' possibly varied.
This was interesting enough for Vico when he later reflected on the Roman
idea of 'superstition'.
Now, in a message dated 5/23/2014 1:56:58 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
donalmcevoyuk@xxxxxxxxxxx writes:
I have sincere beliefs....You have odd opinions...He has cranky
commitments...They have irrational superstitions.
---
I would think that 'irrational', in 'irrational superstition', is adverbial
in nature, and otiose at that.
A 'sincere belief' is a different animal. 'Sincere' is also adverbial
there. The American equivalent is 'honestly':
"Honestly, I do think it will rain tomorrow".
The belief is 'sincere' as opposed to the shepherd who cries 'Wolf!' to
have the population THINK that he BELIEVES that there is a wolf in the
neighbourhood. Although in this case, it is obvious that the shepherd does NOT
hold the belief (and he is being INSINCERE in displaying behaviour _as if_ he
had it).
An 'odd opinion' is possibly in the eye or mind of the beholder. There are
odd opinions and there are even opinions. It is possibly 'adverbial', too:
"Oddly, he opines that Mars is inhabited."
Ditto with 'cranky'. By taking these things as adverbials or sentence
adverbials, even, we simplify their logical form:
"Crankily, he is committed to some arcane mystic religion".
But the topic is the nature of 'superstition', and my point was whether the
implicature (or entailment) is: "I disagree with it" -- where
'superstition' amounts to some propositional content 'p'.
By qualifying the superstition as 'irrational' we are allowing some
superstitions to be 'rational'. Davidson would possibly say it depends on the
meaning of 'reason'. The supersitious person may oddly believe that he has
REASONS to hold superstitious belief 'p'.
Omar K. challenged this when he hardly thinks (again a sentence adverbial,
'hardly') that the Conquistadores were professional anthropologists (vide
book by British philosopher, "Rationality and relativism"). For indeed,
anthropologists are well aware, when describing a culture in what they (after
Pike) call "-etic" terms (rather than "-emic" terms) that they have to deal
with 'reasons' they do not share as such. It is possibly the same old
problem that Socrates faced when he thought he was superior to the Sophists.
The Lewis/Short Latin dictionary online is helpful here:
sŭperstĭtĭo, ōnis, f. super-sto; orig a standing still over or by a
thing; hence, amazement, wonder, dread, esp. of the divine or supernatural.
Excessive fear of the goas, unreasonable religious belief, superstition
(different from religio, a proper, reasonable awe of the gods; cf.: religio
veri
dei cultus est, superstitio falsi, Lact. 4, 28, 11).
Helpful, that is, if we ignore their equivalence: 'superstitio',
'superstition': I guess we KNEW that.
Cheers
Speranza
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
