25-07-2005 09:00									#31
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by Spiffor Oh, please I'm an atheist, and I oppose the idea. As was expected, some people would complain that their precious little faith doesn't belong to the list of 7 religions. I'm sure there are Sikhs, Zoroastrians, Shinto and Animists who feel as insulted as you are that their religion isn't in. Integrating every religion/spirituality is the best way to lose focus in a quagmire of PC-ness

I am not talking about integrating all religions. I am talking about defining what are the major ones.

The whole XX century (or at least very big portion of it) was around difference of the ideologies, about cold war, about Soviet Block vs NATO. Atheistic Marksist ideology is a big part of it. This can not be imitated with religion. Yet it is very similar to religion. So it can be introduced into game as type of religion, which became an option close to the end of the tech tree.

PS. I am not saying that Soviet ideology is the only atheistic ideology. Similar to the situation with different religions, this is one of the possible atheistic ideologies, and it is just a great example of what kind of influence non-religious ideology can have.

	25-07-2005 14:34									#32
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Dis isn't atheism a relatively recent phenomenon? Perpahs 19th century or so when science really began to kick into high gear.

No- you'll find serious discussions of atheism amongst classical Greek philosophers.

	25-07-2005 20:10									#33
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by MxM The whole XX century (or at least very big portion of it) was around difference of the ideologies, about cold war, about Soviet Block vs NATO. .., this is one of the possible atheistic ideologies, and it is just a great example of what kind of influence non-religious ideology can have.

this is exactly the sort of thing civ4 seems to allow for

although it probably won't ship with the game, a cold war scenario should be quite easy to set up. make a few changes to the tech tree and voila! once you discover communism, you can set up the holy city for the eternal church of the socialist redeemer.

one of the interviews actually said they were having to tone down the religious system because allowing line-of-sight into converted cities was too powerful. we'll have to wait and see how it plays out, but the possibilities for ideological warfare are looking good.

	25-07-2005 21:13									#34
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: @lebensraum: put simply, a theocratic police state is one where all is right with the world. the people worship and obey me. they cower in fear before me. they offer up their beating hearts to be sacrificed before the altar of my greatness.

Aaaaah, thanks for the enlightment - I can see why this kind of state appeals to you I'll try to remember avoiding any territories you might be running for head of state then...

	25-07-2005 21:52									#35
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by MxM And during WW2 people in USSR were giving there lives and LOTS of the lives with the words "for Motherland, for Stalin!" motivated by ideology of USSR. The society in USSR was extremely ideologic (I would say religious, if we were talking about religion, but we are talking about form of atheism here). And people did perceive themselves as a group, as Soviet Block, due to this ideology. Basically right now there is no way in civ to imitate cold war, because there is no way to introduce anything similar to atheistic Marksist - Lenin ideology.

You think that they were doing it for Stalin? They were doing it for their country. That's a big difference.

I think you over-estimate how much the average people bought into the ideology. If they really did buy that much into it, the Russian Orthodox wouldn't have survived, Kruschev wouldn't have denounced Stalin just 3 years after his death, and the USSR would be alive and kicking today.

	25-07-2005 22:07									#36
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by AeonOfTime I'll try to remember avoiding any territories you might be running for head of state then...

we also deliver,..

	25-07-2005 22:22									#37
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by sophist You think that they were doing it for Stalin? They were doing it for their country. That's a big difference. I think you over-estimate how much the average people bought into the ideology. If they really did buy that much into it, the Russian Orthodox wouldn't have survived, Kruschev wouldn't have denounced Stalin just 3 years after his death, and the USSR would be alive and kicking today.

Very controversial.

In fact, there're fanatic stalinists all around the world today. . A lot in Russia. Not all of them are old men or women.

	26-07-2005 01:09									#38
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by sophist You think that they were doing it for Stalin? They were doing it for their country. That's a big difference.

They did it for both. Most of the people loved Stalin. It was inseparable in their minds.

quote: Originally posted by sophist I think you over-estimate how much the average people bought into the ideology. If they really did buy that much into it, the Russian Orthodox wouldn't have survived, Kruschev wouldn't have denounced Stalin just 3 years after his death, and the USSR would be alive and kicking today.

The Russian Orthodox Church has survived through the minority. Really minor minority.
Kruschev did not "denounced" Stalin, but softly talked about some "overdones" and "overbends".
And communists could have come back into power with Zuganov (sp?) and communist party in 1996 (not exactly sure about the year) election, if not for very good TV campaign of Yeltsin and co. not without some professional campaigning help from the "West". And that was despite of the state owned TV, which made the campaigning for Yeltsin very easy and hard for communist opposition! Plus that was after 5 or more years of non-communist government!

	26-07-2005 03:20									#39
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by MxM And communists could have come back into power with Zuganov (sp?) and communist party in 1996 (not exactly sure about the year) election, if not for very good TV campaign of Yeltsin and co. not without some professional campaigning help from the "West". And that was despite of the state owned TV, which made the campaigning for Yeltsin very easy and hard for communist opposition! Plus that was after 5 or more years of non-communist government!

5 years of a miserable, corrupt non-communist government. You don't need ideology to explain that; the average person's seemed worse than it was under communism, so they wanted to go back.

	26-07-2005 03:28									#40
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

any care to join my church of

"whats happening now"

	26-07-2005 05:44									#41
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Platypus Rex any care to join my church of "whats happening now"

Sign me in...

	26-07-2005 05:47									#42
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by sophist 5 years of a miserable, corrupt non-communist government. You don't need ideology to explain that; the average person's seemed worse than it was under communism, so they wanted to go back.

Well, it is true that by the end of the century communist loosed people minds. This probably was one of the main reasons of USSR self-destruction.

	26-07-2005 11:22									#43
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by lebensraum put simply, a theocratic police state is one where all is right with the world. the people worship and obey me. they cower in fear before me. they offer up their beating hearts to be sacrificed before the altar of my greatness. eg. 1 ancient egypt (not necessarily a police state) - the ruler was considered to be an embodiment of god. eg. 2 holy roman empire - the ruler was not considered an embodiment of god, but was appointed by divine authority. and as for the methods of policing... ahhh those were the days eg. 3 ussr - acceptable religious practice was determined by the state and enforced by security agents

Are you calling the USSR a 'theocratic police state'?! They were a police state, but they were the opposite of theocratic. I wouldn't call a state that suppresses religion a theocratic state!

	26-07-2005 14:03									#44
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by MxM They did it for both. Most of the people loved Stalin. It was inseparable in their minds.

Unfortunately true. I recall reading the memoirs of people who had survived the labour camps, some who had been wrongly arrested, and also some reported testimony from some of the show trials.

What struck me as most bizarre, was that people who would otherwise have been highly intelligent, motivated members of any society, had been transformed by the cult of Stalin's personality into individuals who, although they knew logically they had not comitted the crimes they were suspected or accused of, believed they were guilty because Comrade Stalin could only be right.


Of course the same thing happens again in China's Cultural Revolution. The sheep look up.....

	27-07-2005 19:41									#45
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Xorbon Are you calling the USSR a 'theocratic police state'?! They were a police state, but they were the opposite of theocratic. I wouldn't call a state that suppresses religion a theocratic state!

I'd agree with teh idea that they were a theocratic state. Yes, they suppressed religions. That is, they suppressed *other* religions. And show me a theocratic state that did not suppress other religions. The religion they proposed, for want of a better word, might be termed sovietism, but dont hold me to that term.

	27-07-2005 22:00									#46
	Re: Re: Re: Atheism and religion Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by sophist Atheist and non-theist are two different things.

No the aren't. The Greek prefix "A" means "Without." So "Atheism" literally means "without belief in god(s)," which is the same as "non-theist." The notion that atheism must denote an active disbelief in deities is false.

I think the best way to implement the move from religious dominance to secular societies is to have governments become less reliant on religious motivations as time goes on. The current government model seems to accomodate that. Also, religiously-oriented wonders and buildings should diminish in effect for more secular societies. I'm not sure if that will be the case.

Come to think of it, I do think it would be okay to include "nonbelievers" as a late-developing "religious" group. I hope it's something that can easily be modded into the game.

	27-07-2005 22:41									#47
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by lajzar I'd agree with teh idea that they were a theocratic state. Yes, they suppressed religions. That is, they suppressed *other* religions. And show me a theocratic state that did not suppress other religions. The religion they proposed, for want of a better word, might be termed sovietism, but dont hold me to that term.

Would you also call the Third Reich a theocratic state that worshiped Nazism?

	28-07-2005 03:18									#48
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by lajzar I'd agree with teh idea that they were a theocratic state. Yes, they suppressed religions. That is, they suppressed *other* religions. And show me a theocratic state that did not suppress other religions. The religion they proposed, for want of a better word, might be termed sovietism, but dont hold me to that term.

I've heard that before, and I don't buy it for a second. Communism is NOT a religion! Communism was all about removing religion from society altogether and making society atheist.

And speaking of atheism, I'd like to see a mod in Civ 4 that included atheism, though it should be done in such a way that you wouldn't end up with an atheist holy city! That would be a bit of a contradiction!

	28-07-2005 05:45									#49
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

True, they never claimed to be a religion, but they performed all the functions of a religion. If it looks like a duck...

	28-07-2005 06:02									#50
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by lajzar True, they never claimed to be a religion, but they performed all the functions of a religion. If it looks like a duck...

Did they have people likes priests/rabbis? Did they have a prayer book? Did they have a religious garment? Did they claim that Stalin was anything more than a man? I think not.

They were just practicing extreme nationalism.

	28-07-2005 06:08									#51
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by Lord Nuclear Did they claim that Stalin was anything more than a man? I think not.

Well...

	28-07-2005 06:56									#52
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Lord Nuclear Did they have people likes priests/rabbis? Did they have a prayer book? Did they have a religious garment? Did they claim that Stalin was anything more than a man? I think not. They were just practicing extreme nationalism.

If all that is required for a religion, then the Scandinavians of the 10th century and the more modern Quakers also had no religion (no priests). Neither did the Aztecs (no prayer books), or Celts (no specifically religious garments).

	28-07-2005 07:01									#53
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by lajzar If all that is required for a religion, then the Scandinavians of the 10th century also had no religion (no priests). Neither did the Aztecs (no prayer books), or Celts (no specifically religious garments).

I was just using those as examples. And being as though Communism in the Soviet Union didn't have all three of those, I fail to see how it's a religion. Another thing that's common in religion is alters/sacrifices. I don't think that the Soviet Union had that either.

	28-07-2005 07:23									#54
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

I know someone will flame me for this, but let's compare Sovietism with the Quakers...

Priests
Quakers take turns leading small religious groups in their homes. No one has any more religious authority than any one else. One of the crucial testimonies of Friends is that the grace of God can be received directly by any person without the need for any human intermediary such as priest or pastor.

This has changed slightly in the last few decades, but remained perfectly true until at least the first half of the 20th century in all groups of Quakers.

The Soviet Communist party hierarchy, especially 'loyalty officers' placed in factories and military units, maintained 'religious' orthodoxy. 'Priests' are present.

Text
Quakers have the Bible as their core text, and their aversion to dgmas discourages other texts being adopted. Even the Bible isn't regarded as the be-all and end-all.

Soviets have das Kapital, and presumably a few other writings too.

Garments
Quakers have no set garments. That guy on the oatmeal box is nothing more than normal contemporary dress from when the product was first made.

Soviets have no set garments.

Sacrifice
Other than spending time at Quaker meetings and living a particular way of life, there is no meaningful sacrifice for quakers.

Sovietism encouraged extremes of personal self-sacrifice for the greater good of the 'people'.

Altars
Neither group has altars.

Judging from these criteria, the gap is slim, but it wuld seem that Sovietism has more right to be described as religiou than Quakerism. Which of course proves nothing, nless you wish to claim that Quakerism is not a religion.

nb: Quakerism is a religion.

	28-07-2005 07:34									#55
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

What seperates Quakerism and Sovietism is a belief in a God and afterlife.

"Sovietism encouraged extremes of personal self-sacrifice for the greater good of the 'people'."

Self-sacrifice has nothing to do with sacrificing a lamb, or burning spices.

This is a definition of religion.

"religion

n 1: a strong belief in a supernatural power or powers that control human destiny"

Stalin was the Dear Leader of the People, but could not control human destiny, nor did he have supernatural powers.

	28-07-2005 07:43									#56
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Want me to do the same for Daoism then? No sacrifices (other than way of life), no afterlife. No supernatural powers (the gods they have are noted as being allegorical rather than literal). No spices need be burnt either.

Oh, Quakers don't even burn spices. By your rules, they don't sacrifice at all.

Religion is such a broad field that almost any attempt to define it will leave out one or more.

	28-07-2005 07:53									#57
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by lajzar Want me to do the same for Daoism then? No sacrifices (other than way of life), no afterlife. No supernatural powers (the gods they have are noted as being allegorical rather than literal). No spices need be burnt either. Oh, Quakers don't even burn spices. By your rules, they don't sacrifice at all. Religion is such a broad field that almost any attempt to define it will leave out one or more.

I consider Daoism as more of a philosphy, then a religion.

The sacrifice I'm talking is the act of offering something to a deity in propitiation or homage, especially the ritual slaughter of an animal or human, or the burning on spices. If that isn't part of the Quaker religion, then they don't have sacrifice as part of their religion.

	28-07-2005 07:56									#58
	Remove this text

Just so we're clear, could you give me your complete definition of a religion? Because I don't want to argue against a moving target.

ps: I hope you've written to Firaxis to complain about Daoism being included as a religion.

	28-07-2005 08:00									#59
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by lajzar Just so we're clear, could you give me your complete definition of a religion? Because I don't want to argue against a moving target. ps: I hope you've written to Firaxis to complain about Daoism being included as a religion.

Religion is a belief in a supernatural entity/entities that is infinitely more powerful than a human, can control human destiny, and is/are the creator(s) of the universe. That's what I just thought of on the spot, so don't try to catch me through loopholes.

ps: I have not, as it doesn't bother me that much.

	28-07-2005 08:29									#60
	Put an end to popups!

Could the difference be that religions are based on metaphysics, while ideas like Communism aren't? Religions seem to have one thing in common: they explain how the world works. Communism doesn't do that as far as I can tell.

Correct me if I'm wrong. (Though I'm sure you would even without my permission. )