Terminology

[Lo-Lo]

I'm a new member to the forum, however, I have noticed something that I find quite interesting. It may be for simplicity's sake, but the vast majority of posters seem all too happy to use terms or names which do not actually explain what they are talking about, but defines it in opposition to something else.

 

For example:

 

Pagans - pagani originally from the countryside, farmers etc., but later taken on by Christians as a slur, presumably suggesting that all those who followed the traditional rituals were stupid, country bumpkins, that type of thing.

 

Barbarians - tribes of people who were not Greek (originally) and who's language sounded like a meaningless bar-bar noise. So essentially this means silly people who aren't us, just like 'pagan' does.

 

What I am suggesting is that terms such as this are too tainted to be used in what attempts to be as objective as possible a discussion, they are unhelpful and have too many negative connotations to allow a reasonable discussion of the subject to be had.

 

Just thought I'd stir it up a bit htere, but I'm interested to know what other people think - is there an alternative, or should we just use these words regardless as everyone recognises them? Are there any other examples?

[Moonlapse]

I'm not sure that anyone misunderstands the modern meanings of these words when used in discussions. Attempting to use replacements could actually cause a lot of confusion...

[Ursus]

There are several people on this site who have "pagan" views or religions (myself included), and so far none have objected to the term, it's original context notwithstanding.

 

Truth be told, I am something of a country bumpkin anyway. There is honestly a cow field behind my house. Moo.

[Tobias]

I'm a new member to the forum, however, I have noticed something that I find quite interesting. It may be for simplicity's sake, but the vast majority of posters seem all too happy to use terms or names which do not actually explain what they are talking about, but defines it in opposition to something else.

 

For example:

 

Pagans - pagani originally from the countryside, farmers etc., but later taken on by Christians as a slur, presumably suggesting that all those who followed the traditional rituals were stupid, country bumpkins, that type of thing.

 

Barbarians - tribes of people who were not Greek (originally) and who's language sounded like a meaningless bar-bar noise. So essentially this means silly people who aren't us, just like 'pagan' does.

 

What I am suggesting is that terms such as this are too tainted to be used in what attempts to be as objective as possible a discussion, they are unhelpful and have too many negative connotations to allow a reasonable discussion of the subject to be had.

 

Just thought I'd stir it up a bit htere, but I'm interested to know what other people think - is there an alternative, or should we just use these words regardless as everyone recognises them? Are there any other examples?

 

 

 

Mate, the English language is littered with terms that have descended from slurs, insults, mistaken pronunciation of other languages etc.

No point changing them now, as was said, it'd only confuse people

[Lo-Lo]

There are several people on this site who have "pagan" views or religions (myself included), and so far none have objected to the term, it's original context notwithstanding.

 

This is one of the main points that interests me about the whole terminology debate, it is interesting how negative definitions fall into regular usage. Indeed, I am aware that some people define their beliefs as 'heathen', an even more extreme case in point in many ways.

 

I am aware that it may be confusing to use 'traditional/imported Roman religious practices/beliefs' or something similar instead of the neat 2 syllable 'pagan', or talk about specific peoples instead of using the umbrella term 'barbarian', but I think I am more raising the point that people need to consider the connotations of what they write in order to clearly construe their meaning, rather than demanding wholesale change in everyone's language!

 

Does no-one think it an interesting point to consider?

[Primus Pilus]

I usually try to convey the term barbarian within quotations... trying to give the impression that I use the term loosely. I'm open to using different terminology when it fits.

[Ursus]

Indeed, I am aware that some people define their beliefs as 'heathen', an even more extreme case in point in many ways.

 

Well, in my experience, the people who call themselves "Heathen" tend to revere Germanic/Northern European cultures. They use "heathen" as it's more true to their Germanic origins, rather than the Mediterranean "Pagan."

 

Also, some people may call themselves "heathen" to differentiate themselves from a lot of New Age types who use the term Pagan. There is a debate in the alternative religions community about whether New Age types should call themselves "pagan" since their beliefs don't exactly match historical paganism. Since most New Age types seem to call themselves "pagan" regardless, some more traditional types call themselves Heathen to differentiate.

 

But I don