Polytheism

File: 1373749933553.jpg (40KB, 460x500px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 460x500px

>What is the best proof

"Prove [ topic ] is real" threads are troll threads made to cause pointless unending arguments and nothing more.

>>17679212
>oh look its this meme again

No trolling here. Seriously looking for best proofs/evidence. Polytheism has a bad reputation for lacking serious intellectual/philosophical rigor, at least as far as I know.

If there is a robust defense of polytheism I want to know about it.

>>17679206
That's a really awkward way to have your penis on.

>>17679230
>Polytheism has a bad reputation for lacking serious intellectual/philosophical rigor, AT LEAST AS FAR AS I KNOW

You invented that reputation. That reputation doesn't exist.

>>17679239
>You invented that reputation

No smartass, I didn't. I have read books by other modern polytheist philosophers and they all complain about this in their prefaces to their own treatise.

Incidentally, I find these arguments to be poor, since they are mostly probabilistic arguments (polytheism is more likely than monotheism) or rehashing of classical arguments for monotheism into a new form (multiple first movers).

Hence I come to ask the actual believers on /x/ if they have any other arguments for polytheism.

>>17679252
>I have read books by other modern polytheist philosophers

Name the books. Name the philosophers.

>>17679231
I wonder why it was drawn that way? Perhaps to make it seem more animal like?

>>17679252
>I have read books by other modern polytheist philosophers and they all complain about this

You of course have the titles of those books and the authors names handy to share with /x/, right?

File: Bunny-Computer.jpg (54KB, 282x425px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 282x425px

>>17679258
>confirmed for never having seen an animal before

>>17679257
>>17679259
Yes, actually.

The Case for Polytheism by Steven Dillon.

Dillon is an ex-Catholic turned pagan who tried to adopt natural theology to polytheistic purposes. A goal of his book is to "restore" polytheism "to its respected position."

This involved recycling the Thomist first cause arguments and adapting it. In my judgement the logic is the same and only works because of a redefinition of what a god is from the original Christian context. It also includes a probabilistic argument that points to polytheism being far more likely than monotheism but only if we are already sure there must be at least one god already.

John Michael Greer's A World Full of Gods: An Inquiry into Polytheism.

Greer is an occultist and Druid. He also uses a probabilistic argument, and despite a stimulating discussion of the epistemology and logic of polytheism ultimately falls back onto an 'until you can prove an experience of gods wrong our experience must be as equally valid as a monotheist's experience of god' claim.

The Deities Are Many: A Polytheistic Theology by Jordan D Paper

Ok Paper isn't a philosopher but he is a polytheist and a religious scholar. I'm including him because what he says is pertinent here. He claims that polytheism might so comfortably fit the human mind that it might not even need a theology or justification at all!

There's a few of them for you.

Athiest stance: all of this exists and continues

Thiest stance: all of this was created and is maintained

- Monotheist stance: one entity created and maintains all of this

- Polytheist stance: many entities had niche creative roles and have niche maintenance roles in a compartmentalized system

>>17679339
Agnostic stance: LOL DUNNO SMOKE WEED ERRYDAY
/Carl Sagan

>>17679345
Yeah basically lol

>>17679335
>he actually came through

I'm floored, and I stand corrected. You didn't invent the reputation. Polytheists did!

>ultimately falls back onto an 'until you can prove an experience of gods wrong our experience must be as equally valid as a monotheist's experience of god' claim

Well, he's right.

>>17679369
You say "invent" implying this reputation is exaggerated or is a fiction? But it seems like this is a widespread idea held by these intellectual polytheists? Why are they wrong?

>>17679396
It's a persecution complex. They may be more articulate than a girl with a pentagram necklace and a shirt that says 'NEVER AGAIN THE BURNING TIMES', but it's the same condition.

>>17679412
This in no way reminds me of a persecution complex. Paper and the rest of them are right about there being a dearth of philosophically and theologically articulate polytheists, especially in Euro-American cultures.

You compare them to the typical stereotype of a tween Wiccan brat. On the contrary its because of an abundance of those against a backdrop of centuries long Judeo-Christian culture that there has been a lack of any serious modern polytheistic philosophy.

>>17679429
>Judeo-Christian

Everyone always forgets the Muslims.

>there has been a lack of any serious modern polytheistic philosophy

You think the polytheist philosophers you picked are wrong, so have you considered that polytheism is just wrong?

>>17679459
>Everyone always forgets the Muslims

I didn't forget. Since I singled out Euro-American cultures I thought Judeo-Christian was more representative of the territory. Though, I doubt there has been much polytheistic development in the Muslim world either.

You think the polytheist philosophers you picked are wrong, so have you considered that polytheism is just wrong?

If they are wrong, then they are wrong. That is all that proves. It just seems like polytheism has fallen into theological and philosophical hard times.

>>17679482
>I thought Judeo-Christian was more representative of the territory

'Judeo-Christianity' is a useless phrase. The Muslims used to rule Spain and Portugal.

>It just seems like polytheism has fallen into theological and philosophical hard times.

If that's what it seems like.

What seems more likely to me is that people have figured out that it's a waste of time to prove anything spiritual exists. Atheists won't listen and believers don't need to.

>>17679482
Not the guy you are arguing with but:

Reading what you have read, and seeing the other guys arguments vs your responsws; it sounds like you gave already read a lot of the best modern arguments for polytheism. As you stated, polytheism hasn't really advanced much in light of a highly monotheistic religious world atmosphere

>>17679493
>>17679507

Well then, for now I have nothing left to say about this. Unless the rest of /x/ has anything meaningful to contribute.

>>17679206
>best proof/evidence

cute b8

>>17679595
You might look to the Smarta Tradition in Hinduism for insight. Of the Hindu sects they have the most polytheistic lean in their theology, though their ultimate basis of reality is the attribute-less Brahman.

File: 2386789399_17bc151f45.jpg (137KB, 500x382px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 500x382px

>Best proof

Uhhh...I guess me feeling better, as opposed to like shit after converting, and having lots of "coincidences" happen that directly reflect symbolism of my gods.

>>17680834
>their ultimate basis of reality is the attribute-less Brahman

A lot of polytheistic religions have That One God that's bigger and older than the rest, often one to whom the rest defer. The difference between monotheism's 'God and spirits/angels/demons/saints' and polytheism's 'God and the other gods' could just be semantics pedantry.

>>17680852
True enough. In which case Smarta Hinduism might be seen as MORE polytheistic, as their One Above All isn't a One at all, but a Formless Source.

File: 1459645624207.jpg (78KB, 960x960px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 960x960px

>>17680842
Using floppy eared dogs unironically.

Dogs actually aren't much for names. Names are kinda a human thing. Dogs have leader, bitch-queen, sometimes secondary bitch, and bitch-prince, the rest of the dogs are just, ya-know, things that eat stuff.

js dogs aren't tripfags.

>>17681923
Go away evil dogger

>>17681923
Go away evil dogger.

>>17681923

COME ON JANITORS -- last time this dumb dog pic was up it got hundreds of replies, IT IS SPAM GENERATING CRAP

>>17679257
Nigga you ever heard about Plato and Aristotle? You know the ones that the best philosophy of Christianity, Judaism and Islam are merely commentary upon?

Also in the more modern era one could cite Goethe, Holderlin and Heidegger as more or less overtly pro-polytheist, and Nietzsche in his more pre-socratic, materialistic way.

>>17681923
I've been blessed by anti anxiety shark
So that dog has no power over me

>>17682030
you won't trick me that easily, dogger
go away evil dogger

>>17679429
The romantics like 150 years ago and to a lesser extent ~100 years ago were into polytheism and paganism and were the intelligensia. I don't think it ever goes away, it just becomes more local, so people go back to village or family celebrations, and people flit between christianity and atheism.

There's also a tendency for the far far right to mix paganism and philosophy. Like there are people that write those mystery books or whatever like in baldrism.