• dustyData@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Yes, any proto-whatever theory is colonialist in essence. It’s a very heated argument in anthropology, sociology and social psychology. The current consensus is that it is only valid for the indo-european migration, and a version exist for the proto-sino-tibetan migration. But, we understand that it can only be claimed to apply thus far, and with all sorts of modern ideological biases and caveats. Both language and religion are extremely complex social phenomena that have independently appeared all throughout history. And every time they have their very unique and distinct qualities. There’s no unified tree of languages that has enough evidence to be authoritative. And there’s no such linear derivation equivalent for religion. It is all just pop-sci feefees.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      Wait… you’re saying that languages aren’t actually derived from older languages and anyone who thinks so is colonialist?

      Because I would look into where the ‘ist’ suffix in ‘colonialist’ comes from. Believe it or not, it didn’t pop into existence along with the rest of the English language.

      I’m sorry you don’t like it that Judaism was derived in great part by Babylonian mythos which, themselves, likely were derived from a previous mythos, but I’m not sure what that has to do with colonialism or any idea of superiority and I’m sorry you don’t like the simple fact that we can point to specific stories which eventually made their way into Judaism and then on to Christianity and Islam.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilgamesh_flood_myth

      As for why that is linear? Because that’s how time works. The Babylonians came first, then the Jews, then the Christians, then the Muslims. And each one derived their religion from the previous one.

      • dustyData@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Ffs, this is why I never engage with you. You’re so thick skulled, nuance is always lost on you. It’s like “bad faith argument, the person”. Enjoy your strawman, you built it, you can keep it.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          Insulting me won’t change the fact that each of those religions was derived from the previous one in a linear fashion.

          In fact, you have been insulting me this entire time. You claimed that I was doing some sort of colonialist superiority thing. As I said, that only makes sense if you are talking about Muslim superiority and Islamic colonialism, something that hasn’t happened in a very long time. I’m not Muslim and I also don’t think there is anything superior about any of those other Middle Eastern religions that ended up spreading around the world.

          I just don’t know why you think oral history and folklore being passed down from generation to generation doesn’t happen when it’s the only way we have left to learn about many indigenous peoples’ histories. Sometimes by getting them from multiple groups and figuring out what truths can be gleaned by the similarities.