Egyptian Monotheism and progress

First, could Akhenaten have succeeded in creating a permanent Egypt-wide Monotheistic Religion?
And if he did, would that have at least enabled an earlier Scientific Revolution, on the idea that nature is controlled by one Lawgiver and not a plethora of contending deities? And maybe made slavery at least a little questionable, all men being creations of a single God?
 
Yeah same here. I had to search for the specific name of the thread to find it. So much content there that there's really nothing more for me to add. Well-written too.
 

MrP

Banned
And if he did, would that have at least enabled an earlier Scientific Revolution, on the idea that nature is controlled by one Lawgiver and not a plethora of contending deities? And maybe made slavery at least a little questionable, all men being creations of a single God?
Polytheism does not preclude a rational understanding of the world, as the Greeks demonstrated; conversely, a capricious One God who overrules the laws of physics at a moment's notice isn't inherently conducive to scientific progress.

As for slavery, the fact that it took until the 19th century to ban it in Christian societies, and that it is around to this day in a comparatively milder form in some Muslim societies, would indicate that monotheism doesn't have much of an impact on its acceptability one way or the other.
 
Polytheism does not preclude a rational understanding of the world, as the Greeks demonstrated;

Most of the major Greek philosophical schools were monotheistic, other than the Epicureans, who were polytheistic but thought that the gods didn't really do anything.
 
Most of the major Greek philosophical schools were monotheistic, other than the Epicureans, who were polytheistic but thought that the gods didn't really do anything.
Not quite, Pythagoreans and Platonists speak of a single creator, but acknowledged, and the other gods as managers of the universe; natural philosophers were either traditional Heathens or were pantheist (God as the personification of the universe, and God is impersonal). Some of the early Christians also tended to pantheism. And monotheism assumes a personal god who shall be punishable.
 
We still take into account that the universe according to the Hellenic myths spawned gods, their worldview wascosmocentrisms their gods intersovali.
 
Not quite, Pythagoreans and Platonists speak of a single creator, but acknowledged, and the other gods as managers of the universe; natural philosophers were either traditional Heathens or were pantheist (God as the personification of the universe, and God is impersonal). Some of the early Christians also tended to pantheism. And monotheism assumes a personal god who shall be punishable.

I'm not sure what you mean by "traditional Heathens", but I don't think any major Greek philosopher thought that, say, the stories of the gods found in Homer or Hesiod were literally true.

Granted it can sometimes be difficult to distinguish monotheism from pantheism from panentheism, the Stoics were monotheistic, or possibly pantheistic. They definitely weren't polytheistic, though. Aristotelianism was monotheistic too (the Primum Mobile and all that). Anyway, the point I'm trying to get at is that the Ancient Greeks aren't evidence for the proposition that "Polytheism does not preclude a rational understanding of the world", because, whatever they were, the Greek philosophers weren't polytheists.
 

MrP

Banned
Anyway, the point I'm trying to get at is that the Ancient Greeks aren't evidence for the proposition that "Polytheism does not preclude a rational understanding of the world", because, whatever they were, the Greek philosophers weren't polytheists.
They lived in a polytheistic culture, and that's what we're talking about here.
 
And if he did, would that have at least enabled an earlier Scientific Revolution, on the idea that nature is controlled by one Lawgiver and not a plethora of contending deities?

Considering we still lack a unified theory of physics maybe a plethora of contending deities is closer to the scientific reality.:closedeyesmile:
 

MrP

Banned
Considering we still lack a unified theory of physics maybe a plethora of contending deities is closer to the scientific reality.:closedeyesmile:
In any case, I remain unconvinced about the "contending deities" argument, because classical polytheists didn't think of the laws of reality as contingent upon divine will, but rather as existing independently of it. Further, I only have the most cursory knowledge of Hinduism, but its countless gods don't seem to have been an intellectual obstacle to pioneering work in mathematics.
 

*cries tears of nostalgia and longing*

The cult of Aten was not a cult of one god, it was still one god among many.

And Judaism emerged out of the chaos of Canaanite polytheism, going from henotheism (hard to deny the idea of other gods when you're surrounded by them, even if they're foreign and false to you) to pure monotheism.
 
I'm not sure what you mean by "traditional Heathens", but I don't think any major Greek philosopher thought that, say, the stories of the gods found in Homer or Hesiod were literally true.

Granted it can sometimes be difficult to distinguish monotheism from pantheism from panentheism, the Stoics were monotheistic, or possibly pantheistic. They definitely weren't polytheistic, though. Aristotelianism was monotheistic too (the Primum Mobile and all that). Anyway, the point I'm trying to get at is that the Ancient Greeks aren't evidence for the proposition that "Polytheism does not preclude a rational understanding of the world", because, whatever they were, the Greek philosophers weren't polytheists.


As I said, the first philosophers (called natural philosophers) did not deny the existence of gods, and believed in them by Hesiod, they were looking for the root cause, and the gods perceived as part of the cosmos. Plato and his disciples themselves often use the gods, as the embodiment of certain ideas and concepts, and contrary to the allegations denied official cult (although it's worth noting that Plato recognized the gods but attributed the category of people who are prayers and sacrifices "bribe" of the gods, and atheists to be judged). As for Aristotle I can not argue.
And yes ... Those philosophers often spoke of non-personal, infinite God, we talked about his indifference to human. And the God of the Bible, constantly punishing, and encourage someone.
 
*cries tears of nostalgia and longing*



And Judaism emerged out of the chaos of Canaanite polytheism, going from henotheism (hard to deny the idea of other gods when you're surrounded by them, even if they're foreign and false to you) to pure monotheism.
Since Hinduism and Zoroastrianism (which by the way are very few borrowings from other religions that did not work).
 
Top