This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Xenophanes article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
(Archived discussion from Wikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy)
In the Editions section, it is stated that the book by Diels, Kranz is superior to the book by Kirk, Raven. I have seen this same comment in other Pre-Socratic articles. It is most probably a correct evaluation. However, isn't it a personal opinion? In addition, it is frustrating because the book by Diels, Kranz is generally unavailable and has not been translated into English. Lestrade 15:24, 1 January 2006 (UTC)Lestrade
(moved here from User talk:Clossius)
I wonder if there is some way to qualify the attribution of monotheism to Xenophanes, beyond "often seen as". I'm not a Hellenist, so I hope you'll bear with me, but my sketchy survey suggests that it's not an uncontroversial claim. And, at least for a civilian like me, an assertion hard to reconcile with the language of "gods" plural, and X's emphasis on the mischaracterization of the gods, rather than their un-reality. What do you think? Quihana 19:00, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
I put in a reference to my own book here. If someone wants to replace it with a more suitable one I shan't mind a bit! Andrew Dalby 16:00, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
Xenophanes is created as one of the philosophers who completely de-anthropomorphsize the gods. In reality however, instead of projecting many different human qualities onto may gods, he simply projected a more specific person onto a god. Xenopahenes simply projects a philosopher onto a god. Xenophanes' god is mentally based, just, and omnipotent. Xenophanes is getting closer, but has not completely de-anthropomorphsized god (assuming this is even possible). He has made a break from Hesiod's mythology but he is still projecting human qualites onto god(s).
At about 57.3 N and 82.0 W (Lunar co-ordinates) there is a crater on the moon called Xenophanes. Shouldn't we put a disambiguation notice at the top of this page? -- 216.106.109.111 14:07, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps the heading should include a disambiguation to differentiate between Xenophane and Xenophon, which seems very much alike
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Xenophanes. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:15, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
This article says, "Later philosophers such as the Eleatics and the Pyrrhonists also saw Xenophanes as the founder of their doctrines, and interpreted his work in terms of those doctrines, although modern scholarship disputes these claims." But the linked-to article on the Eleatics says, "Although many philosophers throughout history have interpreted the doctrines of the Eleatics as responses to Xenophanes, Heraclitus, or Pythagoras, there is no broad agreement or direct evidence of any influence or direct response, although many theories have been put forth interpreting the eleatic in terms of these philosopher." Article shouldn't assert that the Eleatics saw Xenophanes as the founder of their doctrines if there is no evidence of any direct influence. Philgoetz ( talk) 15:30, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
The following content, which I added here, was removed by Apaugasma:
with the edit summary: "rv block evasion: 86.187.173.219 is the same user as 2A04:4A43:4D4F:E306:F9D5:63CA:4619:E70F (2A04:4A43:4D00:0:0:0:0:0/40), who is currently blocked for disruptive editing (including edit warring); even in the article body, it would need proper context on theology in early Greek philosophy (the concept of monotheism is ahistorical here)
References
I believe this content is important, relevant and adequately sourced, and should be incorporated (somehow) into the article. (That this content was first added by a blocked user is irrelevant since I've "adopted" it). I'm not sure why monotheism should be considered to be "ahistorical here", but in any case many scholars consider Xenophanes to have been a monotheist (i.e. that he believed in one god), as the many cited sources clearly attest. Although I think the "context" was reasonably appropriate, I'm willing to consider suggestions on how this content might be presented more appropriately. Paul August ☎ 14:36, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
One god greatest among gods and men, not at all like mortals in body or in thought(εἷς θεός, ἔν τε θεοῖσι καὶ ἀνθρώποισι μέγιστος, οὔτι δέμας θνητοῖσιν ὁμοίιος οὐδὲ νόημα, translation by Lesher 2019) Observe what Lesher 2019, one of the foremost experts on Xenophanes today, writes about it:
In his lead, Lesher 2019 calls Xenophanes' theologyAlthough the remark has often been read as a pioneering expression of monotheism, this reading is made problematic by the nearby reference to ‘gods’ in the plural in the first line and the possibility that Xenophanes sought to highlight not the one god but rather the one greatest god (cf. Homer, Iliad 12, 243 for the use of ‘one’ (Greek heis) reinforcing a superlative).
a partial advance toward monotheism. McKirahan 2011, another prominent expert on the presocratics, does interpret B23 as indicating monotheism, but duly mentions in his footnote
However, the phrase is taken by many to show that Xenophanes was not a monotheist but believed that one of the gods is supreme to the others.That's a far cry from the 'universally regarded as a monotheist in modern times' proposed here.
It is well established, to the ancient history of Mosul, that Xenophanes had visited Mosul, he gave it the name of (Misselah). This name was also called by the (Assyrian historians, post the common era), of the few remaining Assyrians. BUT, I cannot find a source to confirm this. However, if the whole notion is not true, so where did the Name of Ancient Mosul (Misselah) come from.
If this visit was considered true, presumed true and it was taken for granted -that had been conveyed from generation to generation- then would it be true that Xenophanes might have been affected or influenced by the Jewish people in Mosul whom founded Mosul after the total destruction of the ancient city of Nineveh (bear in mind that the Israelis had been brought to Nineveh in 718 BC by the Assyrians) and he, Xenophanes, espoused the faith of the only One God? or, (Could he be a prophet that distinguished between the knowledge that we learnt in everyday life or by studying and the faith. Otherwise, where did he come with the idea of faith in the only One God from, or, the supreme One God that is Omnipotent, and can does things by his mind)?
I would be grateful to you or to anyone who could help me find any clue that Xenophanes had visited Misselah, or, if Xenophanes had actually mentioned the town of Misselah in anyway? thank you. 185.239.178.145 ( talk) 11:52, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
The infobox characterizes his criticism of religion as utilizing the concept of projection. Aside from worries about anachronism - he lived long before Freud, is projection the concept involved in anthropomorphizing? In one sense I get it, projecting human qualities onto a non-human figure. On another I don't, projection is as I understand something like blaming others for what you did before they can blame you, making it seem stale when they inevitably do. Rather like inb4. In that sense of course, it seems little to do with Xenophanes. Yet it seems the more usual sense of the term. Why not, say, "criticism of anthropomorphic gods" as short enough to fit enough in the navbox but less ambiguous? Cake ( talk) 20:07, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Xenophanes article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
(Archived discussion from Wikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy)
In the Editions section, it is stated that the book by Diels, Kranz is superior to the book by Kirk, Raven. I have seen this same comment in other Pre-Socratic articles. It is most probably a correct evaluation. However, isn't it a personal opinion? In addition, it is frustrating because the book by Diels, Kranz is generally unavailable and has not been translated into English. Lestrade 15:24, 1 January 2006 (UTC)Lestrade
(moved here from User talk:Clossius)
I wonder if there is some way to qualify the attribution of monotheism to Xenophanes, beyond "often seen as". I'm not a Hellenist, so I hope you'll bear with me, but my sketchy survey suggests that it's not an uncontroversial claim. And, at least for a civilian like me, an assertion hard to reconcile with the language of "gods" plural, and X's emphasis on the mischaracterization of the gods, rather than their un-reality. What do you think? Quihana 19:00, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
I put in a reference to my own book here. If someone wants to replace it with a more suitable one I shan't mind a bit! Andrew Dalby 16:00, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
Xenophanes is created as one of the philosophers who completely de-anthropomorphsize the gods. In reality however, instead of projecting many different human qualities onto may gods, he simply projected a more specific person onto a god. Xenopahenes simply projects a philosopher onto a god. Xenophanes' god is mentally based, just, and omnipotent. Xenophanes is getting closer, but has not completely de-anthropomorphsized god (assuming this is even possible). He has made a break from Hesiod's mythology but he is still projecting human qualites onto god(s).
At about 57.3 N and 82.0 W (Lunar co-ordinates) there is a crater on the moon called Xenophanes. Shouldn't we put a disambiguation notice at the top of this page? -- 216.106.109.111 14:07, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps the heading should include a disambiguation to differentiate between Xenophane and Xenophon, which seems very much alike
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Xenophanes. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:15, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
This article says, "Later philosophers such as the Eleatics and the Pyrrhonists also saw Xenophanes as the founder of their doctrines, and interpreted his work in terms of those doctrines, although modern scholarship disputes these claims." But the linked-to article on the Eleatics says, "Although many philosophers throughout history have interpreted the doctrines of the Eleatics as responses to Xenophanes, Heraclitus, or Pythagoras, there is no broad agreement or direct evidence of any influence or direct response, although many theories have been put forth interpreting the eleatic in terms of these philosopher." Article shouldn't assert that the Eleatics saw Xenophanes as the founder of their doctrines if there is no evidence of any direct influence. Philgoetz ( talk) 15:30, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
The following content, which I added here, was removed by Apaugasma:
with the edit summary: "rv block evasion: 86.187.173.219 is the same user as 2A04:4A43:4D4F:E306:F9D5:63CA:4619:E70F (2A04:4A43:4D00:0:0:0:0:0/40), who is currently blocked for disruptive editing (including edit warring); even in the article body, it would need proper context on theology in early Greek philosophy (the concept of monotheism is ahistorical here)
References
I believe this content is important, relevant and adequately sourced, and should be incorporated (somehow) into the article. (That this content was first added by a blocked user is irrelevant since I've "adopted" it). I'm not sure why monotheism should be considered to be "ahistorical here", but in any case many scholars consider Xenophanes to have been a monotheist (i.e. that he believed in one god), as the many cited sources clearly attest. Although I think the "context" was reasonably appropriate, I'm willing to consider suggestions on how this content might be presented more appropriately. Paul August ☎ 14:36, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
One god greatest among gods and men, not at all like mortals in body or in thought(εἷς θεός, ἔν τε θεοῖσι καὶ ἀνθρώποισι μέγιστος, οὔτι δέμας θνητοῖσιν ὁμοίιος οὐδὲ νόημα, translation by Lesher 2019) Observe what Lesher 2019, one of the foremost experts on Xenophanes today, writes about it:
In his lead, Lesher 2019 calls Xenophanes' theologyAlthough the remark has often been read as a pioneering expression of monotheism, this reading is made problematic by the nearby reference to ‘gods’ in the plural in the first line and the possibility that Xenophanes sought to highlight not the one god but rather the one greatest god (cf. Homer, Iliad 12, 243 for the use of ‘one’ (Greek heis) reinforcing a superlative).
a partial advance toward monotheism. McKirahan 2011, another prominent expert on the presocratics, does interpret B23 as indicating monotheism, but duly mentions in his footnote
However, the phrase is taken by many to show that Xenophanes was not a monotheist but believed that one of the gods is supreme to the others.That's a far cry from the 'universally regarded as a monotheist in modern times' proposed here.
It is well established, to the ancient history of Mosul, that Xenophanes had visited Mosul, he gave it the name of (Misselah). This name was also called by the (Assyrian historians, post the common era), of the few remaining Assyrians. BUT, I cannot find a source to confirm this. However, if the whole notion is not true, so where did the Name of Ancient Mosul (Misselah) come from.
If this visit was considered true, presumed true and it was taken for granted -that had been conveyed from generation to generation- then would it be true that Xenophanes might have been affected or influenced by the Jewish people in Mosul whom founded Mosul after the total destruction of the ancient city of Nineveh (bear in mind that the Israelis had been brought to Nineveh in 718 BC by the Assyrians) and he, Xenophanes, espoused the faith of the only One God? or, (Could he be a prophet that distinguished between the knowledge that we learnt in everyday life or by studying and the faith. Otherwise, where did he come with the idea of faith in the only One God from, or, the supreme One God that is Omnipotent, and can does things by his mind)?
I would be grateful to you or to anyone who could help me find any clue that Xenophanes had visited Misselah, or, if Xenophanes had actually mentioned the town of Misselah in anyway? thank you. 185.239.178.145 ( talk) 11:52, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
The infobox characterizes his criticism of religion as utilizing the concept of projection. Aside from worries about anachronism - he lived long before Freud, is projection the concept involved in anthropomorphizing? In one sense I get it, projecting human qualities onto a non-human figure. On another I don't, projection is as I understand something like blaming others for what you did before they can blame you, making it seem stale when they inevitably do. Rather like inb4. In that sense of course, it seems little to do with Xenophanes. Yet it seems the more usual sense of the term. Why not, say, "criticism of anthropomorphic gods" as short enough to fit enough in the navbox but less ambiguous? Cake ( talk) 20:07, 21 April 2023 (UTC)