5 ms·

I often think that maybe in a 1000 years or so, archeologists will find evidence that almost every household had a copy of Harry Potter or something similar and

by pvorb 7y ago

I often think that maybe in a 1000 years or so, archeologists will find evidence that almost every household had a copy of Harry Potter or something similar and will conclude that this was a widespread religion at the time.

Mediterraneo10 7y ago
Modern books like Harry Potter come with front or back matter that makes it clear that they are works of fiction, not a religious text.
goto11 7y ago
Current historians distinguish between religious texts and fiction for entertainment. Why should this distinction be lost in the future?
- EliRivers 7y ago
  I understand that in the archaeological community, they have a tendency to label things they can't figure out as being of religious significance. An example I recall is some kind of olive press, I think; it was labelled a religious tool until someone familiar with old-school manual olive presses commented how much it looked like an olive press. Where this is going is that current archaeologists mistake household items for religious tools, so perhaps future archaeologists will as well. As an aside, how do we know that current historians are not already doing the same? That they're not already labeling ancient fairy tales, told as amusing stories by people who knew they were just stories, as religious texts?
  - pvorb 7y ago
    That last paragraph is exactly what I was thinking. Did people in ancient Greece actually believe the stories from the Odyssey or Iliad? Or was it meant to entertain? Or have a look at Genesis. Is this something that the original sources believed to happen or was it an entertaining story in the beginning and retold until people started to believe in it? I'm not sure there always is a clear distinction between fiction and religion.
    - goto11 7y ago
      Yes they believed the stories from the Odyssey and Iliad and considered them historical events. Actually they have been considered historical until modern times. (And many still consider them historical to some extent.)
      - EliRivers 7y ago
        So why should future historians not make the same mistake?
  - goto11 7y ago
    Well if there is written material (like the Harry Potter books) then it is considered history, not archeology. And the historians would be able to read the book and consider if it was treated as fiction or a religious text at the time, especially by comparing to other fiction books and religious texts which would also be available. While not every historical culture had a clear distinction between the two, our culture have a concept of a "novel" which is distinct from both history and theology. A historian looking at books from our time would be able to understand that.

by pvorb 7y ago

Mediterraneo10 7y ago

Modern books like Harry Potter come with front or back matter that makes it clear that they are works of fiction, not a religious text.

goto11 7y ago

Current historians distinguish between religious texts and fiction for entertainment. Why should this distinction be lost in the future?

EliRivers 7y ago
I understand that in the archaeological community, they have a tendency to label things they can't figure out as being of religious significance. An example I recall is some kind of olive press, I think; it was labelled a religious tool until someone familiar with old-school manual olive presses commented how much it looked like an olive press. Where this is going is that current archaeologists mistake household items for religious tools, so perhaps future archaeologists will as well. As an aside, how do we know that current historians are not already doing the same? That they're not already labeling ancient fairy tales, told as amusing stories by people who knew they were just stories, as religious texts?
- pvorb 7y ago
  That last paragraph is exactly what I was thinking. Did people in ancient Greece actually believe the stories from the Odyssey or Iliad? Or was it meant to entertain? Or have a look at Genesis. Is this something that the original sources believed to happen or was it an entertaining story in the beginning and retold until people started to believe in it? I'm not sure there always is a clear distinction between fiction and religion.
  - goto11 7y ago
    Yes they believed the stories from the Odyssey and Iliad and considered them historical events. Actually they have been considered historical until modern times. (And many still consider them historical to some extent.)
    - EliRivers 7y ago
      So why should future historians not make the same mistake?
- goto11 7y ago
  Well if there is written material (like the Harry Potter books) then it is considered history, not archeology. And the historians would be able to read the book and consider if it was treated as fiction or a religious text at the time, especially by comparing to other fiction books and religious texts which would also be available. While not every historical culture had a clear distinction between the two, our culture have a concept of a "novel" which is distinct from both history and theology. A historian looking at books from our time would be able to understand that.