Yet the form language of our culture and our current civilization would not exist without Christianity (specifically Catholicism) and our notion of God.
It'd be close enough if you use faiths across cultures as an average. It's not like Christianity is the oldest faith or anything, it's merely one of the contenders. If anything, Christianity denatured culture, as you can see from looking at people like The Vikings when it comes to their art. They even had the gall to take symbols from other faiths and collage it into their demonized figure.
I agree overall.
I m speaking only of Western Civ here and therefore not even speaking of Christianity as a whole (really only catholicism so no orthodox as it serves a different culture and civ).
The major point here would be that every cultural morphology is born with a religion and that religion usually starts with a death cult (a way to deal with the dead). For every culture that religion is of course different but with it a sort of potential is born.
Our potential is merely tied to a specific brand of Christianity, it didn't have to be but thats what unfolded.
As for taking symbols from other cultures and faiths my answer is ofc because this is extremely typical. I refer to it as a pseudomorphosis. Practically every religion and the culture born out of it experiences this. I don't believe our brand of Christianity took these symbols and solely demonized them. There's a reason our brand of Christianity is rich with pagan and Islamic art, poetry, symbology, and esotericism.
Still seems like a Time Lord point. We'd not be around to see the differences if it'd gone any differently and could be argued with just as much merit to be neither better nor worse than our current setup without going into fantastical hypotheticals with about as much relevance as Lord of the Rings.
Basically, "It'd be different".
Your argument's relevance is only that of a Time Lord point. Seeing as we can't jump through time and space like that, it means nothing from lacking a comparison. "It'd be different", so would it be if we discovered how to make bread later on in our timeline.
More like the infinitesimal and non-eucidean mathematics wouldn't exist.
In it's currently understood form, yes. We'd likely either have something else in it's place or someone else would found something considerably close enough to it.
We've gained and lost math skills in general throughout history, but Math's developments are arguably inevitable as long as written records persist. Math is one of humanity's destinies.
Just like without Judism/Gnostic Christianity/Islam algebra, as in the use of symbols to replace pure value, would not exist. Or without the wedic religion and its consideration of void the number zero may not exist.
Actually, we'd likely have surprisingly similar symbols albeit from different contexts.
A lot of symbols are cross-cultural for the significance of what it's meant to portray. The o and + for example is a classically understood protection symbol while x is it's opposite. This far into my studies I'd argue that symbology is an attempt at depicting the symbols we as a species were meant to recognize from nature, and we can even see modern usage ranging from homeless communities to graphic design.
"The Element Encyclopedia of Secret Signs and Symbols by Adele Nozedar" kinda got me woke about symbology for the moment.
Instead of seeking out 'lies' perhaps seeking out understanding is better. There are not many texts in the world filled with so much wisdom after all.
I looked at The Bible and all it did was make me feel bad for Satan as I attempted to understand the nature of God. If I had the capacity for faith, that'd be my God and Lilith would be my Patron Saint.
Satan's an unsung hero who's otherwise just doing his job, and is more human than any of us.
They are fascinating.
Have you read Paradise lost? It is a very long poem by John Milton that details the fall of man and Satan from Satans pov.
I haven't, but I know I'm not the only one to show sympathy for the devil.
I'll check it.
First the lingo.
I am speaking of intelligence here in the Aristotelian sense. All things have form and that form has aim. Think of pine cone, its aim is to become a pine tree. That is its potential form and that coupled with the actualization of that form is its 'intelligence'.
Once the civilization stage of a morphology is entered that potential form is practically exhausted and as such there is nothing new that can be actualized. In this sense what we consider an advanced civilization is also a unintelligent culture.
Much like how hummingbirds evolved away from each other but still were fundamentally hummingbirds, so too would people have responded to changes in these areas.
I agree that it's significant for understanding how we got to exactly the point we're sitting in right now for the sake of chronology, but how much weight does it have beyond it's history? If anything this descends into more of a conceptual basis of thinking, the mechanics of something instead of the validity of the tools that were used.
Ę̵̚x̸͎̾i̴͚̽s̵̻͐t̷͐ͅe̷̯͠n̴̤̚t̵̻̅i̵͉̿a̴̮͊l̵͍̂ ̴̹̕D̵̤̀e̸͓͂t̵̢͂e̴͕̓c̸̗̄t̴̗̿ï̶̪v̷̲̍é̵͔
