Quote:
|
So how does [your statement about inherent order in mnemonics and phonology] support your idea that "the major bodies of the solar system should include figures that have had a major influence on world tradition, and attempt to maintain a sense of order and consistency"?
|
There is a natural order to language and meaning for humans. Sure, I could decide tomorrow that "Screw off" means "Hi, how are you?" But I won't ever really think that. Additionally, there are universal sounds that connote certain concepts across the globe. Some sounds are long, some short, and involve definite mechanisms for production. These become conceptual. The conceptal schema becomes embedded as our understanding of the universe. We can then take it and apply it ad hoc where it fits. All these associations reinforce it, and it allows us to increase knowledge and understanding. In a Socratic way, it also may reveal characteristic clues for gaining new knowledge where it might otherwise be missed.
Quote:
|
The potential for confusion [in changing the names] seems to me to outweigh the possibility of interest, in this instance.
|
Can't really argue with an opinion. I thought it would be interesting to hear some alternative ideas, even if just to contemplate them in my own way - not out to change the solar system, just to construct an alternative minority view.
Quote:
|
I understand. We just seemed to be jumping to "ignore" before we'd passed "convince".
|
Yes, but the goal of the original post was not really so much to gather argument. I was trying to find inspiration. I was hoping some imaginative posts might offer something striking and interesting to me. But criticism can be a form of inspiration. And I'll take what I can get, although without as much interest. What would be interesting is if someone offered insight into the stories and meanings of representations of Makemake, Haumea, etc.
Quote:
|
So the languages and mythology of minorities should be neglected, as being of no consequence in the grand scheme? Setting aside the cultural bankruptcy of that argument, I need only point out that if I throw a dart at a map of religious practices, I will not strike a Venus-worshipper very frequently.
|
Then you are in favor of renaming the planets? Let's assume some Christians would be in favor also, but there is just not much excitement in naming them "Solomon", "Jonas", etc. Or maybe there is for some. In fact, you will meet many people who unintentionally "venerate" Venus, from which the word comes. Spirits connect the universe from the very small to the very large. Expressing ourselves through them pays homage to the gods.
Quote:
|
You're begging the question. "(Dwarf) planetary names must fill an important place in the planetary pantheon sequence because that's how we choose planetary names." You've yet to demonstrate that this rule is sensible or useful.
|
I try to explain this above in the traditional Socratic way. (There is probably an Eastern philosopher under-represented in the Western world that I could have cited, but, being stuck in the provinces of ignorance, I have not afforded to. I think a certain nonbeliever said something similar to Euthyphro.)
Quote:
|
It seems baseless to me, given that we're talking about proper names, not language structure or the usefulness of a lingua franca.
|
Why is a supposedly mythological proper name different? Gods can bind lands together or rend them apart. "Gaud" (God) can mean "Joy". "Santa Claus" can mean "Divine Gate". These may be bad translations, but since when did all humans think infallibly?