So I can't quite understand something. What is the narrative basis for category:cult members, category:cult leaders and category:cults in general? It seems to be a lot of stuff about Romans, but were are we getting the word "cult" from? Feels like that isn't canonical somehow, but a modern interpretation of religious views we find outdated today.
Anybody got, to coin a religious phrase, chapter and verse on the DWU usage of the word "cult"?
czechout<staff /> ☎ ✍ 00:48:29 Mon 15 Aug 2011
- I think in Alien Bodies someone calls Faction Paradox a cult, and goes on to define it.
- I'm a little confused though, is it not enough that some groups are called "Cult of the"/"...Cult" to help form our definition of cult?
- Or is their name not enough of a definition? Are you looking specifically for description/dialogue that says 'this is X they're a cult, they do stuff'.
- It just seems like an odd set of questions, the cults exist, they have members and a leader and so we have categories. (Or am I missing a logic jump?). --Tangerineduel / talk 15:50, August 15, 2011 (UTC)
A useful definition of 'cult' in the real world is difficult enough. L. Sprague DeCamp, in SPIRITS, STARS AND SPELLS, defines it as any religious group whose members are, largely, converts. He admits that this is a ridiculous definition, but cannot conceive of any more exact for sociological purposes. For such a punctilious writer to admit that, shows how difficult the definition is. The French had a department of state in charge of religious affairs from the fall of Napoleon I, on and off, through 1905. It was responsible for administering the Concordat with the Pope and for similar arrangements with the Protestants and Jews. It was called 'The Ministry of Cults'. So first, we need a good definition of the word, which doesn't seem to exist. Furthermore, when we descend from the word's meaning in general use, to its use in the DWU, which almost invariably involves a group of people Up to No Good.... Boblipton 00:04, August 16, 2011 (UTC)