[MOD] Eusebius World Religions

K-HAN said:

why did u place islam under Judaism à Christianity à Modern Catholicism..?Islam is independent from other religions...

Click to expand...

Not true. Islam is heavily depending upon those two.

Do you have negative religion happiness suport via civic-s?

If you have, how did you do that? As i understand this must be done by SDK..

Good stuff mate. Sorry I couldn't get to helping how I wanted. But my visits to CivFan recently really dropped.

Still, great you got it out there!

LittleRedPoint said:

Do you have negative religion happiness suport via civic-s?

If you have, how did you do that? As i understand this must be done by SDK..

Click to expand...

This came up in another forum and I looked over the SDK code pretty carefully. I could not find any reason why a negative value would be ignored. If that is the case, can you give me a file ref?

But, I have never tested it to see if it works. In fact, I'm not sure how to test for it. Any ideas?

Eusebius

K-HAN said:

why did u place islam under judaism and cristianism..?Islam is independent from other religions...

Click to expand...

Islam shares a great deal with the other Abrahamic faiths. It also displaced Christianity over a huge swath of territory very quickly, which made it ideal to put above Christianity on the religion food chain.

Eusebius

Is this for civ warlords???

Not yet.

Actually negative religion values work but they are show incorrect in civic screen. +1213123 number instead of -3 happy per state religion in vanilla civ4 or warlords. If works in sevo mod.. I quess its done by phyton or something...

This mod looks wonderful. I haven't been active on the forums recently, but this was a great surprise upon returning.

One point of interest, though... I'm a Baha'i, and wouldn't consider Baha'i a "standalone" religion. Doctrinally, this may be true. Historically, however, Baha'i sprung from a radical refom movement within Islam.

I don't know if I'm really asking you to change anything, and I have no suggestions how you might. You've already done quite well, in my estimation.

eoo2 said:

This mod looks wonderful. I haven't been active on the forums recently, but this was a great surprise upon returning.

One point of interest, though... I'm a Baha'i, and wouldn't consider Baha'i a "standalone" religion. Doctrinally, this may be true. Historically, however, Baha'i sprung from a radical refom movement within Islam.

I don't know if I'm really asking you to change anything, and I have no suggestions how you might. You've already done quite well, in my estimation.

Click to expand...

Interesting you should say that. In earlier (unreleased) versions of the mod, I had Baha'i coming out of Islam. But I noticed that the religions at the end of a really long chain tended never to get founded, while some other civs never managed to found any religion. So I changed it to its current form.

Eusebius

Thank you, that's very considerate to make a change in favor of giving every religion an equal chance.

I've been using your mod since the previous post, and it is very enjoyable.

While you can say that Daoism and Confucianism arose from a similar body of beliefs, Daoism didn't really arise out of Confucianism. I don't know if it would cause big problems to change that, just pointing it out. Cool mod though!

The pdf file with info on all the religions says that Hinduism doesn't spread beyond its home civilization. Well, it sure did in my game.

Is that feature supposed to be implemented later on?

Just a question here. What about the Indians? Wouldn't hinduism and buddhism represent a fourth worldview?

evanb said:

The pdf file with info on all the religions says that Hinduism doesn't spread beyond its home civilization. Well, it sure did in my game.

Is that feature supposed to be implemented later on?

Click to expand...

No, it is supposed to work now. I'll add it to the reported bug list.

Thanks,
Eusebius

WiegrafFolles said:

While you can say that Daoism and Confucianism arose from a similar body of beliefs, Daoism didn't really arise out of Confucianism. I don't know if it would cause big problems to change that, just pointing it out. Cool mod though!

Click to expand...

Immacolata said:

Just a question here. What about the Indians? Wouldn't hinduism and buddhism represent a fourth worldview?

Click to expand...

These two sort of relate to the same thing. If you consider culture to be that which makes civilizations distinctive and worldview to be that which a group of civilizations have in common, it seemed to me that there is a general Asian/Oriental view of the world that India and China the rest of Asia share. I'm inclined to consider Old Testament Judaism to be part of that more Oriental worldview. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orientalism

But what to call it? As the article says, the term 'Orientalism' has taken on some negative connotations. Since Confucianism is as much philosophy as religion, I thought I would use that.

That is my current thinking, but I might be persuaded otherwise. WiegrafFolles, do you think Daoism could ever arise outside of an oriental worldview?

Eusebius

Well I would hardly call the culture on the Indian subcontinent confucian. There is barely any similarity between India and China today. The India that Alexander the Great encountered. Indus valley should be considered its own world view. That is, if you ask me. Im not making the mod. Orientalism is just a big box for "just about anything east of the Bhosporus Strait" and as such a useless term of today.

I'm inclined to agree with you to some degree. Since both Confucianism arise out the same prior cultural context, draw on similar references, etc. I can see you might see them as part of one overall Chinese cultural context. However to speak of an Oriental worldview is somewhat problematic.

Warring States Chinese Philosophy is markedly different from Indian philosophy. Questions such as that of the atman (crucial to Indian philosophy) are totally non-existent, and generally it takes a much more "this-worldly" orientation. For instance, China has one of the the longest traditions of historical recording in the world. India never developed such a tradition indigenously (it was an import from Islam). Philosophers often point to this in demonstating the eternal, otherworldly focus of Indian philosophy. Thinkers in China during the warring states were often oriented towards the question of what the proper manner to rule a state was (Daoist, Legalist, Confucian, Moist, whatever) and how that related to a person's conduct and virtue. While statecraft was certainly a concern in India, the Brahmans tended to focus more on "metaphysical" philosophy, which wasn't well developed in China until the movement of Neo-Daoism after the fall of the Han and only really got going after the import of the INDIAN philosophy of Buddhism.

These are some of the reasons I think there are important differences between the two. One might point out the cyclical nature of time in both cultures as an essential simliarity in contrast to Western, linear time, but on closer inspection the character of this cyclical time is quite different in the two cultures. For instance the Vedas often speak of almost inconceivably huge cycles of time, so-called "cosmic time" while the cycles for instance in the Mencius are no so much chronological, as they are political (the rise and fall of dynasties, famously mentioned at the beginning and end of the Romance of the Three Kingdoms).

Anyhow, I think there are sufficient grounds to draw a line between India and China. However it seems reasonable enough for the purpose of the game and its model of exclusive religions (where religions are to some degree always set against one another when in fact in China they often were not so) to speak of a common Chinese worldview.

I wonder if that is why India never really became a colonizer of the world. Simply wasn't interesting, if the brahmans were busy pondering otherworldly concerns

For gameplay purpose its possibly easier with just 3 world views, things are complicated enough with this, but outside that, you'd probably never catch me labelling the indian society as "confucianist".

Its a fitting label for many other East and Southeast Asian countries. Thailand, Vietnam, Korea, Japan and China, Singapore, possibly Myanmar, I would call confucianist.

Now, christendom, judaism and islam are so-called abrahamic religions. But would you consider them hellenistic? I wouldn't. If you examine christianity in Europe, you will notice a cleft between the catholic states south and the protestants to the north. Puzzling difference, isn't it? Bribery in the north is the vilest moral decay you can show, whereas down south, they take a little more pragmatic approach to bribery.

If you really dig into it, hellenism probably didn't penetrate that much up north. Its a coat of paint, we're still barbarians at heart ^_^ Oh well, getting carried away and deeply off-topic. Im going to test this mod soon I hope. I wonder if it will work with New Balance mod for Warlords.

India has a very complicated political landscape that has always be frought with infighting. This made it very difficult for empires there to last long, especially considering they were established on unstable dynastic terms which failed to conceive of "India" as a state that should naturally exist. Add to that a number of difficult geographical problems: Jungles, Deserts, The Deccan Plateau, geographical boundaries to the North (The Himalaya Mountains) the East (Very rough terrain in western Burma) the South (The Indian Ocean) and the West (err...Central Asia) it's not much of a surprise that there were no enduring, far-flung Indian Empires. Having said that the Indo-European or Northern Indian culture has demostrated a very slow but pervasive expansion of its dominance over the Dravidian culture of the south, expanding over the centuries though that is by no means total. It's not that the state was incapable of conquest or expansion, there are of course the conquests of Ashoka, the Guptas, or the Mughals (although they began as foreign invaders) to show otherwise, they just didn't have much staying power.