Skip to main content

Why are terms like "primitive" and "primal" not appropriate in describing indigenous religions?

There are three main groups of reasons why one should not use these terms when describing indigenous religions.


First, there is the problem that these terms are not particularly accurate or informative. Terms such as monotheistic, polytheistic, and animist give us some sense of what certain religions think about the nature of the divine, but terms such as "primitive" or "primal" really give almost no actual information other than a sense of the speaker's attitude towards the religions.


Second, there is the problem of the connotations of those terms. "Primitive" has a negative implication, suggesting something crude, inferior, or undeveloped. "Primal" carries with it a sense of raw natural power but not intellectual sophistication. Both of these terms perpetuate negative stereotypes about indigenous peoples.


Third, the supposedly "primitive" nature of indigenous peoples and their religions was used as an excuse by European settlers to steal land, destroy families, force conversions, and perpetrate many of the other horrors of imperialist rule.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

A man has a garden measuring 84 meters by 56 meters. He divides it into the minimum number of square plots. What is the length of the square plots?

We wish to divide this man's garden into the minimum number of square plots possible. A square has all four sides with the same length.Our garden is a rectangle, so the answer is clearly not 1 square plot. If we choose the wrong length for our squares, we may end up with missing holes or we may not be able to fit our squares inside the garden. So we have 84 meters in one direction and 56 meters in the other direction. When we start dividing the garden in square plots, we are "filling" those lengths in their respective directions. At each direction, there must be an integer number of squares (otherwise, we get holes or we leave the garden), so that all the square plots fill up the garden nicely. Thus, our job here is to find the greatest common divisor of 84 and 56. For this, we prime factor both of them: `56 = 2*2*2*7` `84 = 2*2*3*7` We can see that the prime factors and multiplicities in common are `2*2*7 = 28` . This is the desired length of the square plots. If you wi...
Post a Comment
Read more