Talk:Chinese folk religion

Updating

Hallo, I think the body part of the article should need an update about what happened in the last century with the introduction of the new tlc technologies in the folk religion field ^^^ Lawtheagoraphobic (talk) 22:01, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

Yes, and what keywords should we use when we surf for reputable sources who have something to say on this topic? Vagabond nanoda (talk) 18:10, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Shenism once again

I removed the lead sentence reference to "Shenism" as equivalent to "Chinese folk religion," which was made 5 June 2019 by Alex9444 with no edit summary. This question was discussed several years ago, archived here. In brief, the term was coined for specifically Southeast Asian use, not as a general descriptor of Chinese religion or Chinese folk religion. ch (talk) 05:20, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

The use of "shenism" is quite rare, even for SE Asia, as explained in the discussion linked above, so mentioning it in the lead is WP:Undue. Another reason to avoid it, especially in the lead, is that many of the (few) uses in other places pick up the term from Wikipedia, resulting in a WP:Circular reference.ch (talk) 16:51, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Removed Shenism once again, again

Once again "Shenism" is inserted in the lead sentence without an edit summary, this time by Gyan247677q. I once again removed it: Shenism is not another name for "Chinese folk religion" or "Chinese popular religion". In addition to the points in the section "Shenism once again," above, such as WP:UNDUE, Chinese folk/ popular religion does not center on "Shen". The "family" or "paternal family line" is at least as much if not more important, and the principles of nature run a close second.ch (talk) 22:54, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

@CWH: I've removed this again. Also an IP is warring to include "Ancient Chinese Religion" as a synonym. I object to this as I don't think they're precisely the same topic. Do you also object to this? Hemiauchenia (talk) 20:21, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Yes indeed, "shenism" is not in any way a synonym for Ancient Chinese religion or Folk Religion. Thanks for the heads up!ch (talk) 03:12, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Ancient Chinese Religion is still practiced in it’s original 10,000 year old form in the country of Taiwan

Ancient China was already thousands of years old by the time the ancient Greek city states and the later Roman Empire were created and yet why is this page referred to as “Folk religion” and the religion of civilizations like ancient Greece and Rome are referred to as “Ancient Greek Religion” and “Ancient Roman Religion” when both the Greeks and Roman civilizations are nowhere as old as the ancient Han Chinese civilization which predates ancient Greece by thousands of years? The ancient Han Chinese writing system was already invented over 8,000 years ago long before the Minoans of Crete invented their Linear A writing system and later Greek scripts. The terminology used needs to be the same, you cannot write “Ancient Greek Religion” or “Ancient Roman Religion” on their respective pages and then inaccurately mislabel the Ancient Chinese Religion as a so-called “Folk Religion” which is biased terminology that is not even used in East Asian countries like China, Korea, Japan and Taiwan where the Ancient Chinese Religion had major influence. The 10,000 year old Ancient Chinese Religion along with the 8,000 year old ancient Han Chinese writing system is still used in it’s original form in the country of Taiwan and to a lesser degree in other countries like Japan, South Korea and certain “freer” regions of communist China like Hong Kong and Macau so these ancient Chinese polytheistic religions are not “contemporary” practices, the ancient Chinese Religion most likely evolved and developed from previous East Asian religions that both Ancient Han Chinese and Mongols had in common over 30,000 years ago but split sometime around 23,000 years ago when the Han Chinese split from other East Asian nomadic groups to create an agricultural based developed civilization, like the Romans thousands of years later.

1.) http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6669569.stm

2.) https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn23290-farming-has-deep-roots-in-chinese-ice-age/

3.) https://phys.org/news/2013-05-agriculture-china-years.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.167.28.6 (talk • contribs)

Not much to say here, other than all of what you said either doesn't matter (it doesn't matter what things are called in other languages, this is an English language encyclopedia) or is facially absurd (an unbroken 10k year cultural tradition). Also see the thread above about terminology. Cheers! Remsense ‥ 论 21:31, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

No, the article needs to be retitled “Ancient Chinese Religion” to be more historically accurate. Why is it that “ancient Greek religion” and “ancient Roman religion” are used on their respective pages when the ancient Chinese religion which is thousands of years older than even the Minoan religions of Crete are erroneously labeled as a “folk religion” when it is far more ancient than ancient Greek or Roman religions?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.167.28.6 (talk) 21:59, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Please sign your comments so others can reply to them easier. We generally use recognizable common names used by sources in English and don't impose our own logic on things even if we really prefer certain terminology. Also, it appears that Ancient Chinese Religion refers to something different or more specific in scope than what this article is about, per above. Remsense ‥ 论 22:03, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Did you read the links above showing that the ancient Chinese civilization had invented their ancient Chinese writing system over 8,000 years ago and that they started an agricultural based civilization over 23,000 years ago based on the research studies of Stanford University scientists. So yes China is an unbroken continuous culture that is still practiced to this very day more or less in communist China but especially in Taiwan, South Korea and Japan since none of those three countries suffered a communist cultural revolution like in China.69.167.28.6 (talk) 22:08, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

You can probably install a browser extension that hides or replaces terms you don't like, but you're not going to get your preferred term installed on Wikipedia if you can't engage with site policy, sorry. Remsense ‥ 论 22:11, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Well in that case, we have to change the “Ancient Greek Religion” and “Ancient Roman Religion” pages to “Greek Folk Religion” and “Roman Folk Religion” since it makes absolutely no logical sense that an older more ancient civilization of China would have their Ancient Chinese Religion falsely labeled as a “folk religion” when civilizations like ancient Greece and Rome were never as old as ancient China. Why are the religions of the younger civilizations of ancient Greece and Rome labeled “Ancient Greek Religion” and “Ancient Roman Religion” when Chinese culture is a far older. Please go study the history, archaeology and anthropology of China. Go read these links: — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.167.28.6 (talk) 22:14, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

You've been engaged with on the talk page, and your general question has been answered in terms of site policy. If you vandalize other pages like Religion in ancient Rome to try to prove a point, you're going to be blocked from editing. < Remsense ‥ 论 22:32, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Blocked for doing what? Telling the truth, I simply edited it in fairness since all pages about ancient religions should have a similar equivalent “ancient” title, not just for China but for any other ancient religion (i.e. ancient Egyptian religion), you cannot say Greek and Roman religions are “ancient” while the even older Ancient Chinese religion is labeled as a “folk religion.” This is not typical English usage, this is racist downgrading terminology. And yes, you engaged or should I say trolled…but you didn’t answer my question: Why are the Ancient Greek Religion and Ancient Roman Religion pages not labeled “Greek Folk Religion” and “Roman Folk Religion” when China had an older more ancient civilization than either ancient Greece or Roman Empire and yet the Ancient Chinese Religion page is falsely labeled “Chinese folk religion”?

1.) http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6669569.stm

2.) https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn23290-farming-has-deep-roots-in-chinese-ice-age/

3.) https://phys.org/news/2013-05-agriculture-china-years.html

69.167.28.6 (talk),

I think the mode of argumentation from the IP is not helpful, but as someone who has written quite a lot of text on ancient Roman religion in WP, I think they may have an underlying point, if it could be expressed less tendentiously. I don't know enough about Chinese religion to talk about this intelligently, so let me use Roman religion. There are multiple strands in ancient Roman religion: there's the archaic ethnic religion of the earliest city state, which carried on in various ways into Imperial times as state religion with state priesthoods; there's imperial cult; there are the imported cults that were regarded as foreign and/or amalgamated with Rome's traditional religions, and there were the pre-existing religions of the provinces, which continued in various guises, not always syncretized, particularly in Syria, Anatolia, Egypt, and Gaul; there was domestic or household cult with the ancestor shrines and honoring of the Genii; there was folk religion, which Ovid often touches on in the Fasti among ordinary people, which can seem like mere bogeymen and superstitions because it's practiced outside the grand venues of public temples; and there were the forms of private religion aka "magic" attested by papyri and inscriptions. The article Religion in ancient Rome theoretically covers all these areas; Imperial cult in ancient Rome has its own article too. But we have no separate article on disentangling Roman folk religion as such. Instead of castigating the articles on ancient Greece and Rome, into which many of us have put a massive amount of effort, I wish the IP would expend a like amount of effort proposing a plan for presenting the full range of ancient Chinese religion and addressing shortcomings within the article – I'm assuming that doing so would soon show that "Chinese folk religion" is an inadequate title for the scope of the article? Focusing on the content here would be more persuasive than comparisons to other articles. Cynwolfe (talk) 00:29, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

I actually recently picked up a few recent edited volumes on the subject that may more clearly address these points—I'll circle back if I notice anything interesting. Remsense ‥ 论 00:31, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Ancient Greek, Egyptian, Mesapotamian and Roman religion are historical and effectively culturally extinct. This is why they are called "Ancient". Chinese folk religion is decidedly not extinct. This IP is a Han nationalist POV-pusher with some wild and ridiculous ideas. I really think it is just best to ignore them. Hemiauchenia (talk) 02:15, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. However, they accidentally inspired some salient points from Cynwolfe that I'm curious about. Remsense ‥ 论 02:28, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

I think the issue is that one is still practiced, the others are not. Slatersteven (talk) 11:16, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

I don't disagree with any of that, and I don't claim to have much to contribute to this other than suggesting that the IP, assuming good faith, might try a different approach to argumentation. Religion in ancient Rome isn't called "ancient Roman folk religion" because it isn't primarily about folk religion in ancient Rome but rather state/ethnic religion, imperial cult, household/domestic cult, and Imperial religious pluralism. There's very little "folk" religion in it. So if the IP objects to "folk", the question is whether this article is limited to Chinese folk religion. That requires defining folk religion, so good luck with that (but that article seems to address the question capaciously).

It's possible that the IP means to argue that the article is or should be about the survival or continuation of historical or traditional Chinese religious practices, historically central to cultural identity but perhaps shrouded by the politics of the modern era? So more relevant than any of the articles on ancient "dead" religions might be the way the Shinto article has been developed so productively over the last two or three years, with its 2021 spinoff History of Shinto. In terms of scope, the lede of Chinese folk religion doesn't actually read to me as if it's meant to be confined to folk religion. So again, I'm quite ignorant of the subject matter, but maybe the article is or should be about historical/traditional Chinese religion? Cynwolfe (talk) 15:34, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

I'd also point out we do have articles on History of religion in China and Religion of the Shang dynasty; as well as Chinese theology. I wouldn't be surprised if we could have more subarticles for other periods of Chinese history. Yes the Shang dynasty doesn't use ancient, but the reason is because it's unnecessary, as the Shang dynasty is the common name for that period of Chinese history. Nil Einne (talk) 07:50, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

So here, if the article really is meant to be limited to folk religion, then the challenge for the IP is to show whether or not the article is confined to Chinese folk religion in relation to these other articles. Cynwolfe (talk) 13:41, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

It's also worth noting that the sources that IP cites above are journalistic, not WP:Reliable Sources. There will be some continuity, of course, but nobody in Taiwan consults Oracle bones rather than satellite based weather forecasts. ch (talk) 15:04, 7 September 2024 (UTC)