Philosophies

[lucaluca]

Are philosophies modeled in the game in any way? I mean mainly the 3 great phylosphical schools of the hellenestic era (epicureanism, stoicism, skepticism). They were profoundly influencial on the masses but even more so on the leaders of the greek and roman states.

They also deepely influenced the rise of new religions later on, for example the neoplatonism. I think philosophies were vastly more important than religions at this time. Religions were becoming more and more empty. I'm surprised that they are not included. This was not quite an era of superstition like the omen thing suggests, this was an era of great thought and scientific development.

 

[Alexander Seil]

Well, how do you propose to model them? Modern scholarship doesn't seem to agree with your assertion that religion was "weak" in the ancient world.

Besides, it is logically much easier to justify having bonuses from omens than from having a travelling epicurean philosopher lecture in your province on the virtues of excessive wine consumption. What is that supposed to do? Reduce wine production by 5% for 6 months?

Philosophical schools in antiquity were in themselves in many ways "religions." But they were not as important as the cults of important deities. Seriously, if you think that religion didn't play a role, how do you explain the obviously vast sums of money and enormous effort that went into constructing the temples of the Hellenistic world? Ruins attest to the fact that enormous temples were built well into the "Common Era," and this in turn attests to the importance of religious institutions.

 

[Bleedinbob]

I would assume that philosophy (not a specific one) might influence character traits. Having a ruler philosophical character would be historical. (i.e. Marcus Aurelius)

 

[niceta]

Are philosophies modeled in the game in any way? I mean mainly the 3 great phylosphical schools of the hellenestic era (epicureanism, stoicism, skepticism). They were profoundly influencial on the masses but even more so on the leaders of the greek and roman states.

They also deepely influenced the rise of new religions later on, for example the neoplatonism. I think philosophies were vastly more important than religions at this time. Religions were becoming more and more empty. I'm surprised that they are not included. This was not quite an era of superstition like the omen thing suggests, this was an era of great thought and scientific development.

Nope in the period which rome will be played the religion is strong: just with empire the philosophy will rise as a way of life. You wont find any roman rule before the birth of Christ who can be called a philosopher. Think about Gracchus C. and T. Silla. C.Mario. Caesar (a writer and historian).
For greece and Hellenistic people is differents. In troubles against Silla and pro Mithridates the chiefs of Athenians were the heads of aristotelic school.

 

[ComradeOm]

I would assume that philosophy (not a specific one) might influence character traits. Having a ruler philosophical character would be historical. (i.e. Marcus Aurelius)

Which is a good idea... but very different from the concept of philosophy being "profoundly influencial on the masses"

 

[Swamp Rat]

Well possibly some of the advisors are philosophers. Its a bit hard to name any one society that was thoroughly influenced by any of the ancient philosophies to an extent that it had any national/political/economical results. Anyway most of the philosophies was also connected to the religious beliefs at the time and only a sort of extension for the upper class to find their place in the universe.

And btw contrary to popular belief ancient epicureans was not into debauchery at all. Their practical interpretation of living the good life was in fact not far from the stoic way of life. Friendship and learning and frugal meals was most important, as the studies of the epicuraen library at the Villa dei papiri partially excavated in Herculaneum shows. (I recommend the book "Philodemus in Italy" by Marcello Gigante for a good english language introduction at this new knowledge on ancient epicureanism).

Epicureanism as meaning revelry is a modern misinterpretation of the ancient philosophy.

 

[unmerged(7537)]

Which is a good idea... but very different from the concept of philosophy being "profoundly influencial on the masses"

Considering that in Roman times, philosophy and science in general was, to a large part, the passtime of a small intellectual elite, rather than a mass movement in any sense of the word, I would say that such an approach would fit the time period.

 

[lucaluca]

Which is a good idea... but very different from the concept of philosophy being "profoundly influencial on the masses"

Well in Greece and in the hellenistic states they were. In Rome the became prominent late in the game, but still they should have been included somehow.
After the Alexander conquests the world entered in a sot of globaliazed era comparable to ours where thought and knowledge was traded from one boundary of the known world to the other. After all it was the time of the Alexandria's Library... I just hoped this great movement of science and thought could have been included to add flavor to the game. For examples as character traits or with a system parallel to religion where characters can choose a philosophy and this will affect events/traits/rivalries and friendships.

 

[Swamp Rat]

Well in Greece and in the hellenistic states they were. In Rome the became prominent late in the game, but still they should have been included somehow.
After the Alexander conquests the world entered in a sot of globaliazed era comparable to ours where thought and knowledge was traded from one boundary of the known world to the other. After all it was the time of the Alexandria's Library... I just hoped this great movement of science and thought could have been included to add flavor to the game. For examples as character traits or with a system parallel to religion where characters can choose a philosophy and this will affect events/traits/rivalries and friendships.

Even in the Hellenic countries i would be reluctant to say that philosophy had an impact that would influence gameplay very much. But yes the various centers of learning, the Academy, the Museion etc would be nice to have in the game in some way (research/religious/advisor bonus or something like that).

But your idea about characters possibly being able to choose a philosophy alongside with religion i find to be a very good idea indeed. Unfortunately it most likely comes too late to be incoorporated in the game.

 

[JASGripen]

Philosophers and philosophy is separate things. One can easily talk about a philosophy ruling a society, even if philosophers play a small role in the ruling. I think that the impact of philosophy on society is the part which should be focused on in this issue.

And when it comes to philosophy, should one only use the philosophies which were named in contemporary Rome et al., or should we use philosophies constructed by the developers of the mage (and the modders) to actually reflect the society in a good way, in game. I would actually opt for the latter, as it is more important to have socially constructed categories which give us tools to play the game, than trying to use the contemporary tools which not necessarily give a good reflection of the society.

For example, the idea to have slaves were part of a philosophical system, not necessarily clearly expressed as a philosophical system. This idea made scientific progress moving slowly as there were no real need for progression as the slaves needed job anyway (wind mills were for example known as a concept by the Romans, but not used very much).

Anyway, these things are already decided about in the game, we'll see. But I just felt I wanted to elaborate on the subject in this thread. Now I have taken 30 seconds of your life which you’ll never get back.

 

[unmerged(80821)]

The only realistic way I could see philosophies in the game is if they are through character traits, which would not be a bad idea.

It would be cool if through a characters life they develop a philosophy trait by what they do, or if you could choose by event (like with schooling in CK).

It would be sweet if the trait developed though, like if your character slept around he would become a hedonist (which is of course the best philosophy in the world )

I also would not say that philosophy had a greater impact on the world, because only a select few in the world were true philosophers and understood what philosophy was, while religion was practiced by almost all.

 

[HolisticGod]

Niceta,

Er, that's not so.

I think you'd be hard-pressed to name Roman philosophers before the birth of Christ who weren't rulers, but from among that class I can name half a dozen without thinking too hard.

One should keep in mind that while the original poster underestimates the role of superstition among the masses, there's a substantial difference between superstition and religion. The Hellenistic and Roman periods had their Gods and their sacrifices and all the rest, but their faith was far more elastic than that of the Abrahamic period. In many ways, the Romans were pantheistic.

I'm giving the omen system a chance, in the hope that it isn't earnestly the invocation of magic, but I'm deeply disappointed to see province and state religions and conversions playing such a large role again. This era is quite unlike those Paradox has covered in the past.

 

[HolisticGod]

2763,

And understood by few.

Theology is as esoteric as philosophy. Many people "practice" Christianity without the slightest notion of who Esther was or what transubstantiation means. Likewise, many people accept the theory of evolution by natural selection, one of the great tenets of natural philosophy, without knowing who Mendel was or what natural selection actually means. That the vast majority do not understand a subject does not mean they're uninfluenced by it.

It was the same among the ancients. Sure, more of us are literate now, but that is by no means convincing evidence that we read any more than they did. Plato, Epicurus, Democritus, above all Aristotle had a profound affect on a long procession of Greek, Hellenistic and Roman rulers, meaning they had a profound affect on the societies they ruled, whether or not the people in those societies were aware of it. In the same way, few were aware of Pythagoras but their lives were no less his doing for their ignorance.

And in the Middle Ages, surely literacy and philosophizing were less common than in the classical period and yet Aristotle had as profound an impact on Europe in the 14th through the 18th centuries as any King or prelate of the day.

 

[JASGripen]

I don't see philosophers and rulers being sufficient to reflect the philosophy of the society. It would take Hobbes Leviathan to an absurdly literary dimension. I can see an actor achieving structural changes, but not the actor in himself being sufficient for change by existence in the position. He needs to change something too, not just “be there”.

I could see a ruler with some philosophical trait as a sufficient prerequisite (not a necessary one) in order to achieve certain changes in society which would have philosophical connotations. But then again I would like to see these philosophical traits as game terms which reflect the historical society, rather than historical philosophical labels which perhaps not encompass all that you want and need in and for this game.

 

[lucaluca]

2763,

And understood by few.

Theology is as esoteric as philosophy. Many people "practice" Christianity without the slightest notion of who Esther was or what transubstantiation means. Likewise, many people accept the theory of evolution by natural selection, one of the great tenets of natural philosophy, without knowing who Mendel was or what natural selection actually means. That the vast majority do not understand a subject does not mean they're uninfluenced by it.

It was the same among the ancients. Sure, more of us are literate now, but that is by no means convincing evidence that we read any more than they did. Plato, Epicurus, Democritus, above all Aristotle had a profound affect on a long procession of Greek, Hellenistic and Roman rulers, meaning they had a profound affect on the societies they ruled, whether or not the people in those societies were aware of it. In the same way, few were aware of Pythagoras but their lives were no less his doing for their ignorance.

And in the Middle Ages, surely literacy and philosophizing were less common than in the classical period and yet Aristotle had as profound an impact on Europe in the 14th through the 18th centuries as any King or prelate of the day.

In the Middle Age philosophy was religion, I mean the greatest philospher was
Tommaso D'Aquino (whatever his name in English).
In the Hellenistic era they were totally separated, or better philosophers (some, like Plato) thought of religion as a metaphor of philosophy.
And yes most of the rulers of the time were openly following a philosophical school, so they tried to model their society on that basis. During the time of the triumvirates Rome was deeply moved by those philosophical views, with personalities like Cicero, Lucretius, Caesar who all followed their philosophical agenda. The main reason was that politics were mainly modeled on philosophy at that time.

 

[HolisticGod]

lucaluca,

I have to disagree. Philosophy and religion were not totally separated in the Hellenistic era. It's just that the two major Hellenistic/Roman schools were atheistic (Epicureanism) and pantheistic (Stoicism) respectively. By the same token, religion in the Middle Ages was not philosophy. The Christian Church had simply declared philosophy heresy, and the philosophically minded, like Aquinas or Thomas More or Erasmus, became theologians.

 

[niceta]

HolisticGod

I disagree with you about the presence of "true" philosophers in pre empire Rome. The scipions werent philosophers and their legacy was nothin. Their political role endure thru the centuries and nothin' else... Lucretius and others havent so much influence...
The retors and politicians in Republic Rome were full knowledge about Plato and others Philosophers but their way of life was totally different...

 

[HolisticGod]

Niceta,

If a philosopher has to sit quietly in a grove all day, then no, Cicero, Cato, et al, were not philosophers. This ignores their contribution to Roman thought, however, and particularly Cicero's to subsequent political and legal theory.

Also, bear in mind that most of the work of Roman antiquity is lost. What we have of many of the country's great thinkers is barely a fragment, if that.

 

[unmerged(80821)]

2763,

And understood by few.

Theology is as esoteric as philosophy. Many people "practice" Christianity without the slightest notion of who Esther was or what transubstantiation means. Likewise, many people accept the theory of evolution by natural selection, one of the great tenets of natural philosophy, without knowing who Mendel was or what natural selection actually means. That the vast majority do not understand a subject does not mean they're uninfluenced by it.

It was the same among the ancients. Sure, more of us are literate now, but that is by no means convincing evidence that we read any more than they did. Plato, Epicurus, Democritus, above all Aristotle had a profound affect on a long procession of Greek, Hellenistic and Roman rulers, meaning they had a profound affect on the societies they ruled, whether or not the people in those societies were aware of it. In the same way, few were aware of Pythagoras but their lives were no less his doing for their ignorance.

And in the Middle Ages, surely literacy and philosophizing were less common than in the classical period and yet Aristotle had as profound an impact on Europe in the 14th through the 18th centuries as any King or prelate of the day.

What I meant by understood by few was that they may have believed something, like hedonism, or stoicism, but they would not go around saying "I'm a Hedonist in my philosophical belief" or even know who Aristippus of Cyrene (No i did not use wikipedia to find this guy ) is or even know what philosophy is. what I meant is only a few people would be called philosophers and not everybody would know of them, while everybody would know who Aphrodite is and what she symbolizes, so it is more realistic that the philosophies only affect characters as traits and let the omens (which would have a great affect on the masses through superstition like you said) have these funky funny powers in the game.

Also, people in this time period were much less nationalist (excluding the more civilized, militaristic states, such as Rome and Carthage) especially the tribes, so the philosophy that the rulers held would have less of an influence than religion and superstition would, so giving philosophy the upper hand in this game would be wrong.

 

[lucaluca]

HolisticGod

I disagree with you about the presence of "true" philosophers in pre empire Rome. The scipions werent philosophers and their legacy was nothin. Their political role endure thru the centuries and nothin' else... Lucretius and others havent so much influence...
The retors and politicians in Republic Rome were full knowledge about Plato and others Philosophers but their way of life was totally different...

Cato and Cicero didn't have much influence? How do you know how was their way of life? Of course they weren't hermit or something, but can you really say that Cato didn't follow up to his stoic principles???

The triumvirate era is just about a fight of philosophies with Peripateticism/Epicureanism having the upper end.