The issue of whether or not to capitalize the word "paganism" is a subject of debate among writers, editors, and scholars. Some argue that paganism should be capitalized because it is the name of a specific religious and spiritual tradition. Others suggest that it should be lowercase to reflect the fact that it is a generic term that refers to a variety of different belief systems. Proponents of capitalizing "paganism" argue that it is a distinct religious tradition that deserves the same level of recognition and respect as other major religions such as Christianity or Islam. They argue that capitalizing the word helps to acknowledge its legitimacy as a valid spiritual path and helps to distinguish it from other uses of the term, such as when referring to pre-Christian religions or non-monotheistic beliefs. On the other hand, those who advocate for lowercase "paganism" argue that the term is a generic descriptor that encompasses a broad range of practices and beliefs.
On the other hand, writers in the UK tend to lowercase “pagan.” Others try to split the difference, using “pagan” for the ancients and “Pagan” for practitioners of post-1900 Pagan traditions, i.e. “Neo-Pagans.” [1] And that term, popular in the 1970s–80s, is more and more supplanted by “contemporary Pagan” or “modern Pagan.”
This may leave people with the impression that there is a standard rule in English that for purposes of capitalization we should treat the deities of some religions in one way and the deities of other religions in a different way. For example, the Chicago Manual of Style, 15e, says that Astarte, Freyja, and Mithra deserve capitalization simply because they re proper nouns, pronouns referring to the Christian God and Jesus are not, and there is no chauvinistic distinction between religions as you suggest.
On the other hand, those who advocate for lowercase "paganism" argue that the term is a generic descriptor that encompasses a broad range of practices and beliefs. They suggest that failing to capitalize the word helps to emphasize its inclusive nature and prevent the assumption that it refers to a specific and homogenous belief system. Ultimately, the decision to capitalize "paganism" is a stylistic choice that depends on the context and personal preference of the writer.
Are pronouns for non-universal divines (such as "Zeus") capitalized?
When following the formal English rule of Reverential Capitals, any reference to God Almighty is capitalized, as are equivalent non-Christian entities such as "Allah" or the neo-pagan "Goddess" (and various similar entities from fiction, like the Creator from Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time.) Does the rule extend as well to polytheistic deities of infinite character? If discussing a variation of Greek gods where each deity has infinite and omnipresent control over their particular sphere of influence, would pronouns be capitalized when they wouldn't otherwise be?
Zeus controls lightning. Do not anger Him.
Zeus controls lightning. Do not anger him.(Assume, of course, that reverential capitals are otherwise used, as in "Jesus and His apostles.")
- capitalization
- personal-pronouns
I'd suppose the reverence is to the entity, not to its proper name. (meta: I'd also think there are avoidable adjectives in the question.)
Dec 7, 2013 at 7:42 I adjusted the examples for clarity's sake. Dec 7, 2013 at 7:56 Related english.stackexchange.com/questions/3139/… Feb 23, 2014 at 1:17Some style guides, such as the Chicago Manual of Style, recommend capitalizing the word when referring to the specific religious tradition, while lowercase is used when referring to the broader category of belief systems. Overall, it is important to be consistent in the usage of capitalization to avoid confusion and to respect the beliefs and practices of those who identify as pagans..
Reviews for "Rediscovering the Impact of Capitalization on Pagan Beliefs"
- Jennifer - 2 out of 5 stars - In my opinion, "Does paganism need to be capitalized" is a wasted effort. The author fails to present a compelling argument for their case and instead spends most of the book delving into irrelevant tangents. The writing style is also convoluted and difficult to follow, making it hard to grasp the main points the author is trying to convey. Overall, I was disappointed with this book and would not recommend it to anyone looking for a clear and concise discussion on the topic at hand.
- David - 1 out of 5 stars - I found "Does paganism need to be capitalized" to be a complete waste of time. The author's arguments lack coherence and are filled with logical fallacies. Additionally, the book is poorly edited, with numerous grammatical errors that further detract from its credibility. I was hoping for an insightful exploration of the topic, but instead, I was left feeling frustrated and unsatisfied. Save your money and look elsewhere for a more thoughtful treatment of this subject.
- Emily - 2 out of 5 stars - I was initially intrigued by the title of "Does paganism need to be capitalized," but unfortunately, the book did not live up to my expectations. The author's writing is overly academic and feels disconnected from reality. I was hoping for a more accessible and engaging approach, but instead, I found myself struggling to stay interested. The lack of concrete examples and real-world applications made it difficult to relate to the arguments presented. Overall, I was left feeling underwhelmed and would not recommend this book to others.
- Mark - 3 out of 5 stars - "Does paganism need to be capitalized" raises some interesting points, but ultimately fails to provide a comprehensive analysis. The author touches on various aspects of the debate but fails to delve deeply enough into any of them. I found myself wanting more evidence and examples to support the author's claims. While it is an adequate starting point for those new to the topic, the book falls short for anyone seeking a more in-depth exploration of the subject.