Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hermetism

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 22:06, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hermetism

non-encyclopedic POV split of Hermeticism. Hermeticism is the accepted nomenclature. Hermetism is occult jargon from the works of Manly P. Hall. Really, Atlantean *cough* —Hanuman Das 01:09, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per my nom. —Hanuman Das 01:09, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. This is part of a blitzkrieg attack Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Blitzkrieg_Tactics_to_push_POV. Hermetism was an article before Hall's citaitons ever made it in, it is used to describe the movement prior to it's renaissance ressurection, which I can cite. False allegations.KV(Talk) 01:30, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
  • TINC --Xrblsnggt 03:23, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment. WP:V requires "that they must refer only to facts, assertions, theories, ideas, claims, opinions, and arguments that have already been published by reputable publishers." This book is published by "H.S. Crocker Company", not self-published, lauded as a classic, publisher site is at http://www.hscrocker.com/. Read up on the issue that I have cited to show what is going on with this. Rather than discuss this, there are three editors attempting to throw so many things at articles that I am the primary contributor of that discussion on my part is impossible.KV(Talk) 01:30, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
      • Further Comment. Hermetism and Hermeticism refer to two different eras. The original followers were called Hermetists, following Hermetism, the philosophy or religion or movement of Hermes. After the Corpus Hermeticum was rediscovered by the West in the 15th century, the new followers were called Hermeticists, because they followed not directly the teachings of Hermes, but of what was Hermetic. Hermetism is the precursor to Hermeticism, according to scholars. People call this junk history, but whereas I have added verifiable citations from several sources, the attackers are attempting to violate WP:NPOV and actually performing OR by deciding that they know off hand more about the subject, and lacking citations, they attack citations from reputable sources!KV(Talk) 13:17, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. user:999 had proded this as OR. I prod2'ed it. I've given enough information on the articles talk page to conclude that its OR, and KV realzed it, and wished to fix it. Instead, he caused a revert war. I'd like to ask that a careful review of the talk page be made before deciding. SynergeticMaggot 01:56, 28 July 2006 (UTC) Wrong article, I was thinking about Hermeticism and other thought systems which is going to be up for AfD soon. So delete per Zeusnoos's talking points. SynergeticMaggot 02:19, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. This is an odd article. Who coined the word "Hermetism" instead of Hermeticism? The writer of Kybalion? The sources are not scholarly. hscrocker is not an academic publisher (compare with Brill and university presses). Manly P. Hall is an important and interesting figure in the history of occultism in the twentieth century, but his work is not referenced as authoritative by scholars. Do a search in a university library journal and book database on ancient Hermetic scholarship - you will find names like Walter Scott, Festiguiere, and Garth Fowden instead. Zeusnoos 02:17, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Junk history. --Xrblsnggt 03:28, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete: Philosophical equivalent of errorspace, I guess...Philsophosquatting? Original research is the deletion criterion. Although there are references, they're not cred(it)ible. Geogre 04:18, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. `'mikka (t) 05:41, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as per the comments above. Philosophosquatting...there's too much of that on Wikipedia. Byrgenwulf 07:15, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Hall was certainly inventive, but is not a reliable source for actual documentable history. Ekajati 14:03, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per Xrblsnggt, "junk history" sums it up perfectly. -999 (Talk) 14:47, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
• Comment is this a WP:POVFORK? I'm not sure I understand enough of this article (or it's history with sister articles). My concern is that this seems to qualify under WP:POVFORK. Can anyone elucidate? Scorpiondollprincess 15:13, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Response Let's look at just the first two sentences. "Hermetism was the religion of the philosophical elite of Ancient Egypt. In the ancient days, every pagan nation (i.e. those of the classical pantheons: Greece, Egypt, Mesopotamia, Nordic, Druidic, etc) had two religions." We have two outrageous claims there, neither of which are referenced, nor do they accord with generally accepted knowledge or scholarly understanding of historical facts. If not a pure WP:POVFORK, it seems to simply be an outlet for an "alternative" understanding of Hermeticism based on the work of an oft-read but low "scholarly integrity" author: Hall seems to be after the ultimate "synthesis" of all "mystery teachings".

Personally, I think hermeticism is bunk in its entirety (after all, it was comprehensively and conclusively debunked by Casaubon during the Renaissance). However, I accept that it is an important part of Western tradition and hence merits a neutral article. The junk historical findings of a Diabolical, on the other hand, don't merit an entire, originally researched article which puts his slanted viewpoint across as fact.

That's just my personal, skeptically slanted reading of it, of course. But I hope it at least answered your question! Byrgenwulf 15:47, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually Causabon's debunking has been debunked in the 1940's, and that only has to do with the age of the Corpus Hermeticum. And to reply to the first user, no Hermetism refers to the precursor of Hermeticism, and it is well documented. I have done more research and this article does need to be tended to, sure, but it needs to be tended to, not deleted. Hermetism is documented outside of Manly P. Hall, and I have done extensive research and there are other viewpoints which I have now found verification of and can add in. The proposor of this AfD decided not to find that same evidence, but rather remove what was already there in order to support his POV.KV(Talk) 17:39, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

No, Casaubon's research was not "debunked"; it was criticised, but as far as I can make out, the criticism were not valid. Moreover, if the Corpus Hermeticum was made up in the early centuries AD, then it cannot reflect the teachings of some ancient figure.

Casaubon notwithstanding, there is absolutely no evidence that I am aware of with regards to there being "dual" religions in the Nordic tradition; admittedly I am an amateur when it comes to Germanic philology, though. Also, the Egyptian pantheon (and Hell, the Egyptian theology)does not fit into the same group as the Indo-European ones. That's a simple historical fact.

Those are just a few of the concerns to do with the first two sentences. I could carry on about the whole article, but have no desire to do so. The bottom line is that there is no reason for it to stay, unless some pretty convincing, scholarly (read: reputable, serious) evidence comes up that says that Hermetism is different to Hermeticism. Byrgenwulf 18:00, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Causabon had his theory based upon the fact that the Greek text would date back to the 1st or 2nd century, the Greek used. However, in the Nag Hammadi find, an older version of one of the books of the Corpus Hermeticum was found, written in Coptic, showing that the idea that the book had to originate in Greek even was flawed. It's similar to looking up the New King James Version of the Bible and decide that Genesis was written about 1950. The removal of this article is nothing more than a POV push.KV(Talk) 11:56, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

The content of the Coptic Hermetic text bares similarity in form (question/answer) but not in content. The material in the Greek Hermetica contains some Middle Platonic and Stoic elements. The fact that the Coptic is not pre-Hellenistic means there is little way of determining that this is indigenous pre-Hellenistic Egyptian. It may have been an Egyptian's competitive attempt to take back Thoth from the Greeks. See my comments below. Who invented the word "Hermetism" by the way? Zeusnoos 13:22, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

• • Response. Thats odd KV. If Hermeticism sprang from Hermetism, then shouldnt the definition say this? It merely says its a system based on and the adherence to things Hermetic. Its my understanding that if you were correct, then the definition would say origins of Hermeticism or something of a simular wording. Also note that KV is trying to get this Afd blocked here: [1]SynergeticMaggot 17:47, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
    • Response. Miriam Webster isn't the best source on words that are rarely used and understood. It took me 3 months of research before I saw a book that made that clear. At that point I began editting Hermetism.KV(Talk) 17:57, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
      • Comment. A definition is not the best source no, but neither is Manly P. Hall either. SynergeticMaggot 17:59, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
        • I have more sources now that I could add, if I had the actual opportunity to work with people one article at a time. But Hall did do extensive research. KV(Talk) 18:00, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
          • Comment It doesn't matter if Hall did extensive research. I have read Hall's work which generally receives little or no attention from scholars of antiquity and renaissance studies. He makes unsubstantiated connections and generalizations about antiquity. Most scholars up into the 1980's thought that Hermeticism was a Late Hellenistic (Greek and not indigenous Egyptian) that saw its revival with Ficino in the Renaissance. Garth Fowden, however, in the Egyptian Hermes, has shown that there are two types of Hermeticism that he defined as technical and philosophical, the philosophical forming a little bit later around the second century CE. The technical Hermetica includes alchemy, some bare-bones astrology (Sun/Moon stuff) and magic, and dates as early as the third or second century BCE. Works were attributed to the fictional character/god Thrice-great Hermes to give them some weight and respectability. This was a common practice. Fowden's research has contributed to changing the scope and antiquity of Hermeticism by making such distinctions and by covering far more material than the Corpus (which was the late philosophical Hermetica). Today, the question scholars debate is whether or not there is some indigenous non-Greek Egyptian Hermetic tradition. The recent research on Demotic texts shows that there is in fact another thread that may be indigenous, but the content has very few connections to the Greek philsophical Hermetica. What I mean by indigenous is that it is Egyptian, but Egypt was Hellenistic during the time these texts were written, so it can't escape syncreticism. Please see http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/bmcr/2006/2006-05-19.html for an example of the type of scholarship that should be used for these articles. This is the real Book of Thoth and not some Crowleyque modern concoction. Zeusnoos 19:01, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:POVFORK. Thanks for the comments, btw! It seems there's potentially a problem with Reliable Sources here as well. Article also seems to skirt WP:OR and WP:NPOV. But the main problem is WP:POVFORK. Wikipedia already has an article on Hermeticism (very well-souced, in fact). This article just presents an alternative spin on Hermeticism. Delete. Scorpiondollprincess 16:42, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
• Redirect to Hermeticism as a likely spelling mistake. Jkelly 18:07, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
• delete and redirect per Jkelly Bucketsofg✐ 23:46, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.