I am checking on a working title for a paper I am writing on the similarities between Christianity and Mithraism, with an emphasis on the errors of causality in the historiography. I wanted to replace "hoc" with the proper nouns, however. Is my order correct below so as to say "Christianity is the way it is because of Mirthraism"? I am not sure if I have the proper order...
"post Christianitas ergo propter mithrae"
Thanks!
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 2
- Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2016 3:09 am
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 564
- Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 4:34 pm
Re: Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Post and propter both take accusative (hoc is neutre singular accusative). But are you sure what you suggest makes logically sense? “After Christianity, therefore because of Mithra”?? Maybe rather “after Mithra, therefore because of Mithra”?
When the logic is clear, the question will be what the word Mithraism would be in Latin. It may not even be attested. Can we use Mithra as such, i.e. in fact refer to the god instead of the religion itself as I have done above, or would this be a no-no? (That would be easiest.) If it won’t do, then we may have to try to derive it ourselves. One possibility would be Mithriacitas (from attested Mithriacus < Μιθριακός), though it seems to be quite an infelicitous word to me.
Do you know how to form the pertinent accusative(s) yourself? (They’re not right in your message.)
When the logic is clear, the question will be what the word Mithraism would be in Latin. It may not even be attested. Can we use Mithra as such, i.e. in fact refer to the god instead of the religion itself as I have done above, or would this be a no-no? (That would be easiest.) If it won’t do, then we may have to try to derive it ourselves. One possibility would be Mithriacitas (from attested Mithriacus < Μιθριακός), though it seems to be quite an infelicitous word to me.
Do you know how to form the pertinent accusative(s) yourself? (They’re not right in your message.)
- Anthony Appleyard
- Textkit Member
- Posts: 173
- Joined: Mon May 23, 2011 12:43 pm
Re: Post hoc ergo propter hoc
"Post hoc ergo propter hoc" means "after therefore because of", and means a common logical fallacy; one old example is a story about a rooster who thought that his crowing made the sun rise.
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 2
- Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2016 3:09 am
Re: Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Right, so, following that example, where would the sunrise and the crowing land in the original statement?
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 25
- Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 2:30 pm
Re: Post hoc ergo propter hoc
If you wanted to say "the sun rose after the crowing therefore because of the crowing" I think it would be
Sol ortus est post cantum ergo propter cantum.
I assumed crowing = cantus. My Latin isn't perfect so correct if wrong.
Sol ortus est post cantum ergo propter cantum.
I assumed crowing = cantus. My Latin isn't perfect so correct if wrong.