Disputatio:Iainismus

Disputatio vetus hic mota

Cf. Infinitas#Genni. Perhaps we should put this under the classically attested Genni "Jains" instead of coining Gennismus. Afterall, en doesn't distinguish between the two either. --Iustinus 07:20, 22 Martii 2008 (UTC)

It would be a start. There is a useful distinction to be made between a religious community (and its history) and its system of beliefs (and the history of that). But it doesn't have to be made at the beginning. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:55, 22 Martii 2008 (UTC)

Absolutely, but so far as I can tell en doesn't have separate articles for the two concepts in this case (unless you count their en:list of Jains article), so it's ridiculous to think we ever will. Unless, say, we manage to get a major contributor of the Jaina persuasion. --Iustinus 17:41, 22 Martii 2008 (UTC)

The ism is different from the adherents, and I would think the philosophy would have priority over the adherents.--Rafaelgarcia 01:38, 21 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)

Disputatio novior

Disputatio:Infinitas#Jaina. Again, Gennus may seem like an obscure word, but it is at least attested. --Iustinus (disputatio) 19:37, 6 Augusti 2012 (UTC)

Possumus igitur sine neologismo "Religio Gennorum" scribere. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:55, 29 Decembris 2012 (UTC)

Bene dicis, sive per me melius "Gennorum religio" ut discretivum verbum generali praeponatur. Num Ioscius adhuc moratur utrum Gennismus sit "religio" an "philosophia"? --Iustinus (disputatio) 23:20, 29 Decembris 2012 (UTC)

Religio est modo philosophia satis cum pecunia. ;] -- Ioscius ^∞ 16:21, 30 Decembris 2012 (UTC)

Ut sollemnius respondeam, Gennismus mihi videtur religione potius philosophia, non autem video cui bono sit inquisitio. Si Gennistae ipsi eam sicut religionem habent, annuo eorum coeptis. -- Ioscius ^∞ 16:27, 30 Decembris 2012 (UTC)

Ab altera parte... ;) --Iustinus (disputatio) 22:09, 30 Decembris 2012 (UTC)