“The Great Chain of Being” that the author mentions is an idea that dates back to Aristotle and Plato, but it developed into the concept described in the article under medieval Christianity, before the Catholic/Protestant split.
I agree the article presents it a bit weirdly, like a fact of existence. But I can see how it makes sense in a discussion of taboo, since as the article points out, taboos applied differently at different “levels” of that chain.
If the author had included a sentence or two to contextualize it, it might have helped - but he probably expects that the audience already knows about it, and (one hopes) wouldn’t take it literally. But it’s difficult to tell for sure.
Comments
“The Great Chain of Being” that the author mentions is an idea that dates back to Aristotle and Plato, but it developed into the concept described in the article under medieval Christianity, before the Catholic/Protestant split.
I agree the article presents it a bit weirdly, like a fact of existence. But I can see how it makes sense in a discussion of taboo, since as the article points out, taboos applied differently at different “levels” of that chain.
If the author had included a sentence or two to contextualize it, it might have helped - but he probably expects that the audience already knows about it, and (one hopes) wouldn’t take it literally. But it’s difficult to tell for sure.