Talk:Parallelomania

Religion Low‑importance

	Religion portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Skepticism Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Parallelophobia?[edit]

Is this a word? A google search suggests not. All that stuff in the article seems to have been invented by some parallelomaniac. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C6:62A9:A01:20B4:6F72:643C:EC55 (talk) 19:30, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In the absence of response, I've started to remove the crap. "Parallelophobia" here is purely an attempt to promote Parallelomania. 2A00:23C5:C153:6F01:BB2D:BA44:BFFA:32F7 (talk) 18:07, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Promote what now? I hope you know that just because some academic coined a term for something doesn't make it real. I am an academic and I now coin the term Editarianism to refer to people who think that something is gospel just because there's a Wikipedia article on it. You're not promoting editarianism, are you? 98.156.185.48 (talk) 18:50, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Compliments[edit]

Nice article. There must be theories which describe this phenomenon psychologically. See (as an association) Arthur L. Dirks (1998), Critical Thinking and Analogical Thinking: A Model and Men Have Multiple Brains. Joshua Jonathan (talk) 12:59, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. But adding those amounts to speculation per WP:OR. In the comparative religion field, this is a well known item, but those who use it are not neuro psychologists, but religious scholars. So I am not sure how one makes the psycho-link without speculation. In fact, it would be quite ironic to do parallelomania regarding the nature of parallelomania ... History2007 (talk) 13:07, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're right. Joshua Jonathan (talk) 08:11, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, if there be such a thing as "Parallelomania", there also exists its opposite. What religon or tradition would want to admit this? Thanks wiki for being an outlet only for the "scolars". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.32.41.19 (talk) 15:03, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What would be the opposite of parallelomania exactly? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.69.171.63 (talk) 10:56, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

New Age[edit]

Hanegraaf ("New Age Religion and Western Culture", 1996, p.97) makes an interesting distinction between "New Age sensu stricto" and "New Age Sensu lato". "New Age sensu stricto"(in a strict sense) originated in the 1950's as a group of people who expected a radical change of culture. "New Age Sensu lato" (in a wide sense) emerged in the later 1970's, "when increasing numbers of people [...] began to perceive a broad similarity between a wide variety of "alternative ideas" and pursuits, and started to think of them as part of one "movement"".^[1] Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 05:37, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Correspondences[edit]

I knew that Parallelomania fits into a bigger theme: Correspondence (theology). Greetings, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 11:12, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bias comment[edit]

Mostly the sources seem to be Christian, not historical. In places it was used it was to argue against the scholarly view to advance religion over history. To declare something as parallelism is to take a side. We need some wording to that effect or else it has a POV. DreamGuy (talk) 15:05, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to me to be biased to claim that Christians cannot be historian. Also it's nonsensical to say "To declare something as parallelism is to take a side.". Parallelomenia occurs when people take superficial similarities and attribute some sort of significant connection between them ignoring historical data. Parallelomania occurs in many areas. Egyptomania (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptomania) is an example.

This topic also relates to differences in perception by Kantians vs. Hegelians, where Kantians tend to see less parallels or none at all, but Hegelians see more parallels and patterns. e.g. a Kantian would accuse a Hegelians of parallelomania.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 20:44, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've added information about the inverse phenomenon of parallelophobia, and how scholars have warned against both. Accordingly, I've renamed the article to include both terms in the title. This reasonably establishes neutrality, and I've removed the NPOV template. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 15:53, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

^ Hanegraaff 1996, p. 97.

[FOOTNOTEHanegraaff199697-1] Hanegraaff 1996, p. 97.

[1]