Capitalism - the Ultimate Religion

[TheDarkestOfAngels]

I think capitalism has affected all human relations.

...and... what? I know you think that but so what? Superman affected lots of people around the world - even more than christianity and has a powerful following of fans but Superman fandom is not a religion any more than anything else that's popular is a religion.
Also... I get that you want to sound educated, but I might recommend actually forming your own opinions and using quotes and explaining them only to help your main point. If I wanted to debate Karl Marx, I'd resurrect him from the dead and discuss the political situation with him.

I would suggest that this profound disagreement between us on very deep level is the real reason you are taking issue with my description of capitalism as a religion, your other argument which involves dictionaries is just an attempt to insulate your position from my unashamedly subjectively-arrived at assertions by invoking the dictionary as an iconic oracle of supposed objectivity, which of course it isn't. It's just a guide to the popular usage of the day.

Ugh... No no no no no no NO.
This isn't about me using the dictionary to beat my chest and say that I'm the most objective man at the table. This is you trying to define something as a religion when a religion is defined as a different kind of noun. Even you provided the definition in this post to make some attempt to argue otherwise but this entire arguement boils down to you misidentifying one noun as another noun using somewhat convulted logic.

Even if the dictionary were an oracle of objectivity, which I categorically deny it is, the way you've copied and pasted from dictionary.com means that unfortunately you've lost that web page's italics and therefore you have, I suspect inadvertently, though rather conveniently for you, implied that what dictionary.com cites as possible examples are actual definitions! Here's what dictionary.com actually says.

Wonderful. Now you're accusing me of using very subjective judgement because I told you that your definition of what a religion is is wrong and I supposedly "conveniently" left things out of my copy-paste of dictionary.com's definition.

Now with the dictionary quoted correctly, and looking more like the original it's easier to go through it and see how capitalism fits. From what I can see, capitalism, being (in my and Marx's opinion) a system that revolutionises the whole relations of society, ticks the boxes of definitions number 2, 3, 5 (by reference to 2 and 3), and 6. For me it ticks all these boxes because for capitalists (and there are many), capitalism is has an ideological basis and is not just an accidental economic system. Indeed there are strong arguments for capitalism to tick the box of definition number 1 as well since many capitalist supporters would say that capitalism is indeed a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature and purpose of the universe. Yes, really - there are such people around!

How conventient. Let me know when you actually have any of these arguements because thus far you've provided none.
In other words - if you think it fits examples 2 - everything else, how about providing an arguement for why this is the case so I can simply tell you that since capitalism isn't a set of beliefs it can't fit any of them. It's a system where every part of it is well defined - it has to be well defined because you can't base a society off it if it wasn't. If a part is less-than-optimally defined, then that's why all societies have a group of people specifically devoted to defining a lacking aspect of it.
So say that because you may or may not fully understand the system and you have confidence that it can work doesn't make it a belief - otherwise I could potentially argue that my computer is a religion because I believe in the owner's manual and technical specifications of how the computer works and operates.
This is what makes social engineering, economics, and government more of a science and not at all like a religion.
And no, telling me that you can argue that or that it does fit x and y and z aspects of a definition isn't an arguement nor is it any kind of point.
Just becuase you understood the plot to the South Park episode called "Margaritamaker" (or whatever that episode was called/spelled as) as a documentary doesn't mean it's generally true now or ever.

Of course, my own arguments do not depend on simply the content of dictionaries.

Then you may as well be arguing that Capitalism is an "apple." Things are defined in a way for a reason and just because languages are a living thing doesn't mean you can redefine things at will and have it be based on fact.

Luckily we don't live in that particular universe.

Yes... living at a time where space travel, time travel, green women, earth is a utopia where war, disease, and poverty were all eliminated, and hyper-deadly diseases can be cured over the course of a single star trek story arc must be a real hell to live in.

In reality dictionaries can't dictate meanings to us, they can only report approximations to the most popular usage. If dictionaries were the real source of definitions, neologisms would never arise. Dictionaries can only ever be a guide to popular usage. The real definitions of words are to be found in every individual's human experience, beliefs, senses, ideas, emotions and a load of other things. This is why it takes effort for people to understand each other, and they do not always succeed, let alone agree.

That doesn't mean that the dictionary is wrong and that doesn't make you correct by erroneously twisting the usage of one noun to mean the same thing as another noun. In any case, you stated that capitalism is a religion and thus far you've failed to make any arguement and what arguements you have made are flimsy at best.
Just because you're miffed that dictionary dare to properly define words and not compensate for every single usage as it occurs doesn't make them wrong. You've entered a purely semantic arguement based on your own "truthiness" (which, thanks to a hero of mine, has been a word since his hit show has arisen within the past decade) and not the facts to which an arguement to be properly based.
... In other words, just because you feel like capitalism is a religion doesn't mean it actually is one.
There is a lot that can be said in how some people treat political issues and private enterprises like a religion but you've outright attempted to state that a system of trade within a civilization is the same thing as a religion, which is easily not the case. I'm not interested in your tirade against fascist dictionaries and their definitions of "words" just because you want to attach one to the other.

To round off, it is not because capitalism is merely "important" in people's lives that I define it as a religion, it is because it is revolutionary in every aspect of their lives. I do not rely on dictionary definitions to make my mind up what words mean because I think the way words are used is vastly more personal than that, however as it happens, I can easily make capitalism fit the dictionary definitions you have cited. Just because two dictionary definitions look different does not mean that they do not overlap or merge in meaning. In any event a concept like capitalism cannot be adequately defined by a dictionary which can only provide a rough guide to popular usage, not legislate against new usages. That's why people write books about capitalism - at least in part, to define it better. Same with religion.

So you decided to tell me that 'my arguements allow me to fit capitalism to now define it in every way as a religion' but decide to then go on a tirade about a completely different arguement on how you're above dictionaries.
Yes, people write books on both religion and capitalism. People also write books on sesame street, space travel, sadism and masochism sexual techniques, and dracula - sometimes all in the same book. That doesn't make any of those a religion. You may as well tell me that communism is an apple because both are readily identified with the color red.