Hi all,

I'd like very much to see civs grouped around Descola's four ontologies. I think it's a neat and sound approach to tackle religions and cultures that hasn't AFAIK been used in games so far. Also what is very interesting is that no culture is of purely one ontology: there's a dominant one and other minor ones that influence or change it more or less over time, which reminds me of the way Humankind may work through eras.

Ontology is the way people consider their relationship with other beings (animate or inanimate). It affects religions, science, culture, language, society structure and organisation, etc. Because of that, ontologies are an effective way of linking technology, culture, religion, and even (why not?) diplomacy.

Descola's four ontologies are classified according to a criteria of interiority (= all principles related to ethics, feelings, social connection) and a criteria on exteriority (= all principles related to the physical world). Here they are:

• Animism = same interiority, different exteriority. Both humans and non-humans have souls, and share the same way of thinking, but behave separately. Example: Shamanist cultures.
• Naturalism = different interiority, same exteriority. Only humans have souls but both humans and non-humans physically function based on the same physical principles. It is opposite to Animism. Example: Western cultures.
• Totemism = same interiority, same exteriority. Humans (each separately or as groups) have an animal, plant, river, mountain, etc. counterpart, and they behave, feel and/or think in continuity with one another. Example: Indigenous Australian culture.
• Analogism = different interiority, different exteriority. The world is made up of different entities that influence each others even though their agenda and working mechanisms are their own. It is opposite to Totemism. Example: Astrology.

One can imagine different mechanisms around ontologies in-game.

For example: Ontologies would be society traits that govern religion, tech, production, culture, diplomacy, etc.. That would make different starting civs with very varied gameplays, similar to what exists in Endless Legend / Endless Space races. Then when changing eras, each civ could partially integrate an ontology that shares a common trait, i.e. an animist civ could evolve toward totemist civs (same approach to interiority) or analogist civs (same approach to exteriority) of the next era, gaining some totemist or analogist traits (be they techs / production / cultural / diplomatic bonuses) at the price of loosing some animist traits, but could not evolve directly toward a naturalist civ (its complete ontological opposite).