Talk:Religio

I find the sentence "Religio among the Romans was not based on 'faith', but on knowledge, including and especially correct practice", curious and more than a bit oxymoronic in that I understand, epistemologically, virtually all knowledge and all practice -- except for mere recognition of phenomenological consciousness -- to be predicated, at least implicitly, on faith. Thoughts on that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blyden (talk • contribs) 00:27, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

---The Romans did not share your theory of knowledge. Knowledge was seen as something firmly based, not resting on belief or faith.Burressd (talk) 08:20, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Re-, not res?
Republic comes from res publica, which I understand to mean "thing of the public" or "matter for the public to decide". I suggest that religion is maybe from something like res legio which might mean "thing of the law" or "matter for the law to decide". (I'm not learned in Latin.)

I acknowledge that this is apparently not attested in the article, but the article itself acknowledges that neither is re- as "anew". D. F. Schmidt (talk) 15:58, 23 December 2017 (UTC) D. F. Schmidt (talk) 15:58, 23 December 2017 (UTC)