Tables

Table PS1 - Classes of Person

The following is largely derived from Dewey 21 (see 248.8 of the “official” schedule). Apply it wherever “notation from Table PS1” is referred to in the schedule proper – when works for, or about, particular kinds of person are classed. In theory at least it is possible to use the standard Dewey Table 7 instead (but see notes to use of tables on previous page).

In line with Table 7 - class persons falling into more than one category in the category mentioned last in the table – e.g. adolescent mothers at –431 rather than –33; children in holy orders in –94 rather than –2.

(-2 to -5 Persons classed by chronological age/sex and sexuality/marital status)

-2 Children

-24 Up to the age of 11

-25 Between the ages of 11 and 15 (early adolescence)

Class adolescents in general in –3.

-3 Adolescents, youth, university students

-32 Male adolescents

-33 Female adolescents

-34 Young tertiary students

-4 Adults

-42 Men

-421 Fathers

-425 Husbands

-43 Women

-431 Mothers

-435 Wives

-44 Couples, families

For husbands, wives use –425, -435

-45 Parents

For fathers, mothers, use –421, -431

-451 Sole parents

-46 Separated and divorced persons

-48 Persons of unconventional, doubtful, or ambiguous sexuality

Class religious law limiting or prohibiting the expression of unconventional sexuality at
[-63224] – class homophobia with moral intolerance, at [-54152] – persons suffering from medical conditions inhibiting or distorting normal sexuality under –61/4 below.

-484 Homosexual people

-484 2 Male homosexuals

-484 3 Female homosexuals

-486 Persons of ambiguous sexuality

-486 4 Bisexuals

-5 Persons in late adulthood – elderly

-6 Persons experiencing illness, trouble, bereavement

(-61 to -64 Persons experiencing physical or mental illness, disability)

Add to base number –6 the numbers following 362 in 362.1 – 362.4

(For example)

-61 Persons suffering from disease, illness

-617 5 Terminally ill people

-619 697 92 Persons suffering from AIDS

-62 Persons suffering from mental illness, addiction

-628 Persons who have attempted suicide

-629 Persons experiencing addiction

-629 2 Alcoholics

-64 Persons suffering from disability

(-65 to -68 Persons suffering from misfortune)

Class persons suffering from poverty as a result of misfortune at -714

-65 Persons with criminal records - prisoners and their families

-653 Juvenile delinquents

-659 Newly released prisoners

-66 Persons experiencing bereavement

-662 Loss in immediate family

-662 1 Loss of spouse/partner

-662 2 Loss of parent/child, grandparent/grandchild

-662 4 Loss of sibling

-663 Loss in extended family

-664 Loss of friend, companion

-665 Loss of pet animal

-67 Persons experiencing breakdown of marriage, relationship, friendship

-673 Marriage, relationship breakdown

-675 Breakdown in friendship

-68 Victims of sin, crime

Add to base –68 appropriate numbers following 206.32 – e.g. victims of rape or sexual abuse –68474

-7 Persons by class or caste – social and economic status – ethnic identity

-71 Persons of lower, working, oppressed class or caste (the poor)

Including beggars, the starving, homeless persons.

-712 Persons of lower class or caste due to race or birth

Including oppressed minorities, e.g. untouchables, indigenous peoples.

-714 Persons of lower class due to misfortune

-714 2 Victims of natural disasters, war, religious persecution

Class here refugees, displaced persons.

-714 3 Victims of unjust social systems – economic disasters, depressions

Class here unemployed, exploited workers.

-715 Persons of lower class due to occupation, workers

Class members of particular occupations under –8

-75 Persons of middle class

Class members of particular occupations under –8

-78 Members of upper, privileged classes

-782 Persons of wealth, status, privilege due to birth

Include aristocrats, upper caste persons, inheritors of great wealth

-785 Persons of wealth or standing by reason of occupation, personal effort

But class members of particular occupations under –8

-79 Members of National, ethnic groups

Add to the base number -79 notation 4-9 from Table 2, e.g., Australians -7994

-8 Occupational groups

Add to the number –8 the Dewey number for the discipline involved – e.g., Medical profession, health workers –861. BUT use –96 for clergy: NOT –82.

-9 People by religious status – religious groups

-91 New and recent “converts” – people isolated from fellow believers

-913 People who have recently joined a religion: “New believers”.

-915 Isolated believers

-95 Persons in, or entering religious orders

-952 Men (brothers, friars, monks etc.)

-953 Women (sisters, nuns etc.)

-96 Clergy, religious leaders

-98 Persons of specific religions, sects etc.

Add to the number –98 notation following 2 in 200-299 that serves to identify the religion concerned.

for example:

-981 34 Atheists

-987 Christians

-986 Jews

-987 279 8 Mormons

-988 858 Sufis

-989 Bahá’ís

N.B. “-98” divisions only apply (and this is perhaps common sense) where the people in question belong to a different religion to the one that is the primary focus of the topic!

Manual Notes

100 vs. 200

Religion vs. Philosophy, paranormal phenomena, psychology

Philosophy and religion are distinguished in Dewy in that religion involves revelation, deity, and worship – usually all three, but at the very least two. “Philosophy of religion” on the other hand, deals with questions “within the context of deity” without considering revelation or worship.

This schedule treats the whole idea of the interface between religion and philosophy in a slightly different way; although broadly more or less the same distinction is made.

“Natural religion” and “Philosophy of religion” in the sense of “religious questions treated outside the context of a particular religious system” fall under our new definition of “comparative religion” in 200-209: along with treatments of religious questions in relation to several different religious systems.

On the other hand, “Philosophical religion” as such, or Deism (Theism) as a religion in its own right, has its own number, at 212.1

Philosophical theology in a particular religion goes at [-503]: thus Christian philosophical theology at 275.03. On the other hand, a consideration of philosophy, or of particular philosophical questions, from either a general religious viewpoint, or from the viewpoint of a particular religion, might be classed at [-171]: e.g. Christianity and (secular) philosophy 271.71

133 vs. 200

Parapsychology and Occultism vs. Religion

The note in the old (“standard”) schedule at this point is perfectly sensible: “If the author of a work about parapsychological or occult phenomena describes them as religious, the work is classed in 200”. One might add that some works on the occult are written in the context of a particular religious background; in this case we would include them with that religion (under [-86]) even if the occult practices concerned do not form a universally “recognised” part of that religion. Works specifically about the relationship between the occult and religion, or a particular religion might be classed at
[-17133] Some religions frown on occult practices, or specifically prohibit them – works treating the occult from this kind of viewpoint are classed at [-63284]

As with the standard schedule, we would want to class all religious texts (e.g. the Zohar) in the 200s rather than 133, even if they are annotated “from an occultist viewpoint”; in fact we would go further, and class all occultist works based on religious texts regarded as scripture or quasi scripture in the 200s.

A religious library, as opposed to a general one, may even go so far as to include all works on the occult under 212.365 (or [-86]); or, alternatively, to exclude the occult from the 200s altogether. In our view a classification should allow that much flexibility. The important thing is that rules for a particular library are kept consistently; and that something doesn’t go in one place one week and another the next! Pencilled annotations to one’s working copies of both this schedule and the standard Dewey volumes are often useful in cases like this.

200-209 vs. 210-299

Comparative Religion vs. “Particular Religions”

“Comparative religion”, in the original Dewey 200s schedule, basically meant “all religion other than Christianity”, and occurred as an afterthought, in the 290s. In this schedule non-Christian religions are no longer regarded as pagan remnants, but as religious systems in their own right. Hence “Comparative Religion” is systematically re-defined as “Religion in general., or specific religious questions considered either outside the context of any specific religious system, or in the context of several different systems”. Note that all particular religions are arranged in the same basic pattern as comparative religion, unlike Dewey 21.

Strictly, everything before 210 refers to comparative religion, in this sense, while everything after 210 refers to a “Specific Religion”, or a topic considered in the context of that religion. No specific religion is considered to be merely a part of the general topic of comparative religion; and on the other hand, all works dealing with religion in general, or three or more religions, go in 200-209 (BUT see note in this manual at 202.6 vs. 214/219).

A comparison between two religions, or a treatment of one religion in the light of another, goes with the religion of the author, at [-16]. An exception to this is that a library specialising in material on a particular religion may wish to concentrate all material on that religion under the main heading. For instance a Christian Library may optionally class a work by a Muslim on the relationship between Christianity and Islam at 271.68 – whereas the preferred number is of course 281.67.

201.757 68 vs. 205.326 5 vs. 576.8

The question of evolution

Very simply – use 201.75768 (and its cognate numbers) for works considering evolution in a context that includes both religious and scientific thought, without of course making any judgements about the value of that thought! For instance “Creation science” from a Christian point of view, (however unsound, as science, it might seem) is classed at 271.75768

Use 205.3265 (and its cognate numbers) where the question is essentially considered as a religious one – ignoring science and scientific method, except, perhaps, in passing. Thus a Christian creationist (or evolutionist) work that simply mustered theological arguments as to why evolution is, or is not, a viable hypothesis, with little or no reference to science, would be classed at 275.3265. When in doubt between 201.75768 (or one of its cognates) and 205.3265 class at 205.3265.

Class in 576.8 (or elsewhere in the 500s, as appropriate) works that consider the topic outside, or largely outside, the context of religion – probably, but not necessarily, in a conventionally “scientific” sense. When in doubt between a 200s number and 576.8 class at 576.8.

It is hoped that this will prove a little more workable than the very intricate rule proposed in the “standard” manual!

202.6 vs. 214/219

Religions originating in, or found in, particular countries, regions etc.

A survey of several different religions originating in one country (say, India) will necessarily go in 200-209: (specifically, at 202.654). The regular Dewey schedule would put a work dealing with several religions as they are found in India (for instance, including Islam, Judaism, Christianity, and Zoroastrianism: as well as the “real” Indian religions of Hinduism, Jainism, Sikhism and Buddhism) in another slot altogether. We don’t. The wider work still treats “Indian Religions”, and still goes at 202.654. There is, of course, a perfectly valid distinction here, but we have chosen at this point not to make it.

Any specific religion listed under 214, 217 or 219 will of course be listed under its own proper number; but a work treating several such religions will go under 202.6, or perhaps 202.5 (see last rule). Thus the generalised headings under 214, 217 and 219 will normally not be used.

BUT this nice clean rule raises a difficulty. Indigenous Australians, and other small but very fragmented groups of people, belong to particular tribes or language groups whose religion(s) might be treated in isolation. It is far more likely, however, that most library material will in practice survey the religion of several different tribal groups instead. Now, if we followed our rule rigidly, the bulk of material on Indigenous Australian religion (for example) would be found at 202.694: at our generalised heading for “Religion in Australia”, because it is concerned with the religion of several Australian peoples (albeit all Aboriginal). This is unhelpful: a much better placing for such works would be 217.94 “Religion of Indigenous Australians”.

In fact there can be very real difficulties in defining exactly what is meant by a “particular” religion in the context of 214, 217, and 219 – for instance the history of ancient Greek religion includes a number of distinct cults that really comprise quite different religions – but since most works on ancient Greek religion treat these cults as if they were a single system it would be unhelpfully pedantic if we did not follow suit.

In practice, a number of works that ought, by a strict, pedantic application of the rules, to be classed under comparative religion, as treating several religions, are really best shelved together. Thus we can formulate a rule as follows:

“Normally numbers in the range 210-299 all refer to works on a specific religion – works treating more than one religion are classed in 200-209. However, where a strict application of this rule produces an unhelpful shelf order, especially in certain subheadings under 214, 217, and 219 – it is permissible to treat different religions of ancient peoples, and modern indigenous or ethnic populations, as if they belonged to a single religious system, when in fact this is not strictly the case.”

203 – 223 – 273 etc.

Persons associated with comparative religion, particular religions

In the standard DDC schedule the philosophy is to place biography and other works about people as close as possible to the aspect of religion to which they are connected, using the (-092) standard subdivision. In practice, many prominent people are connected with more than one aspect, and this results in considerable confusion and ambiguity and a generally unhelpful shelf order. In this schedule all religious biography is grouped at [-3]: that is, all biography of people associated with more than one religion, or specifically with comparative religion, goes at 203, while persons associated with a particular religion go with that religion, under 223, 263, 273, 283 and so on. Even if it is desired to use some of the standard subdivisions (table 1) do NOT use (-092).

Note that works on the station and duties of certain persons or classes of person have their own slot – e.g., station and duties of clergy [-96] – station of founders of religion [-521]. Works on saints (apart from biography and works on individual saints) – have their own place at [-527].

An exception also needs to be made for some (“minor”) persons associated with a particular scriptural story. Cain and Abel, for instance, are unlikely to be of interest outside consideration of the Book of Genesis, and putting them into 263 or 273 would be a bit extreme. Standard Dewey practice is to add
(-092) on to the end of the number for the book concerned – although we have abolished this particular standard subdivision for the 200s we can add [-183] instead – followed by a Cutter number for the person concerned. Thus “Abel” will be 264.451183.A1 in a Jewish or “neutral” context – or 274.4351183.A1 for a strictly Christian one.

Some Old Testament characters DO have their own numbers under 263. In a Jewish or “neutral” context these go under their specific number – in a Christian context class them under 273.02 (this is the preferred method), or, optionally, as above.

211.3 vs. [-5121(3/4)] vs. [-16113(3/4)]

Agnosticism and atheism

Agnosticism and atheism can be considered in three different contexts.

In the first context we consider them as creeds in their own right. The classifications for this are at 212.33 and 212.34. This is obviously the correct place for books written by Atheists or Agnostics in favour of their point of view.

In the second context the specific creeds of atheism or agnosticism are under consideration (probably attack) in the context of a particular religion, or perhaps in the context of several religions. The classification for this is [-16123(3/4)] (for example, Muslim polemics against atheists 281.61234).

In the third context atheism or agnosticism may be considered as questions within a particular religion rather than as creeds in their own right. The classification for this is [-5121(3/4)] – e.g. Atheism in Buddhism 245.1214 This is specifically excluded as an option in the schedules for some very highly theistic religions.

264 vs. 274

Bible

In standard Dewey 21 the Bible precedes general works on Christianity, and the books of the Old Testament or Tanakh may be classed under three different optional arrangements; either with the rest of the Bible used by Christians or under Judaism.

In this schedule, while a complete Christian Bible (i.e. including the Old Testament) is classed under 274 (Christian scripture), and specifically Christian works on the Old Testament or parts thereof are also classed there, the Jewish Tanakh or Bible is nonetheless given its proper place as a Jewish document – and the “default” place for such works is under 264 (Jewish scripture). In either case the numbering of the books of the Tanakh or Old Testament follows the usual order in which they are found in Jewish Bibles.

To make this matter quite clear: there is no longer any “option” in numbering the books of the Old Testament; and these are classed under Judaism, unless the work forms a part of a Christian Bible, or receives a very specifically Christian treatment.

This also applies to the Old Testament Apocrypha, and all parts of Christian scripture that are also recognised as such by members of the Jewish Faith. Consider them as primarily Jewish documents – and only class the original texts or works about them with Christianity where they are bound with distinctively Christian matter, or are treated from a specifically Christian point of view.

272.74/9 vs. 270/9

Christian Sects and Denominations

Christianity is a particularly fragmented religion. This raises the problem of whether to class material particular to one division of Christianity with other material about the subject concerned, or under the heading reserved for that division or sect. For example, should a book about Christian missions organised by the Anglican Church be classed under “Christian missions” (with missions organised by other Christian denominations), or “Anglican missions” (with other material about the Anglican church)?

Under the heading for a division of Christianity we would normally only include material highly specific to that particular sect or division. Thus a book written by (say) a Baptist, on a general, fairly non-controversial subject, would generally go with other books on that subject, written by other (non-Baptist) Christians, rather than under the heading for the Baptist Church.

With a very few exceptions (notably religious orders, where denomination plainly provides a sensible basis for arrangement) we have resisted the tendency in DDC to arrange material on particular subjects by denomination. The overall rule, for users of this schedule, is:

“Ignore the denomination or sect of the author of a Christian work unless that work relates very specifically to his particular sect – but in the latter case unambiguously class it with that sect.”

In practice this means that for “mainstream” divisions of Christianity the only material that will be classed under a denomination, rather than “Christianity in general”, will be material on that denomination’s history (including, for example, biographies of founders etc.) – catechisms and other doctrinal works concerned with its distinguishing features, and specific liturgies and orders of service. These are arranged under the heading for the denomination concerned, using the same overall pattern as that followed for Christianity as a whole.

In the case of the more distinctive denominations – especially Mormonism, which is in many ways an independent religion – the case will obviously differ. While the great majority of (say) Anglican or Catholic material will be classed as “general Christian” – the majority, at least, of Mormon material (for instance, Mormon scripture) needs to be shelved together (under Mormonism), rather than scattered throughout the “Christian” portion of the collection.

The overall rule must be – does this work really belong with other Christian works on the same subject, or does it belong with other works produced by or about the particular sect of Christianity concerned? The answer to these questions will not necessarily be the same for all libraries. Pencilled notes in the schedules themselves, and care by cataloguers to “follow precedent” for the particular collection, may be necessary to avoid inconsistency and “cross classification”.

The above all applies to a general library, or to a religious library other than one itself specialising in works on a particular branch of Christianity. It would make sense for (say) a Catholic library to treat Catholicism under “27” – while classing its (probably less than extensive) collection of specifically non-Catholic Christian works under 272.7, at the point for the denomination concerned.

282.7

Muslim Sects – Sunni vs. Shiite

Islam is of course only a little less fragmented than Christianity. Hence much of the above note, concerning Christian sects and denominations, will also apply here. There are however three further special difficulties.

The first of these concerns the fundamental and very early split between Sunni and Shiite Islam. The Sunni Muslims form the overall majority in most Muslim countries, and they regard themselves as the orthodox Muslims. On the other hand the Shiites themselves believe that Muhammad’s son-in-law Ali was Muhammad’s true successor, and that they, as Ali’s disciples, are thus the truly orthodox section of Islam. I apologise to any Muslim reader, whether Sunni or Shiite, for the superficiality of this explanation – the fact remains that both of these divisions consider themselves as being the original, pure form of Islam – and the other side as being schismatic, if not heretical.

This question might seem to be best left to the Muslims themselves – the problem is that while most non-Muslims regard the Sunni as the stem of Islam, the Bahá’ís, for whom this schedule was originally drawn up, strongly believe that the Shiites have this honour. There are thus two optional places for Sunnism and Shiah. Bahá’í libraries, and libraries for whom this question is not a burning issue, will use the first, “preferred” option – which is the one appearing in the schedules and the relative index. Any library for which this is intolerable will use the second option – simply exchanging 282.73 and 282.74, and thus reversing the Sunni/Shiite order. So far as the number for a particular sect is concerned, only the fifth digit changes – thus the Malakites (282.745) become 282.735.

282.7 vs. 288.58

Sufism

The Sufis are in one sense a denomination or sect of Islam – and might have been placed under 282.7. On the other hand many Muslims who regard themselves Sufi, or at least have strong Sufi leanings, belong to one or other of the formal denominations of Islam. Some Sufi teachers have been widely regarded as heretical, but others are considered more or less orthodox by most Muslims.

Hence, instead of being treated as a particular sect, under 282.7, works by or about the Sufis are classed at 288.58, under Islamic mysticism.

The main difficulty that this raises is that we need to be able to build numbers for the Sufis as we would if they were classed under 282.7. Thus Sufi biography is 288.583, classical Sufi writings 288.584 and so on, as if Sufism was indeed a separate denomination.

On the other hand, note that distinct sects with a mystical leaning, such as the Kadarites, have their own numbers under 282.7.

282.78 vs. 292.73

Bábism

Bahá’ís regard the Báb as one of the Founders of their Faith. His earthly remains rest in a Bahá’í Shrine on Mt. Carmel; His writings are considered a part of Bahá’í scripture. A classification suitable for a Bahá’í library must consider Bábism as part of Bahá’í history, an independent revelation, but not strictly an independent religion. Most non-Bahá’í libraries likely to use this schedule will also be perfectly happy with this, if only because the whole question is very peripheral to their case.

On the other hand some of the Báb’s followers did not become Bahá’ís – so that in the spirit of this classification, (rejecting firmly any religious bias) we need a separate “Bábi” number, however remote the chances might be of a library (other than perhaps a Bahá’í one!) obtaining material published by or for non-Bahá’í disciples of the Báb.

This is one point where we have felt the need to present an “option” of the kind that abound in the standard schedule. According to the first (“preferred”) option, necessary for Bahá’í libraries, and acceptable for most others, Bábism is seen essentially as a variety of the Bahá’í Faith: material by, or about, “non-Bahá’í Bábis” is classed at 292.73, and all editions of the writings of the Báb are classed at 294.4. In the second option, which may be more satisfactory for some non-Bahá’í libraries, Bábism is regarded as a sect of Islam, at 282.78 This second option will enable Muslim, (and, theoretically at least, Bábi) users of the classification to dissociate Bábism from the Bahá’í Faith in their shelf arrangement, if they so desire. Note that if this second option is used then Bábi scripture – even editions published for and by Bahá’ís – will be classed at 282.784

320.55 or 322.1 vs. 281.732, 285.017, 285.65, 286.53

Islam and “secular” government

The dividing line between the secular and the religious in Islam (and some other religions) is very different from that in the West, where a strong tradition of separation between Church and State has arisen over the centuries. Standard DDC21 largely ignores this fact, and the equivalent note to this one (q.v.) advises the user to class in 320.55 or 322.1 many items we would prefer to class under 280.

At 281.732 class works about the general relationship between political science and Islam, other than those directly involving Islamic doctrine or law.

At 285.017 class all works on Islamic fundamentalism – not merely the religious (in the western sense) aspects, but also the political and social ones (since to a Muslim writer, or reader, these are just as “religious” as, say, doctrine).

At 285.65 class doctrine about relations between secular government and Islam – and the duties etc. of the individual Muslim to the state.

At 286.53 class Islamic theocracy – and the temporal powers of Islamic leaders and Institutions.

If in doubt between a number under 280, and one under 320 – choose the number under 280 (this is basically the opposite course to that advised in DDC21).

322.1 vs. 261.732, 265.017, 265.65, 266.53

Judaism and “secular” government

While the dividing line between the secular and the religious in Judaism is still very different from the equivalent in “Christian” countries it is much more clearly marked than in Islam.

Generally – use the above numbers like their cognates in Islam – but prefer a number in the 320s where the Jewish connection is clearly political or national rather than religious.

322.1 vs. 271.732, 275.017, 275.65, 276.53

Christianity and “secular” government

At 271.732 class works about the general relationship between Government and Christianity (or the Church and the State) other than doctrine or prescriptive theology. If in doubt between 271.732 and 275.65 then prefer 275.65.

At 275.017 class works on Christian fundamentalism – including the direct relationship between it and the political far right in (for instance) the United States. If the relationship seems tenuous, however, and the work in question clearly concerns politics rather than religion, prefer 322.1 or another appropriate number under 320.

At 275.65 class specific doctrine about relations between Church and State – and the duties etc. of the individual Christian to the state.

At 276.53 class the temporal powers of Christian leaders and institutions.

If in doubt between a number under 270, and one under 320 – choose the number under 320.

398.2 vs. 204.85

Folk literature vs. Mythology

All mythology has a religious source, although this has been lost in some cases. Therefore class mythology in general at 204.85 rather than 398.2. This is the opposite to DDC21 practice - the reason for considering the “secular’ number the more general in the DDC21 manual seems equally applicable in reverse. Myths and legends concerned with a particular religion should be classed with that religion – usually at [-485] or [-49].

Stories and tales found in scriptural works from any religion are considered with the works concerned (in some cases at [-4148]) even if they are plainly mythological, to all but perhaps the most fundamentalist adherents of the religion concerned.

Folk tales without religious content, even if miraculous or magical events and supernatural beings feature – should of course be classed under 398.2. If there is any doubt about the religious content, however, prefer the appropriate number under 200.

615.852 vs. 208.62 (228.62, 278.62 etc.)

Religious healing

Standard DDC21 prefers 615.862 for a work which “focuses on religious practices as a part of the medical practice” or that treats “the use of psychic and paranormal powers in healing that do not mention a religious context”. Generally, this seems a sensible enough distinction, although we would reverse the “when in doubt” rule to favour 208.62 or one of its cognate numbers rather than 615.852.

616.86 or 362.29 vs. 205.406 29 (etc.)

Addiction and addicts

Follow DDC21 as to the distinction between 616.86 and 362.29 – but use the appropriate number under 200 for works on either medical or sociological treatments of this subject that include a strong religious aspect. The relative index entry under “Addicts” gives an idea of the possible range of headings concerned.