by VorJack
Many scholars think the earliest type of religion may have been animism, the belief that spirits infest the world around us, and that every item, phenomena, or landscape feature has a soul. Animism shades into a loose polytheism, in which these spirits exist just behind the universe we see and control what happens in this world.
The appeal of this is intuitive. Things happen. Fruit ripens, lightning strikes, snow falls, animals get pregnant. Why does this person get pregnant, and not that person? Why does it rain today, but not yesterday? What makes things happen?
Well, we make things happen. We can do things. So whatever is making the fruit ripen and the rain fall must be a lot like us. Invisible, since we can’t see them. Powerful, since they do things we can’t. But like us, because what else ould they be?
Personal Projection
Pullquote: It’s intuitively appealing to project ourselves onto the world around us.
Anyone who has ever felt that their car was being stubborn, or that their computer was angry at them, or that the weather was out to get them, can understand this. It’s intuitively appealing to project ourselves onto the world around us. Perhaps, as social creatures, we’re programmed to do this. As Hume put it:
“There is an universal tendency amongst mankind to conceive all beings like themselves, and to transfer to every object those qualities with which they are familiarly acquainted, and of which they are intimately conscious. We find human faces in the moon, armies in the clouds; and by a natural propensity, if not corrected by experience and reflection, ascribe malice and good will to everything that hurts or pleases us.” (David Hume. The Natural History of Religion, Section 3)
I started to write that we’ve changed a lot since animism was popular, but we haven’t really. It’s true that we no longer perceive every object as imbued with a soul, but we still project ourselves onto the world around us. It seems that the only thing that has changed is the scope of our animism.
As a historian, I frequently find myself dealing with conspiracism. And what is a conspiracy theory but a projection of the self onto historical events? Some people just can’t accept that impersonal forces and intangible ideas could bring things about, so they imagine a person or group of persons behind it all. Someone must have made the French Revolution occur.
Projection on a Cosmic Scale
Pullquote: Creationism and the cosmological argument are both kinds of this large-scope animism.
I submit that creationism and the cosmological argument are both kinds of this large-scope animism. Sometimes it is almost made explicit, particularly in creationism. “I just can’t imagine how this world came about naturally. God must have done it.” Our imagination is a limited thing. Why should our inability to imagine something mean that a God must have done it? But the intuitive desire to project ourselves onto the universe means that we have an easier time imagining an invisible, all-powerful being doing the work.
The creation of the universe is trickier. Here our language and our intuition are actual liabilities. As our friend Deacon Duncan points out:
We don’t even need to think about [the concept of the beginning of time], because we’re so familiar with “beginning” being a chronological transition. If the thing we’re talking about is time itself, however, then our normal, intuitive perception breaks down, because in order for time to begin, in the sense that we mean “beginning,” we must assume that at one point in time, time did not exist, and then at some subsequent point in time, it did exist. But that means that part of our argument involves assuming that time existed when time did not exist—a self-contradictory premise.
We don’t even have a meaningful way to talk about the origin of the universe. We can say, with some confidence, what happened after that. But beyond that we’re lost. And while we’re lost, that tendency to project creeps back in again. Something happened. Someone must have made it happen. What else could it be?
I’m not really trying to wade into creationism or the cosmological argument. I’m simply trying to urge caution to those who would pose that last question. The way our minds work make it very difficult to really talk about the issue without projection.
Add animism with a pinch of solipsism and you get a monotheistic believer:
Somebody who creates an abstract projection (i.e. God) of what they deem to be morally “good” and just – in an unjust world. Everything that happens to them, be it good or bad, will be perceived as intentional and will attribute these circumstances to the life style they’ve been living – and will make adjustments accordingly in order to avoid the bad circumstances.
I’ve been there, its a scary place….
Have you looked into a book called The Golden Bough? It’s about, to some extent, how religion is magic. It’s in the public domain so you can easily find it at the Gutenberg Project and/or Librivox.
Religion is not magic. Magic does not exit!! But religion BELIEVES in magic as do all mystic systems. Myth MAY portray aspects of reality through story, as in the hero’s quest, etc. but it is still not real in the basic sense.
Or as shown on Stargate (us) will do our best to kick the ORI’s ass (gOd) when we encounter them, that is a hero’s quest type mythic story. But it aint real no matter how you pretty it up
I had to LAUGH at this only because I am so guilty! I am a computer tech, and actually do catch myself talking to computers all day. Not in a Hi Mr. Computer way, but in a program is taking forever to load and I say “Come on, seriously?”, at the PC, kind of way. Yes, I admit, I am a dork.
But after all, I think this is how all religions started anyway. Pray to the Sun and make offerings to make sure it comes back, worship the animal gods to make sure they are plentiful for hunting. I think it’s cool that we can identify with ancient ancestors on some levels.
As a developer, I can fully relate to this. My computer is running on equal parts electricity and profanity.
My motorized wheelchair is the same way. Profanity with an electricity chaser.
Daily. LOL!
Cybrgnx, A lot of religion is magic in the sense they use what’s called Sympathetic magic which can be broken down into Contagion magic and the Law of Similarities. It’s the view that if you do something in imitation of another thing, you get similar results (law of similarities) and/or once an object has been in contact with another, they are somehow linked despite physical separation.
The easiest examples are voodoo dolls which has the hair of your intended (contagion magic) or pouring water on the ground to bring rain (law of similarities).
You can see some of this in the Christian religion like the dominance of men. Jesus was male so if we’re lead by men, we will get the same benefits represented by Jesus (law of similarities). Or, along those lines, the Catholic church says they’re the real deal because Jesus commissioned Peter and there has been an unbroken line of popes since then (contagion magic).
Sign of the cross (similarities). Holy relics (contagion). Etc….
Hi Scott I do agree that all religion is magic. But as I stated earlier it is still all BS cuz it aint real and don’t exist. Voodoo- similarities-contagion-harry potter any name you like it is all a pile of crap.
I defy anyone to use a magic crystal on me to stop or make me do somethin. It wont work and like the church’s standard magic spell -Prayer- it make people feel good through delusion. Animalism is just another, earlier form of religion/magic used to help people deal with the mysteries around them. Thank no one that someone finally said why-what-how? and other questions.
There is a good deal about Christianity which is animistic in nature. This is particularly true of some fundamentalist Christians, who view everything from illness to poor behavior as being due to the influence of “spirits.” Among charismatic Christians it leads them to have a lot of exorcisms to deal with any problem you could think of … from a mere headache to homosexuality. It really is a very primitive form of thought.
The problem is that it is almost impossible for the human mind to comprehend life springing from non-life. Something had to create life right? Our brains are not equipped to think of hundreds and hundreds of millions of years during which the randomness of the universe may have allowed a molecule to make a copy of itself and so on. Someday we’ll be able to create life from non-life. That would be a scary day for religion although the simple counter argument is this – now let’s see you make the ingredients!