Animism - The first global "religion"

[greyl]

My understanding of animism is:

-it has no dogma
-it is perfectly comfortable with and dynamically responsive to 'scientific' knowledge
-the indigenous people who practice animism wouldn't know what we meant by "religion"
-the 'god/s' are simply that which animate this place, not who tells us how we ought to live.
-Animism predates salvationist religion by a couple hundred thousand years.

Thoughts?

edit: Animism is to Hinduism, like Astronomy is to Astrology.

[disgruntled_goat]

1. check out the Witoto people

South America, Rio Putamayo region. sounds like a good example. real original power stuff.

[greyl]

2. Sad that the population is so small, eh?

There's no part of our culture that wants to see their population maintained.
They are "irrelevant" to our Mother Culture.

http://www.nativeplanet.org/indigenous/ethnicdiversity/latinamerica/peru/indigenous_data_peru_huitoto_murui.shtml

[Branjor]

3. We don't have a "Mother Culture"...

we have a Father Culture.

[H2O Man]

4. Animism is

part of the Original Instructions, delivered to early people in the era that h. habilis began to advance in tool-making ability. It pre-dates the hunter/gatherer culture. As human society journeyed through different cultural phases, including herding, agriculture, and the industrial revolution, attempts were made to translate those Original Instructions into something that fits the new cultural reality. When there have been crises in culture, often found at the cusp of transitions in means of production (and hence family patterns), reformation prophets arise, and call for a return to the Original Instructions.

[manic expression]

5. Yes

but there is more to it than just "animism". Polytheist and Pantheist religions are a bit different, but have many common traits and beliefs. Furthermore, both types of religion predate salvationist religion by quite some time.

I would like to know exactly what you mean by your last statement (the edited one). There are many animist facets to Hinduism. Hinduism also meets all of the points you lay out (if you consider the Vedas, Puranas, Upanishads and more a "dogma", that is debatable).

Shintoism is another example of an "animist-ish" religion that is around today.

[catbert836]

6. My understanding of Animism

is that it's a primitive belief system- and with many superstitions, for example primitive animists would sacrifice to the spirit of a river they crossed, and beg forgiveness from the spirit of a deer they killed for food.
I am familiar with Quinn's definition of animism, but I think this would be more properly called neo-animism, as it has almost nothing in common with original, or prehistoric, animism.

[manic expression]

7. 'Primitive'?

or different? It borders on arrogance to label something inferior simply because of certain traits. Animists would pray to a deer after killing it, showing respect for something that provided for them and their kin. How is that "primitive"? IMO, it is more sensible and reasonable than many other religions, including "modern" religions.

[catbert836]

8. Primitive does not mean inferior

It means just what the definition is, in this case that it was widespread in prehistorical times. But you're right, that wasn't the best word to use.
My remarks were not intended to being insulting to Animism or its followers in any way. I sincerely apoligize if they have been. I certainly agree that Animism is probably much more reasonable than many modern organized religions.

[manic expression]

9. OK

Thank you for clarifying. I agree with you completely.

:hi:

[greyl]

10. Is "sacrificing to the spirit of"

a necessary conditions for Animism?

On "begging forgiveness from the spirits of", I can see that as empathy and humility toward other life, especially life that has eyes to look into. One doesn't need to have fabricated beliefs to feel for others. That's just how humans are.

The truly original animism that I imagine pre-dates mythologies which include ritualistic killing to please the gods. Sacrificing to the spirit of a river and honoring a river are significantly different attitudes.
One is based on some fabrication, and the other is based on a reconciliation of oceanic experience and rational apprehension of how the world works. A 'rule' that sacrifice of life is needed to cross a river is mythology.

I'm just trying to imagine how the first self-conscious primates explained their world.
I can't imagine how faulty logic, false beliefs, or faith could have afforded them a survival advantage.