Animism and Mythology

This article, along with some aspects of Indian Philosophy, also discussed on Indian Logic Forum: http://nyaya.darsana.org/topic100.html

Thanks!

Inquirer,

``Divinity is merely a way of garnering support for human ideas. NOTHING MORE.``

So you should let good people of world to enjoy this support. Why do you want to deprive them of this support...???

Re: # 52

``good`` people do not require theology to support their ``good`` actions..............if you try to do that then you would find yourself in the same boat as radical Islamists .......

Re: # 52,Khuram:
Thanks, for the totally honest response.

The bad record of performance of almost all religions in exploiting, terrorizing and dividing people (humans) all over the world requires that we intelligently undrstand what is what.

Only then will the Einsteinian definition of religion will become applicable to the organized AND delusive activities that pass for religion today.

PS. Your interpretation of the consequence of adherence to religion interms of acquired ``support`` is significant and I hope deliberate not accidental.

``So whichever true and valid element exists in whichever organized religion ... we can consider that element as having been told to humanity by God Almighty Himself. ``
****Here lies the pitfall, only humans can decide what is valid at what times. So where does God enter into picture?****

Re: # 46

Inquirer,

Yes it is humans who are to decide which is true or valid. But if you find truth and validity in ``higher aspects`` of all the religions, then you should accept or at least assume those aspects being Divine told, because all religions are claimed to be Devine told. Consider the following words of your profile:

``Intersested in developing a synthesis of the higher aspects of all religions. Fully recognize the tentative validity of all religious teachings. Would like to contribute to the rational foundation for human behaviour in all fields.``

Regards!

Re: # 47,Khuram:
Thanks for noting my profile. But the essence of my statement is that ALL HUMAN IDEAS ARE ARE HUMANLY CONCEIVED AND ORGANIZED. Thus we humans are the extension of God if we so conjure God.
Unity that I aspire for is entirely human. Divinity is merely a way of garnering support for human ideas. NOTHING MORE.

Kaalchakra,

As my main issue of concern is Human mind ... so I can discuss only human self made knowledge, which could give clues to the structure of mind and how it functions.

Re: #41,
``So whichever true and valid element exists in whichever organized religion ... we can consider that element as having been told to humanity by God Almighty Himself...``

and #42,
``...the understanding of true religion is given by God Himself,....``

What is the criterion for truth?

Ranjit Sahib,

Yes many Indian schools of thought consider ``desires`` as the source of all the human misery and unhappiness. Underlying idea is something like that humans are caught by miseries and unhappiness when they fail to fulfill their desires. So if they stop desiring anything then any question of failure in fulfilling the desires shall not arise and therefore humanity will be free of any misery or unhappiness.

As I stated in my previous post that only humans can be desirous of anything. Those early Indian thinkers might have noticed this fact. In addition, they also might have noticed that only humans are caught up by many forms of miseries and unhappiness. They might have then rationalized the phenomenon of human misery by putting all the blame on human desires. Jainism and Buddhism were the main representatives of this school of thought and both these religions originated in around 6th century B.C. By that time, Greek intellectuals still had not tried to determine the purpose of humans in Universe. So in this respect, Indian thought took the lead as Indians happened to be the first who tried to determine the objective before humans, which, according to them, was getting freedom from miseries which could be achieved through the control on desires.

But in the same period, Confucius, in China was telling his students that their objective was to become able to think over various practical matters of life RATIONALLY and should become able to express their opinions clearly and transparently.

Anyhow, ``desire`` itself was not the source of human misery because the real source of human misery, under this line of thought, was the ``failure`` of humans to fulfill their desires. Right strategy should have been to try to ``control`` the rate of failure rather than to forbid the desires altogether.

What I think is that ``desires`` are positive things. These are ``desires`` which give us our most of the long term objectives. ``Desires`` make it possible that we try to improve our knowlege, abilities or skills over such long periods that may extend to decades. If we were limited to just bodily needs, then we would not be in need to make any ``improvement`` in ourselves. Desires tell us two things. On the negative side, they tell us that we are lacking some important thing. On the positive side, they give us hope that we can remove that shortcoming in ourselves. Thus a movement towards better and higher levels becomes possible through the application of desires. I have described in previous post that all desires are basically ``analogical inferences`` in nature. It works in a way that lets say I observe some entity, which is similar to me in some aspects. But I find that I am lacking some important characteristics, which exist in that other entity. If I imagine myself of possessing the same or similar characteristics, which I have observed in that other entity, it means that now I am ``desirous`` of possessing those important characteristics. Its meaning is that if I do not observe any entity which is similar with me in any respect and possesses some important characteristics that I do not possess, I WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO FORM ANY DESIRE in this case. If humans would never had seen flying birds, if they never had realized that they themselves are lacking in an important characteristic of ``flying``, which a similar entity to them i.e. birds did possess, THEN HUMANS COULD NOT BE DESIROUS of flying like birds.

If human mind works by making analogies, it means that mind does not work at its own. It cannot get the desire of flying like birds without having observed that birds can fly and realizing that humans cannot fly. But if humans can observe many different things in the environment, then they would definitely tend to form one or the other desires.

And I also think that to be desirous of something would be better than having fulfilled all the desires. Fulfillment of all the desires would eliminate all the charms of life. Secondly it is also not possible to acquire the state of complete “control” on desires. Any attempt to “control” desires would actually “magnify” the desires. One important component of “desire” is the feeling of “lacking” something. Any attempt to control “desire” will actually strengthen those feelings of “lacking” something and desires shall be magnified in this way. Buddhists tried to “control” their desires related to sex … that desire ultimately magnified and then manifested in the form of amazing art work of Agenta caves.

Issue of “desires” is related with the issue of ethics as well. Your main question was also that if desires are good or bad? In case we find that we are lacking some better or superior characteristic, which other people do possess; and we get a desire of acquiring that superior or better quality – this type of desire would be “good”. But if we find that we are lacking in some inferior quality, which some other people do possess, and in this way we become desirous of acquiring that inferior quality – this type of desire would be “bad”. Better and superior qualities are those, which are beyond the scope of our presently held skills or abilities. Inferior qualities are those, which could be acquired just if we do not employ our presently held skills and abilities in the best possible way.

Issue of ethics also has relationship with just how we try to fulfill our desires. If we employ unethical or illegal means, we would be ethically bad then. We are ethically good if we fulfill all our body and mental needs under the supervisory control of our rationality and wisdom.

@ Inquirer

Thanks for your points.

Regards!

khuram, ballukhan

Could it be that since the understanding of true religion is given by God Himself, and the understanding of everything else has been constructed by man, true religion cannot be discussed (if discussion involves any real questioning) by man, while the rest of human knowledge can be discussed?

Re: # 42, kalchakra:
This is the pet excuse of all who want to escape scrutiny.

Re: # 42

That`s a loaded comment -

``True Religion`` , ``Valid elements`` all reveal the prejuduces laid down during one`s childhood.
That is the type of analyses I am looking at rathar than an analyses that presumes the ``truths`` of religions.
Animism is the corner stone of all great religions. The mind/body duality , the ghost-in-the-box notion of reality with heavy emphasis on ``Almighty`s will``-
This classical animism has permeated in our daily life with the profusion of praises and references to the ``almighty`s will``????

Re: # 48,ballukhan:
The third statement is the anticlimax.

ballukhan,

Thanks for sharing your views. You are requiring that I apply the study of animism to the study of religion. But I think more appropriate thing is to apply the knowledge of animism to the study of mind and knowledge. And true religion may not be confined to any particular form of organized religion. We all know that there so many sub-classifications also exist in all the organized religions. As rational analysts, we cannot assume that all the true religious knowledge is confined to only one community of humans. So whichever true and valid element exists in whichever organized religion ... we can consider that element as having been told to humanity by God Almighty Himself.

Thanks!

Re:khuram#13

[..Presence of ``desires`` is a positive advancement in humans, which is missing in other animals. ``Desire`` is not any bodily need but it is a ``mental`` need....]

Very interesting point, Khuram Sahib. One of the cornerstones of hindu philosophy is to control desires - not just physical but also mental. For instance - kaam (sex), krodh(anger), moh-maya(fascination for material/emotional needs) etc. The idea is that it is ``desire`` that drives human beings to do negative things and is the root of all evil. Therefore, there is a lot of emphasis on meditation and other tools to control human desires. Most Indian historical figures such as Buddha, Ramakrishna, Kabir, even Gandhi, were constantly battling against desire. Of course, ``desire`` can be a positive force e.g. a search of enlightment is also desire in one sense.

But the real question is whether physical desire is really the root of evil? Is it bad to want to be successful or to enjoy a happy, material based life? Should we feel guilty about it? Western civilization makes physical desire the paramount objective. Based on that, they have created an amazing civilization. Eastern countries, such as India, have deemphasized desire, which has led to a ``guilt complex`` and association of shame with being wealthy. We keep hearing about ``simple living, high thinking``. The resulting poverty and a poor standard of living is a direct result from this culture. The bleeding heart liberalism and leftist ideology also gets motivation from the same guilt complex.

So is ``desire`` good or bad?

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

``So they must have reconciled this chain of breath with that ‘something’ which could leave their body during sleep and could come back when awakened and they must have called it the ‘Spirit’. That ‘spirit’ finally became a real object for them. ``
****An interesting explanation of the development of soul. But later thinkers who accepted the basic tenet developed the superstructure for the concept of the soul. They developed the the consistency of the assumption of the soul with God, justice and the physically observed concepts of the conscience and healing as actuated by the soul as an intermediary the imagined God and the drab reality of human existence.****

`` If a child is not given proper education or if he does not get the experience of living in a realistic society, he/ she will continue living in that ‘children’s world’ throughout his/ her life. ``
****Due to the organized (Church, Masjids and Temples) and the unorganized goadings from parental and teachers ` influences most of the adult world is unable to make the transition from a child to a thinking individual. This is particularly maintained by the religious and political leaders who would want herd-like adults in the infantile state rather than the self-deciding individuals.****

`` Actually it happened to be the many failures of magical method, which led the clever people to try to find some realistic methods for the purpose. And remember that these realistic methods are now known as ‘science’. ``
****Furthermore, the vested interests of the organized religions supported by the money-makers assured that this aspect of self-development remains stulted in vast populations.****

khuram

Let`s hope you find time to take Khurram (with double rr)`s suggestion and soon produce an equally amazing exegesis on religion.

In this article, you captured your most profound and revolutionary thesis in a few brilliant words:

``Presently, humans possess mainly two types of ‘theoretical understandings’ of above-mentioned things which are (i) Divine told Explanations and; (ii) Human self made Explanations.

In this way, the God Almighty Himself has told the theoretical knowledge of true religion to humanity whereas rest of the theoretical knowledge is man made.``

From those clear-sighted beginnings to true religion should be a short walk.

Re: # 12

Thanks Kaalchakra ... again for such appreciating and encouraging comments. As you have quoted: humans possess two types of explanations which are (i) about TRUE religion as are told to humanity by the God Almighty Himself and; (ii) Man`s self made explanations that include animism, false religions, philosophies, sciences, technical understandings etc. etc.

Due to my limited abilities, I can discuss only the second type of explanations, which are man`s self-made. Issue of even false religions can create many controversial ties. So my preference would be to avoid controversial things. We can discuss many positive things without criticizing any religion. How much irrational these animistic, or magical or other superstitious beliefs may look like, but I am not against them. Even these things are the unique characteristics of human beings. Any other known life form doesn`t possess any form of superstition. Study of superstitions can give wonderful insight into our true nature or essence. Humans want to control the external world events but at the same time want that they may not have to do any effort for the purpose. They tend to find easy solutions for every task. Mostly they perform those tasks in just daydreams. More ``practical`` people take help of a magician. Wise people ask help from super natural beings. Scientists insist that only materialistic causation principle is the solution for performing any task. But tasks before the humans may not always be accomplished by the material causation principle. Humans want to defeat the death, which causation principle may not allow ... but religion offers its solution in the form of belief in after-life.

But all this apparent and observable human behavior is actually a clue, which can lead us in finding the true human nature or essence. Some times we consider human desires as something negative. But this ``desire`` is one of the most basic differences between humans and other animals. In the article, I have mentioned that humans possess two types of life. First one is their `physical` life and the other one is their `mental` life. ``Desires`` are basically one of the most basic manifestations of human ``mental`` life. Consider a child who does not own a bicycle. He observes his friends or other age fellows who come and go, here and there on their own bicycle. In this way that child boy would develop a desire of having his own bicycle. Now consider a dog. He may observe many people who travel on their own bicycles, bikes, cars and so on. But even after observing so many such things, a dog cannot be desirous of riding on car or bike etc. A dog can just be ``trained`` to ride on bike or any other thing. By nature, a dog would be complete indifferent towards any such thing which has nothing to do with his bodily instincts. He would become active if he gets any odor coming from some food source. But he would never show any desire to ride on bike even if he happens to observe so many people riding on bikes. ``Desires`` relate to ``mental`` life of humans. Presence of ``desires`` is a positive advancement in humans, which is missing in other animals. ``Desire`` is not any bodily need but it is a ``mental`` need. And every desire is an ``ANALOGICAL INFERENCE`` basically. Simple meaning of analogy is our tendency to think that two or more things, which are known to be ``similar`` in some aspects, can be similar in some other aspects. Now I try to explain how a small boy`s desire of having a bicycle was an analogical inference. As the boy could see that he and his friends were ``similar`` entities in many respects. But an aspect i.e. of having a bicycle was missing in him. This would be the simplest form of analogical inference whereby that boy would imagine himself of being ``similar`` to his friends in the respect of having a bicycle also.

Most basic difference of human and animal mind is the ability of human mind of drawing analogical conclusions. All the animism and all types of magic are also one or the other ``analogical inferences`` ... which an uneducated human mind like a small child or a primitive human can draw. When a magician digs in many needles in the statue of enemy, with the purpose to kill the enemy, he actually acts on an ``analogical inference``. He thinks that real enemy and the statue of enemy are ``similar``. So if the statue of enemy could be tortured by digging in needles etc., the real enemy, being a ``similar`` entity, also would be tortured as a result. In my childhood, we had a Philips remote control television. My elders always hold that remote control and used to switch channels against my wish. My calculator was very ``similar`` to that remote control. So I very sincerely and confidently used to press the buttons of calculator with the hope that I also could switch channels in that way. It never happened however. Similarly again in my early childhood, I happened to listen somewhere that there was a student in USA who while sleeping, used to keep his open book underneath his cushion. Next morning, as a result, he would automatically learn all the lessons. I also very sincerely did the same but ... I could not learn the lesson in this way.

Anyways, I was discussing the most basic difference in human and animal mind. Human mind can draw analogical conclusions whereas animal mind cannot do it. Above given examples of magic and my own examples are the examples of somewhat complex form of analogical inferences. Animal mind, in no way, can reach to this much complexity. But in certain cases, animal mind does reach to the simplest form of analogical inferences. The simplest form of analogical inference is to just “copy” or “imitate” others. This ability exists in certain monkeys and apes.

I shall try to share other related things through interacts and via other articles as well. Actually I am in process of developing a whole new philosophy of mind and knowledge, which would be based on the core concepts of Cultural Anthropology. It shall be interesting, at least…!

Regards!

Re: # 13

I would say that you are suggesting a functional view of animism and paganism.
Nothing wrong with that thesis, but I could see that you stopped yourself from extending it to all the great ``religions``.
Why??
Is that because our own prejudices appear to be protected from sucn a functional analyses of ``religions``.
Let me state again-

ALL RELIGIONS ARE ANIMISTIC!!

and calling one religions as ``false`` and another as ``true`` is only to state one`s prejudice!!

HD,

Yes we should know that life is more mysterious than our expectations. But at the same time, we should be determined to resolve those mysteries ... even if we cannot actually do it.

ballukhan,

Thanks for sharing your views. Our beliefs are the clues ... that can lead us in figuring out our ownselves.

Regards!

Let us not trivialize life (human or animal or whatever). There is tremendous mystery here.

Those of us who are interested/familiar with the workings of the human body are left astounded by the layers upon layers of intelligence (decision making, resource allocation and planning, etc, etc, etc) in this.

And those of us who write some silly code for a living, are humbled beyond belief by the tremendous code present in a single human body (nay, an insect).

All hail the cosmic programmer!

Dear Khuram (with a single `r`) ,

Why did your article stop so abruptly? Why not go the next logical step and talk about religion?
Specifically, what about God? Is this another childish story invented by uneduated masses?

Re: # 6 Khurram

Well title of this article is ``Animism and Mythology`` ... To discuss religion would require another article ... So it depends ... if I ever write it then shall try to share.

Regards!

``In Anthropology, these ‘approaches’ are generally classified as:

1- Animism
2- Mythology
3- Religion
``

Much of the classification and calling ``religion`` as an ``advancement`` to pagan-animistic thought is nonnsense. Simply because the body/spirit dualism is the basis of all religions.

Take this ``animistic`` thought away from these religions and you find all the great religions from Christianity, Islam to Hinduism falls falt like a pack of card.
All religions are animistic, anthropomorphic and superimposes human qualities on an external non-material entity called God/Almighy/Allah/Ishwar etc etc. This dualism of world/god is same as in the animistic dualism of body/mind or body/spirit.

Infact this dualism is very ancient and has been the basis of Platonic and Greek Matter/Form dualism.

Now consider the anthropomorphic bearings of the ``Classical `` religions. We superimpose the human emotions and attributes on the divine entities. What do you mean by ``infinite`` mercy/compassion/knowledge/understanding/power??? What do we mean by something happening because of the almighty`s ``will``? This is pure and classical animism that tries to explain a material event by taking recourse to a non-material cause (the ``Spirit`` or the ``Will of Almighty``)

The anthropomorphic bearings of the animistic classical religions becomes evident the more we read it and find the ``infinity`` speaking in our ears!!!

Khurram Sahib,

The fundamental issue that stumps human beings is death. Death is such an irrational, unexplainable phenomenon that humans just cannot accept it as an abrupt end to each person`s existence. The rationale is how can something as sophisticated as a complex, intelligent life form simply stop functioning one day and return to dust. We have got to be part of some cosmic scheme, some universal purppse. This conviction leads to the search for an explanation along the lines that you describe.

Each culture and civilization, from the most primitive to the most advanced, have attempted to understand and explain death. Almost everyone of them have rationalized that death is not an end but just a transition to an after-life. Hindus formulated cycles of rebirths which in turn resulted in the setup of the caste system. Christians have the whole after-life concept with heaven and hell. Muslims have extended the christian concept of after-life even further to promote the concept of detailed bookkeeping of human behavior which will be evaluated on the Day of Judgement. In fact, muslims formulate their partnership with God or Allah virtually as an exclusive partnership, a cosmic connection that overrides all worldly matters. The suicide bombers in the middle-east may be desperate youth but they are also absolutely convinced that they are doing God`s work. In fact, it is the perfect example where humans have lost their fear of death, such is their conviction that a higher cosmic force is guiding them.

The secular progressive movement in the West, India and the far-east (China), is moving towards the other extreme where they no longer want to find any explanations. They have gone through the search phase and have concluded that it is futile to search for explanations. There is no cosmic connections or higher purpose and death is simply the point in time where neurons stop firing in our brains. Hence the only objective becomes maximization of our happiness on earth while laws are setup to avoid harming other`s happiness. It is no wonder that the US constitution promotes life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. We will never hear any hindu saint or muslim pir advocating the pursuit of happiness as an objective in itself.

At the end of it all, we still do not know any better. Is the search for a cosmic master plan based explanation, as manifested in its extreme by Islam the answer? Or is the answer simply to stop looking for explanations, as is evident in the West? From a sheer physical comfort point of view, the western approach is awesome. From an emotional, spiritual perspective, the religion based approach provides answers. The jury is out.

Re: # 4 Ranjit Sahib,

Yes issue of death really has been the core issue of concern in all the history of human conscious life. Psychological fear of death would never let us fully believe that death can be a permanent end of life. Humanity is bound up in communities based on mutual love and affectation ... and may be on the basis of hatred against other communities. It is hard for humans to think that their loved ones who have died no more exist. Appeal in the belief in after life has strong roots in collective human psychology. So this belief can manifest itself, sometimes in extreme behaviour as well.

khurram

You are being too modest. Sure, some of it may not be ``completely original,`` but the rest of it completely turns conventional wisdom (or what people thought was wisdom) on its head. A tour de force, signaling Chowk`s arrival as a platform for showcasing innovative intellectual work. Best of luck.

Thanks Kaalchakra for such nice words of appreciation. This article does contain some of my original views also like humans always need to get ``theoretical explanations`` of every ``observed phenomenon``, and they do it because they are rational BY ESSENSE. And since they do possess essence so I am expressively going against the philosophy of ``Existentialism`` which denies the presence of pre-given human essence by emphasizing on slogan: ``Existence Precedes Essence``. Secondly my explanation of the notion of ``Children`s World`` is also original. The rest of the article is a synthesis of Sir James Frazer`s ``Golden Bough`` and Syed Ali Abbas Jalapuri`s ``Insan Aur Kainaat``. Syed Ali Abbas Jalalpuri Sahib has discussed only animistic form of magic. But the study of many examples of magic, as mentioned in ``Golden Bough`` would lead to the conclusion that pure magic was older than Animism.

Thanks again … and obviously I shall consider your advice of sending it to peer reviewed journals.

Regards!

Absolutely brilliant, Rafique Sahib. Have you submitted a copy to refereed jounals?