FRIHOST • FORUMS • FAQ • TOS • BLOGS • DIRECTORY
You are invited to Log in or Register a Frihost Account!

Animism

   Frihost Forum Index -> Lifestyle and News -> Philosophy and Religion
 


silliman
It looks like many of the organized religions of the world are fairly represented in this forum. However, I do not see animism.

Animists attempt to relate respectfully with the persons (human, rock, plant, animal, bird, ancestral, etc.) who are also members of the wider community of life. This concept is not that dissimilar to the claims made by modern metaphysics regarding the "Unified Field" -- "intelligence" that is manifest in, on, above, below and throughout all creation.

Animism is often extended to include the belief that personalized, supernatural beings (or souls) endowed with reason, intelligence and volition inhabit ordinary objects as well as animate beings, and govern their existence (pantheism or animatisms). More simply put, the belief is that "everything is alive", "everything is conscious" or "everything has a soul".

Some say that a new infant child is pure, innocent and closest to its creator, and therefore more "connected" to god. If the parallel is true for humankind; that is, if the infancy of the human race first conceived animism, perhaps that is closer to the truth and the modern theo-political religions that "dominate" the world today.
smartbei
Frankly, this is too far out-there. It requires not only that you believe that there are such things as souls, but that they inhabit objects as inanimate as rocks. How would you go about showing this, let alone proving it?

In the "infancy of humankind" it was also concieved that the world was flat, that the sun orbited the earth, and that the moon was composed of cheese. However, those are no truer considering the "age of humankind". Why should this be?
Code of Ruin
smartbei wrote:
Frankly, this is too far out-there. It requires not only that you believe that there are such things as souls, but that they inhabit objects as inanimate as rocks. How would you go about showing this, let alone proving it?

Many people believe in souls. As for showing that they inhabit rocks and stuff, that is impossible to show and to prove. But we can't prove there is a god either. Yet that doesn't stop people from believing so why should animism be any different. It seems quite closely related to shintoism: the old nature religion of Japan. There people would worship elements of nature, be it a rock or waterfall, because the Kami (gods) would manifest themselves through those.
smartbei
The reason people believe in either a god or souls is beyond me, because there is no way to show their basic existence.
silliman
smartbei wrote:
The reason people believe in either a god or souls is beyond me, because there is no way to show their basic existence.


Smartbei,

You missed my point and you got lost in traditional conceptualization of the term "soul.” If you are uncomfortable conceptualizing things that you cannot see or "prove" through scientific methodology, then believe only what you can see. That is fine. Surely you see science telling you and proving that all life shows signs manifesting "intelligence."

Whose “intelligence” is this? Where does this intelligence come from?

You might also think that humankind is the pinnacle of all life forms, yet the "intelligence" of the Unified Field of life does not come from humankind (e.g., a plant cell that knows how to photosynthesize energy, or the intelligence of an electron knowing how to spin, how fast to spin and in which direction around its neutron).

Frankly, I don't care to call that intelligence god (e.g., a white bearded old man somewhere in a cloud called heaven), nor do I care to believe in floating, disembodied spirits or souls. But no one can disprove what physicist and other hard core scientists have studied and observed – the existence of the Unified Field or intelligence and order in the universe.

If you can’t see that the world has some degree of order, and if you don’t see manifest intelligence around you, then we are not able to continue the conversation about Shintoism, Nature or animism. Our points of reference are too far from each other to have a meaningful dialog.

In my mind, being spiritual is not necessarily being religious or dogmatic. And science and religion are not antithetical or countervailing.
CompactHaven
I've heard of American Indians believing in this. Please tell me, is it wrong for you to rest your bike on a tree? How about step on rocks. Do you believe rocks and such feel pain?
BruceTheDauber
smartbei wrote:
Frankly, this is too far out-there. It requires not only that you believe that there are such things as souls, but that they inhabit objects as inanimate as rocks. How would you go about showing this, let alone proving it??


Too far out-there compared to what? That God turned into a human being, died on a tree, and then got up again? That people who make the mistake of believing the wrong religion will be punished forever by fire? Sorry, but compared to that stuff there's nothing far out about thinking there are natural things are indued with spirits. Sure, you can't prove it's true (and it is almost certainly not true), but you can't prove that humans have souls, either.
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Lifestyle and News -> Philosophy and Religion

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2007 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.