Is there a Religion that predates Animism?

[Spiderman]

That's actually not supported by the research. God's controlling the forces of nature came much later after animism or the magic stage. To answer the OP, there is nothing before animism. You can refer to the work of Jean Gebser and his structures of human consciousness to understand more about this. From the Magic Stage:

Around some unspecified time far back in our past, a change took place. Man entered into a second phase of development and gained a new structure of consciousness, the Magical structure. This structure is characterized by five primary characteristics: (1) its egolessness, (2) its spacelessness and timelessness, (3) its pointlike-unitary world, (4) its interweaving with nature, and (5) its magical reaction to the world.[9] A rudimentary self- sense was emerging and language is the real product of this change. Words as vehicles of power are typical of this time and structure; incantations as precursors to prayer emerged. Consciousness, in this phase, is characterized by man's intimate association with nature.

This is perhaps the most notable characteristic regarding this structure. Man, at this time, does not really distinguish himself apart from nature. He is a part of all that surrounds him; in the earliest stages it is hard to conceive that he views himself apart from his environment. The plants, animals and other elements of his surroundings share the same fate as he does; they experience in a similar manner. Latency is still dominant; little is transparent. Magic we can define in agreement with Gustav Meyrink as doing without knowing,[10] and it is magic man who is engaged in this activity in all aspects of his existence. The hunting and gathering, the quest for survival are all activities that consume most of his waking hours. But in the quiet of the evening around the fire; there is time for reflection of sorts. The activities of the day were codified (in speech) and recounted. Memory was collective, tribal, and all things were shared and experienced by all. The "I" is not a factor; the "we" is dominant.

This is a one-dimensional, pre-perspectival, point-like existence that occurs in a dream- like state. Unlike the dreamlessness of the previous structure, a recognition is developing in man that he is something different from that around him. Not fully awake to who he is or what his role in the world is, man is recognizing his self as an entity. The forms of expression for this structure can be found in the art and other artifacts that have been recovered from this time. Graven images and idols are what first come to mind. However, ritual should also be considered here, for it is in the specific and directed execution of certain actions and gestures that conveys much about this consciousness structure. Feuerstein feels that this structure persisted till around 40,000 BC and the advent of the Cro-Magnons.
​

God's controlling the forces of nature come in at the next stage of our evolution as a species in the Mythic structure of consciousness. What the mythic stage does is it takes the magic of the the early stage, where everything is connected to an controlled by you via invisible strings attached to you, and move that magic to an external being. This is where polytheism comes in, then much later monotheism.

You can read more about these here: AN OVERVIEW OF THE WORK OF JEAN GEBSER

That was helpful. Thanks

 

[Windwalker]

Lovely. But what kinda sources did this author use, besides his imagination and cliches he inherited from his own culture?

Are you serious? Here, do a little research about him rather than assuming it's just trivial stuff. His work is quite well received in academic circles. A Brief Biography

 

[Liu]

Are you serious? Here, do a little research about him rather than assuming it's just trivial stuff. His work is quite well received in academic circles. A Brief Biography

It just reminded me of an academic essay I read some years ago in a unversity seminar in which exactly this description of the development of human consciousness (especially the most easly forms) was pointed out as unfounded.
I don't remember the details, and the theory which this essay critiziced had this view on the ancient Greeks, and not on the pre-historic humans, but it sounds like exactly the same.
I'm not saying that it's necessarily wrong - I don't know having studied neither anthropology nor psychology. But I don't see how these theories are anything more than guesswork.
Nor do I see, and that was my point considering this thread's topic, how this points to animism. How could one prove that humans in these early structures of thinking (assuming them to be accurate) actually have any kind of spirituality yet?

 

[Windwalker]

I'm not saying that it's necessarily wrong - I don't know having studied neither anthropology nor psychology. But I don't see how these theories are anything more than guesswork.

One interesting thing about this is that you do see the same stage unfolding pattern in early childhood to adult development. Ironically Gebser was doing his work from a cultural approach at the same time Piaget was doing his work on cognitive development working with his children. I don't believe either knew of each or the work they were doing, but they parallel each other, once examining culture, the other childhood development. That alone is a quite interesting thing to note.

Aside from that, I believe a lot of the work is analyzing the literature, the artifacts and what they were doing at the time, and a list of other things I really haven't looked into. He references these in his work to support his theory, I believe. I am familiar with reading one's own culture back into history, and to be sure that has been pointed out. But as far as I am aware this is pretty solid and has been used quite a lot over the years.

Nor do I see, and that was my point considering this thread's topic, how this points to animism. How could one prove that humans in these early structures of thinking (assuming them to be accurate) actually have any kind of spirituality yet?

How it relates is because it specifically addresses the Magic stage of development, which is where animism comes into play. How they know they had spirituality is evidence in the artifacts of the day. They demonstrate stuff like cyclical thinking, various ritual patterns, statues, etc. The details of that evidence you'd have to reference his work with this.

Aside from Gebser, let's take a look at ourselves as humans today in our various stages of development. At what age do you think children start having what you can call a spiritual connection to the world? The world is a world of magic to a child, and they move and operate in very much magical modes of thinking and connecting to the world around them. There is a "feel" to this. Children may make up stories of fairies and magical creatures who are extensions of their wish-fulfilment.

Now, if human children as a pattern do this as they mature through and beyond that stage, you don't think that evolved historically in us as a species, prior to more sophisticated stages developed for us a species? To think otherwise to me would seem to indicate a certain belief we suddenly lept from primal man to modern man without any stages in between, that when the first modern humans appeared, they were structuring their modes of thinking adapted all the way up to modern times. That's just not feasible.

So if we see this in children, and the patterns of childhood development are universal, seen the same across all cultures and to this day there are no exceptions to this, then these early stages, which include the animistic magical word of early childhood, then it's safe to assume as a human species, our sense of spirituality has been there our ancestors. Were they ALL spiritual? Well, I'd say some more attuned that way than others, like today. This is a species level thing, not cultural. It expresses itself in many forms.

 

[Liu]

One interesting thing about this is that you do see the same stage unfolding pattern in early childhood to adult development. Ironically Gebser was doing his work from a cultural approach at the same time Piaget was doing his work on cognitive development working with his children. I don't believe either knew of each or the work they were doing, but they parallel each other, once examining culture, the other childhood development. That alone is a quite interesting thing to note.

Aside from that, I believe a lot of the work is analyzing the literature, the artifacts and what they were doing at the time, and a list of other things I really haven't looked into. He references these in his work to support his theory, I believe. I am familiar with reading one's own culture back into history, and to be sure that has been pointed out. But as far as I am aware this is pretty solid and has been used quite a lot over the years.

How it relates is because it specifically addresses the Magic stage of development, which is where animism comes into play. How they know they had spirituality is evidence in the artifacts of the day. They demonstrate stuff like cyclical thinking, various ritual patterns, statues, etc. The details of that evidence you'd have to reference his work with this.

But how would one know that these artifacts are of the same time periods as these stages in consciousness development? The first level for example sounds "lower" than that of apes. So the second one would be roughly that of apes. There is hardly any evidence for apes having spirituality, though.
And regarding pre-historic artifacts, there have been the most fanciful interpretations, especially when it comes to religion. A human-shaped figure for example can also be only that and needn't depict a deity.

Aside from Gebser, let's take a look at ourselves as humans today in our various stages of development. At what age do you think children start having what you can call a spiritual connection to the world? The world is a world of magic to a child, and they move and operate in very much magical modes of thinking and connecting to the world around them. There is a "feel" to this. Children may make up stories of fairies and magical creatures who are extensions of their wish-fulfilment.

I hardly ever have to do with small children, nor is my memory of my own childhood that good, so I can't really make a statement on that.

Now, if human children as a pattern do this as they mature through and beyond that stage, you don't think that evolved historically in us as a species, prior to more sophisticated stages developed for us a species? To think otherwise to me would seem to indicate a certain belief we suddenly lept from primal man to modern man without any stages in between, that when the first modern humans appeared, they were structuring their modes of thinking adapted all the way up to modern times. That's just not feasible.

Sure there were different stages, but who's to say that they are as described there?

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

In the beginning was God.
This would have been before there was a material universe.
So the first religion would have to have been Pure Monotheism.

Nope, you're begging the question that your interpretation of deity is right. It could be that the gods themselves are the products of the Universe's rise from Chaos.

But of course, aTheists read it in a book that we are the product of atoms
bouncing off one another. So for them, the first religion would have been nihilist Chemistry.

For agnostics, the first religion would have to have been philosophy.
So we may take this 3rd option to be most interesting -[/QUOTE]

Neither 'nihilist Chemistry' (whatever that is) nor philosophy are belief systems so this is wrong.

- because God himself at the start of the universe is technically not
really going to be a 'believer' in himself. The first non-God beings,
must have had a first moment of:
'How did all this happen?, perhaps God, perhaps nothing made it?'
So yes,
a good answer would be: philosophy.

No it wouldn't because you're baselessly assuming that other sentients would necessarily have believed the same thing as you which is a display of hubris. There's not a shred of evidence to support the notion that:

1. prehistoric hominids worshipped One God;
2. That any such One God is the same as the one you worship;
3. That their religion would be the same as yours considering humankind has been illiterate for the vast, vast majority of its existence - and revealed religions such as yours always rely on a canon of literature.

 

[corynski]

That's actually not supported by the research. God's controlling the forces of nature came much later after animism or the magic stage. To answer the OP, there is nothing before animism. You can refer to the work of Jean Gebser and his structures of human consciousness to understand more about this. From the Magic Stage:

Around some unspecified time far back in our past, a change took place. Man entered into a second phase of development and gained a new structure of consciousness, the Magical structure. This structure is characterized by five primary characteristics: (1) its egolessness, (2) its spacelessness and timelessness, (3) its pointlike-unitary world, (4) its interweaving with nature, and (5) its magical reaction to the world.[9] A rudimentary self- sense was emerging and language is the real product of this change. Words as vehicles of power are typical of this time and structure; incantations as precursors to prayer emerged. Consciousness, in this phase, is characterized by man's intimate association with nature.

This is perhaps the most notable characteristic regarding this structure. Man, at this time, does not really distinguish himself apart from nature. He is a part of all that surrounds him; in the earliest stages it is hard to conceive that he views himself apart from his environment. The plants, animals and other elements of his surroundings share the same fate as he does; they experience in a similar manner. Latency is still dominant; little is transparent. Magic we can define in agreement with Gustav Meyrink as doing without knowing,[10] and it is magic man who is engaged in this activity in all aspects of his existence. The hunting and gathering, the quest for survival are all activities that consume most of his waking hours. But in the quiet of the evening around the fire; there is time for reflection of sorts. The activities of the day were codified (in speech) and recounted. Memory was collective, tribal, and all things were shared and experienced by all. The "I" is not a factor; the "we" is dominant.

This is a one-dimensional, pre-perspectival, point-like existence that occurs in a dream- like state. Unlike the dreamlessness of the previous structure, a recognition is developing in man that he is something different from that around him. Not fully awake to who he is or what his role in the world is, man is recognizing his self as an entity. The forms of expression for this structure can be found in the art and other artifacts that have been recovered from this time. Graven images and idols are what first come to mind. However, ritual should also be considered here, for it is in the specific and directed execution of certain actions and gestures that conveys much about this consciousness structure. Feuerstein feels that this structure persisted till around 40,000 BC and the advent of the Cro-Magnons.
​

God's controlling the forces of nature come in at the next stage of our evolution as a species in the Mythic structure of consciousness. What the mythic stage does is it takes the magic of the the early stage, where everything is connected to an controlled by you via invisible strings attached to you, and move that magic to an external being. This is where polytheism comes in, then much later monotheism.

You can read more about these here: AN OVERVIEW OF THE WORK OF JEAN GEBSER

Windwalker...... I can't thank you enough for posting these references, as I have never heard of Jean Gebser, although I've read many of the others mentioned. My reading was done back in the 1960's when I was studying anthropology...... and now seems like light years away. May I quote something I found in your reference:
In a 1955 diary entry, Gebser observed, "Becoming an ego is painful. Hardly anyone finds his ego prior to the middle of his life. Then most people remain stuck in it and become hardened in it. The still more painful process of ego-transcendence with all its crises and relapses is accomplished by only a few. But it is just this ego-transcendence that is the decisive task of human life."
Absolutely stunning observation ....... 'the decisive task of human life.'

 

[Windwalker]

Windwalker...... I can't thank you enough for posting these references, as I have never heard of Jean Gebser, although I've read many of the others mentioned.

Most of the time I bring this stuff up people's eyes glaze over. I'm very happy you find this intriguing! I recently made an acquaintance with this person I find quite insightful who digs into some of Gebser's thoughts. I'll share this one video from her she put out I find quite well explaining some of his thoughts. It's around 40 minutes long, but I think you'll find yourself wanting more. I love the explanation of dialectical thought and its end folding into paradoxical thought, which I tend to dance around exploring its dimensions. I hope you find it valuable as well.

My reading was done back in the 1960's when I was studying anthropology...... and now seems like light years away. May I quote something I found in your reference:
In a 1955 diary entry, Gebser observed, "Becoming an ego is painful. Hardly anyone finds his ego prior to the middle of his life. Then most people remain stuck in it and become hardened in it. The still more painful process of ego-transcendence with all its crises and relapses is accomplished by only a few. But it is just this ego-transcendence that is the decisive task of human life."
Absolutely stunning observation ....... 'the decisive task of human life.'

That is exactly right. I'm at that place in my life that in order to truly move forward I have to recognize the ego rearing its head up out of habit and set it aside to truly explore what vistas lay ahead for that "self" in the next phase of being. I find that door in music, in the physical body, and in the exploration of the mind and soul. I am a child in the face of this vast expanse.

 

[Windwalker]

But how would one know that these artifacts are of the same time periods as these stages in consciousness development?

Because they reflect it. How would you know where somewhat is at in their thinking by the posts they write online? How do I know who am I talking to is a Christian fundamentalist versus an atheist? If you want the details of what Gebser was looking at, you'll have to read the source material itself.

The first level for example sounds "lower" than that of apes. So the second one would be roughly that of apes. There is hardly any evidence for apes having spirituality, though.

I really don't see that at all in the link I shared. The first stage is Archaic, and that would be where apes are at. Not the second stage.

Now as far as apes, or other animal life forms having spirituality, I'd have to qualify my thoughts a little on this first. I'd say all of life has a spiritual connection to the world and their own being, felt at some level or another. The condition of existing alone is a spiritual one. It's bloody magical!

That humans lose touch with this in themselves because we have divorced ourselves from ourselves by crawling into our thinking minds and losing touch with our bodies, retreating into our skulls instead and dragging the mass of flesh along with us to support the brain that we see ourselves as, is something unique to the human condition, I believe. This is what the myth of the Fall touches upon, that existential crisis of being.

Now when I said this spiritual condition is "felt to one degree or another", that means that the taste of this is the same for all of life, but how it is held and understood by our level, or stage of consciousness will be experienced to greater or lesser degrees of depth. The richness of a tomato will depend on the construction of our taste buds and how refined or dull they are because of our dietary intake, such as dulling them with heavy salts or smoking cigarettes. You can still taste the tomato, just not a lot of depth to it.

Another metaphor, it's all water, and it's all just as wet, but in a human based on our capacities to hold more, and more as we develop those capacities, it will be held by the conscious mind in greater degrees of that light. It's not that humans do and apes don't. It's that our conscious recognition of it is higher.

There's a great quote from the poem Whales Weep Not! I think captures this. "And all this happens in the sea, in the salt where God is also love, but without words." I love that, and think it speaks to how I feel and experience that spiritual bond that connects all living things together. Spirituality is not a human-only thing. It's univeserval. It's the condition Life itself.

And regarding pre-historic artifacts, there have been the most fanciful interpretations, especially when it comes to religion. A human-shaped figure for example can also be only that and needn't depict a deity.

And you are ready to dismiss anything people say about these things? Again, if you question the validity of it, then find critics who look at the specific details he presents and weigh them against those who find validity in it. I agree we need to be careful, but I also believe we need to be careful of being cynical about everything scholars and researchers teach.

One of the pitfalls of postmodernist deconstruction is to leave you with nothing at all but a smoking ash heap. I think there is way to approach these things with a careful understanding, that you don't mistake as hard fact, like physics. Truth need not be 100% accurate to be quite useful and powerful. These models in fact are useful and powerful, and predictions of what we will see bear out time and again using them.

I hardly ever have to do with small children, nor is my memory of my own childhood that good, so I can't really make a statement on that.

Sure there were different stages, but who's to say that they are as described there?

The researchers say. And again, no data has come along to show the models are flawed. The opposite is true. Everywhere you look, it's validated again and again, like all the evidence coming in to support our models of evolution. If you have a different model, then offer it.

 

[DavidFirth]

Christianity and Judaism started when God created. Nothing predates that.

 

[Windwalker]

Christianity and Judaism started when God created. Nothing predates that.

So there was zero religion until Moses? Christians follow Jesus who was born 2000 years ago. Judaism did come to be until Moses, some supposedly 3500 years ago. What did humans believe and practice prior to these? I think there is tons of evidence out there there was quite a variety of religious practices before these.

 

[DavidFirth]

So there was zero religion until Moses? Christians follow Jesus who was born 2000 years ago. Judaism did come to be until Moses, some supposedly 3500 years ago. What did humans believe and practice prior to these? I think there is tons of evidence out there there was quite a variety of religious practices before these.

Not arguing that. Just stating a fact.

 

[Liu]

Because they reflect it. How would you know where somewhat is at in their thinking by the posts they write online? How do I know who am I talking to is a Christian fundamentalist versus an atheist? If you want the details of what Gebser was looking at, you'll have to read the source material itself.

I might take a look at it, but not sure whether I'm that interested - actually, I mostly replied to your comment on this since you posted it shortly after I had asked in this thread how one would be able to know about such pre-historic things and since your comment seemed to make claims on pre-historic things without specifying the reasoning behind, i.e. making the very mistake I had just pointed to.

I really don't see that at all in the link I shared. The first stage is Archaic, and that would be where apes are at. Not the second stage.

Apes are self-aware (some species at least), so it can't be Archaic. The second stage also includes language, which apes don't have invented on their own yet as far as I know, but they can learn sign language and teach it to their children, so the mental capacity is there. Therefore I'd say they are on the second stage, or at least on the verge to it.

Now as far as apes, or other animal life forms having spirituality, I'd have to qualify my thoughts a little on this first. I'd say all of life has a spiritual connection to the world and their own being, felt at some level or another. The condition of existing alone is a spiritual one. It's bloody magical!

That humans lose touch with this in themselves because we have divorced ourselves from ourselves by crawling into our thinking minds and losing touch with our bodies, retreating into our skulls instead and dragging the mass of flesh along with us to support the brain that we see ourselves as, is something unique to the human condition, I believe. This is what the myth of the Fall touches upon, that existential crisis of being.

Now when I said this spiritual condition is "felt to one degree or another", that means that the taste of this is the same for all of life, but how it is held and understood by our level, or stage of consciousness will be experienced to greater or lesser degrees of depth. The richness of a tomato will depend on the construction of our taste buds and how refined or dull they are because of our dietary intake, such as dulling them with heavy salts or smoking cigarettes. You can still taste the tomato, just not a lot of depth to it.

Another metaphor, it's all water, and it's all just as wet, but in a human based on our capacities to hold more, and more as we develop those capacities, it will be held by the conscious mind in greater degrees of that light. It's not that humans do and apes don't. It's that our conscious recognition of it is higher.

There's a great quote from the poem Whales Weep Not! I think captures this. "And all this happens in the sea, in the salt where God is also love, but without words." I love that, and think it speaks to how I feel and experience that spiritual bond that connects all living things together. Spirituality is not a human-only thing. It's univeserval. It's the condition Life itself.

Fair enough. I think I get what you mean, but I wouldn't have called it spiritual.

The researchers say. And again, no data has come along to show the models are flawed. The opposite is true. Everywhere you look, it's validated again and again, like all the evidence coming in to support our models of evolution. If you have a different model, then offer it.

I just see that theories like this one often tend to be taken as dogma instead of as theories. As long as we can agree on them being not proven yet, all is well.

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

religions such as yours

My religion is based on direct experience of God, and logic, not on canon-fodder.
Earlier I outlined 3 potential arguments as the only 3 permutations that could exist; logically.
ps
learn to multi-quote

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

My religion is based on direct experience of God, and logic, not on canon-fodder.

That's a pretty conceited statement. If your religion were based on logic you'd realise it's illogical for you to base your claims on circular reasoning - you believe there is one god because God told you so therefore the only god primitive peoples could have worshipped was God therefore the first religion was worship of your God which would have said there is only God - and begging of the question because you're presupposing you're correct without basis. In fact your post looks suspiciously like preaching.

Earlier I outlined 3 potential arguments as the only 3 permutations that could exist; logically.
ps
learn to multi-quote

The multi-quote feature is only relevant when quoting from multiple posts and you've only made one in this thread. Where are your 3 potential arguments? I saw empty claims in your post; nothing more.