Researching
animism and shamanism |
 click to return home |
|||
My most recent research has been about "animism".
Click here to go to the companion website for my book Animism: Respecting the Living World (2005). I define "animism" as "the attempt to live respectfully as members of the diverse community of living persons (only some of whom are human) which we call the world or cosmos". |
 |
|||
 |
||||
I've also edited Shamanism: A Reader (2003). With Robert Wallis, I'm currently co-writing the Historical Dictionary of Shamanism (2006). I have a problem with defining "shamanism" because although there are lots of different kinds of shamans in the world, few of them belong to an -ism that should be called shamanism. Or, rather, the majority of shamans are animists. Conversely, it is not helpful to say that animists are shamanists. |
 |
|||
| More interestingly, I argue, certain features of animism make it necessary for there to be shamans. Shamans may be mediators between different kinds of persons, they may be ritualists who lead their communities in respectful ceremonial engagement with other-than-human persons, they may be combatants against the aggression of predatory enemies (especially other-than-human ones), and they may be healers of diseases caused by the assault of predatory enemies. | ||||
|
||||
| Nonetheless, before we get too romantic, shamans are commonly suspected of being dangerous in various ways. If they know how to combat sorcerers, might they also become sorcerers? There's a lot to be said for linking shamans with tricksters .. but I'll not say it here. | ||||
| But one suggestion of how different things may look if we respect indigenous discourses about shamans may be provided by considering the implications of reclassifying "hallucinogenic" or "entheogenic" plants and substances as emetics. That is, the chief aid provided to shamans by some plant persons is not inducing visions but vomit. For more on that, you'll have to wait for Robert and my dictionary! | ||||
| Finally, for now, I've said elsewhere that academia isn't
merely the collection of interesting facts that may aid in the winning
of a pub quiz, but an ongoing conversation full of questions. In 2005
I was privileged to be part of a panel at the American Academy of Religion
annual conference discussing the implications of the work of Marc Bekoff
(ethologist interested in animal cognition and behaviour). The papers
from that panel have now been published in Zygon: Journal of Religion
and Science. My paper wonders what would happen if animals, animists
and academic engaged in respectful conversation. Well, that's a bit of
it — |
 |
|||
|
||||