Animism

With a foundation of every child learning to become a human being, _animism_ is one of the Inadequate World Hypotheses, as a primitive sort of common sense. Animism is criticized for its Inadequacies in World Hypotheses, on grounds of Scope and Precision, specifically due to _inadequate precision_.

> §2. _The animistic world hypothesis, an example of inadequate precision_

> Animism, as a metaphysical hypothesis, is the theory that takes common-sense man, the human being, the person, as its primitive root metaphor. > * This is the most appealing root metaphor that has ever been selected. > * Nothing is so interesting to man as man. > * To take man, everything about him, his body, his shape, his actions, his expressions, his motives, his emotions, and anything else about man that appeals to man's fancy, as the source of explanation of everything in the world: what could be more to man's taste, or seem more natural? > * Every child is a natural animist, and so (if the secret be known) is every man, not only primitive man, but civilized man as well. > * This view of the world is the only one in which a man feels completely at home. > It is perhaps as well for us to learn early, therefore, that we shall probably never feel completely at home in a world view that is adequate. For the world does not seem to be made after man's own image [p. 120, editorial paragraphing added]

Animism, as a root metaphor, can be personified into _spirit_, but a list of categories and a theory of truth would be a challenge to produce.

> * What is thunder? > * * It is the angry voice of a great spirit. > * * It is the stamping of the hoofs of the steeds of a great spirit. > * * It is a great spirit clanging his arms. It is the roar of the lightning bolts hurled by a great spirit. > * * It may even be a spirit itself roaring in pursuit of some other spirit to devour. > These interpretations are all consonant with the categories of spirit, and there is nothing but the limitations of poetic fancy to put a stop to such interpretations. > * There is no one precise and determinate interpretation of thunder, nor is there any precise method for finding one, nor is there any hope that more factual observation will ever produce one through these categories. > * On the contrary, the more details of observation are presented, the more the animistic imagination luxuriates and the more indeterminate the interpretations become—that is, the more mutually contrary and equally consonant interpretations are thrown in our lap. [p. 122, editorial paragraphing added]

The problem of resolving _which spirit_ is mightier than others relies on resolution of human beings who may be recognized (or challenged) as being authoritative.

> The natural animistic theory of cognitive value is the authority of spirit. What a great spirit says is true, and what the greatest spirit says is most true. > When the direct word of a spirit cannot be obtained -- in his immediate presence, in dreams, in voices, in omens, in prognostications, in sacred traditions, or in holy books -- then the word of the most authoritative representative of a spirit must be taken. > * So we come to the authority of shaman, medicine man, and priest. > Animism is the natural metaphysical support of authoritarianism, which inevitably culminates in the dogma of infallible authority. > * It is ultimately infallible authority that is appealed to for rendering final and determinate the factual interpretation of the animistic world hypothesis. [p. 123, editorial paragraphing added]

Pepper sees attempts to fix animism as a world hypothesis as getting farther and farther away from Evidence and Corroboration.

Animism thus gives us a good idea of the symptoms of inadequacy through lack of precision. > * Since the categories lack determinateness, they are unable to control their interpretations, which multiply about the same fact and mutually contradict one another. > * The situation gets worse rather than better the more information is brought forward. To save the theory there follows a strong tendency to take refuge in abstractions and hypostatizations. > On either count the theory convicts itself of inadequacy. [p. 127, editorial paragraphing added]