Animism in the Sciences Then and Now _ E-flux
11
Skip navigation Clients Archive Program Projects Journal About Subscribe Contact RSS Follow us Search: Search View all Issues Distribution Books Colophon Letters to the Editor Please note: A printready PDF of this article is available. To download it, click the Download PDF link at the top of the page. Print Cornelius Borck Animism in the Sciences Then and Now Animism began in the sciences, when the chemist and physician Georg Ernst Stahl coined the term for describing the specificity of living matter, its distinctive character visàvis non living things. Its modern, almost inverted meaning, however, goes back to the Anthropologist Edward Burnett Tylor who used it to characterize a worldview that does not discriminate—or at least, not properly—between living and non living matter but believes in “universal animation of nature” (Tylor: Primitive Culture (1871), chapt. VIII). Tylor’s concept of “animism” as a deviant worldview points to an irrevocable—and perhaps irrecoverable—separation of the spiritual from the material. If animism named the belief in having no separation between the material and the spiritual worlds, then the very coining of the term would indicate that such an inclusive worldview had already become anomalous by the time he introduced it in his book Primitive Culture (1871). Regardless of the concept’s clear history and of the processes that motivated Tylor (1832–1917) to elaborate his theory of religion—though such a point of rupture would be difficult to locate historically—dichotomizing regimes that classify things and beings as either animate or inanimate, material or spiritual, can well be traced to different places and periods throughout history; they certainly predate the progressivism of the nineteenth century, which was a driving force in Tylor’s theory. The same applies to alternative, holistic, or integrative worldviews, which are also shaped by vastly different places and perspectives—with some dating back to the beginnings of human cultures and others stemming from the current interest in animism. With Tylor, however, these alternatives became widely associated with questions about evolutionary progress, and animism became the label for a primitive form of belief. The concept of animism hence entails a twofold discrimination: the differentiation between two classificatory regimes as well as between hierarchical divisions. Consequently, animism henceforth described a double loss, one of access
-
Upload
boris-velines -
Category
Documents
-
view
11 -
download
2
description
Animism
Transcript of Animism in the Sciences Then and Now _ E-flux
-
Skipnavigation
ClientsArchiveProgramProjectsJournalAboutSubscribeContactRSS
Followus
Search: Search
ViewallIssuesDistributionBooksColophonLetterstotheEditorPleasenote:AprintreadyPDFofthisarticleisavailable.Todownloadit,clicktheDownloadPDFlinkatthetopofthepage.Print
CorneliusBorck
AnimismintheSciencesThenandNowAnimismbeganinthesciences,whenthechemistandphysicianGeorgErnstStahlcoinedthetermfordescribingthespecificityoflivingmatter,itsdistinctivecharactervisvisnonlivingthings.Itsmodern,almostinvertedmeaning,however,goesbacktotheAnthropologistEdwardBurnettTylorwhousedittocharacterizeaworldviewthatdoesnotdiscriminateoratleast,notproperlybetweenlivingandnonlivingmatterbutbelievesinuniversalanimationofnature(Tylor:PrimitiveCulture(1871),chapt.VIII).Tylorsconceptofanimismasadeviantworldviewpointstoanirrevocableandperhapsirrecoverableseparationofthespiritualfromthematerial.Ifanimismnamedthebeliefinhavingnoseparationbetweenthematerialandthespiritualworlds,thentheverycoiningofthetermwouldindicatethatsuchaninclusiveworldviewhadalreadybecomeanomalousbythetimeheintroduceditinhisbookPrimitiveCulture(1871).RegardlessoftheconceptsclearhistoryandoftheprocessesthatmotivatedTylor(18321917)toelaboratehistheoryofreligionthoughsuchapointofrupturewouldbedifficulttolocatehistoricallydichotomizingregimesthatclassifythingsandbeingsaseitheranimateorinanimate,materialorspiritual,canwellbetracedtodifferentplacesandperiodsthroughouthistorytheycertainlypredatetheprogressivismofthenineteenthcentury,whichwasadrivingforceinTylorstheory.Thesameappliestoalternative,holistic,orintegrativeworldviews,whicharealsoshapedbyvastlydifferentplacesandperspectiveswithsomedatingbacktothebeginningsofhumanculturesandothersstemmingfromthecurrentinterestinanimism.
WithTylor,however,thesealternativesbecamewidelyassociatedwithquestionsaboutevolutionaryprogress,andanimismbecamethelabelforaprimitiveformofbelief.Theconceptofanimismhenceentailsatwofolddiscrimination:thedifferentiationbetweentwoclassificatoryregimesaswellasbetweenhierarchicaldivisions.Consequently,animismhenceforthdescribedadoubleloss,oneofaccess
-
tospirits(whatevertheybeandwherevertheysupposedlyreside)andoneofanunderstandingforpeoplewhocommunicateorinteractwiththem.
OnionstuckwithpinsfoundinSomersetEngland,19thcentury.ExhibitusedbyEdwardBurnettTylorasdemonstrationofsympatheticmagicat
theInternationalFolkloreCongress,London,1891.
Demarcatingapremodernandallegedlyprimitiveworldview,animismwasthenameforadistancingandexoticizingviewfromasuperiorEuropeanperspective.Classifyingalternativeworldviewsaslowerstepsinarigidlyevolutionaryschemahelpedtodefine(andexert)Europeansuperiority.Innotingalackofprogress,andwithdeeptiestonineteenthcenturyprogressivism,theconceptofanimismisconstitutiveoftheveryemergenceofmodernistepistemologies.Addressingforeignculturesasitdid,thenotionofanimismfosteredtheEuropeanperspectiveonmaterialism,rationality,objectivity,andtheallinallmodernincontrasttoallegedlyirrational,superstitious,andnonobjectiveworldviews.Amongthemanydivergentandpartlycontradictingmodernagendas,theculturalevolutionaryprogramgaineditsshapeandsenseofdirectionfromasupposedlyclearandobviousopposite.Whatevermodernismspeculiaritiesorspecificities,wecansaywithsomecertaintythatthemodernistprogramitselfwasnotprimitive.
Itisthishistorythatmakesanimismproblematicanddifficult.Animismisnotjustrootedinahistoricalcontextthatnowappearshighlyproblematictheveryphenomenonthatanimismwassupposedtocapturecannoteasilybedetachedfromthehistoricalbaggage,fromtheveryperspectivefromwhichitderived,fromthestrictlyevolutionaryfocusinglensandthesenseofsuperioritythatwasinscribedintoit.Whateveranimismdidorreferredto,itspotentialdoesnotsomuchdependonthequestionofhowtoregainperspectivesthathavebeendiscarded,butmoreontheproblemoffindingaperspectiveoutsideaseparationofworldviews.
Forthehistorianofscience,animismisfirstofallanineteenthcenturycategorydeservingcriticalscrutiny.Animismcanobviouslynolongerbenaivelyusedtodescribecertainformsofreligioninstead,
-
theconceptscolonizingstrategymustbedecoded.Anyinabilitytocomprehendsomeoneorsomethingrelatesbacktotheactorslimitedcapacitiesandshouldnotautomaticallytranslateintoincomprehensibility.Inatrulyglobalizedworld,inwhichmediationandarticulationbecomeincreasinglyrecognizedasmultidirectional,anyefforttoexplainanddeclaresomeoneorsomethingasprimitivemustbeconsideredasaproblematicandobjectionablestrategy.Thisproblematiclegacyofanimismhasmeanwhilebeenwidelyacknowledged.Atthesametime,however,Tylorsdiagnosisofprimitiveculturedidnotquestionuniversalhumanintelligence,nordidhesharetheconcernofhiscontemporariesaboutdegeneration.
Moreimportantly,andpossiblymoreproblematically,thecritiqueofanimismasascientificconcepthardlyleadstoastraightforwardrevivalofitsrejectedcontent,evenoncethepejorativelabelinghasabated.Attemptstoswiftlytaketheconceptasaguidetorecuperatelostmeaningswillprobablyendinanunfoundednostalgia,aslongassuchaimsdonotaccountforthetransformativepowersofthemodernismthatstillseparatescontemporarytheorizingfrompreevolutionarythinking.Thisskepticismtowardseffortstoreanimatetheworld(regardlessofthemeaningfulnessofsuchendeavors)callsforamorenuancedrecognitionofanimismsembeddednessintheveryconceptofevolutionaryprogressanditsepistemologicalimplications.
PossibleseweldonatedbyEdwardBurnettTylortothePittRiversMuseum,andrecordedasspecimenofaWitchesLadder.
Inthisrespect,areflexiveandcriticalengagementwithanimismopensadiscursivespaceforreworkingthehistoryofmodernwaysofknowingfromapostcolonialperspective.Designedforlabelingallegedlyprimitivesystemsofbelief,atthecolonialperiphery,incontrasttosupposedlyadvancedandmorerationalEuropeanstylesofknowing,animisminadvertentlypointstocoreproblemsofthemodernistepistemology.Likeanimismitself,modernepistemologyrestsonfundamental,dichotomizingoppositionsnatureversusculture,rationalversusirrational,subjectversusobject,objectiveversussubjective,straightversusqueer,andsoforth.Theconceptofanimismepitomizestheconstitutivebuthighlyproblematicroleofthisdichotomizationinmodernepistemologies,particularlyintheoppositionsofforeignversusfamiliarandspiritualversusmaterial.
Inretrospect,itiseasytoseehowtheconceptwasdesignedtofunctionafteronehundredandfiftyyears,itsideologicalbackgroundhasbecometangible.Situatinganimismagainstthisbackground,
-
however,bringstotheforeyetanotherimportantaspect:theapproachappearstoapplynolessviolentlytotheEuropeanconditionthantothecolonizedperspectives.Ofcourse,sincetheenlightenment,scienceandsocietywerebelievedtodeveloprationalfacultiesinpeople.Buttherapidprogressofscienceandtechnologythemselveshadleftmanybewilderedwhenconfrontedwithevernewerpowersandstrangeinventions.Forthehistorianofscience,animismisindeedpartofanepistemictransformationthoughnotofamovetowardsrationalism,secularism,andmaterialism,butofalargerandmorecomplextransformationthatalsosawoccultismandspiritualismrisingtofindahomeinEurope.
Vitalismandspiritualismhaveanespeciallylonghistoryinthehumanitiesandlifescienceswiththebeginningofindustrialization,particularlytheemergenceofnewcommunicationtechnologies,speculationsaboutknowledgebeyonditsordinarylimitsbecamewidespreadandconnectedtothenewestadvancesinscience.Itisthusbecauseofthehistoricalconfluenceofanimismwithaheightenedinterestinoccultism,aswellastheemergenceofthepsycheasthenewconceptofsubjectiveexperience,thatanimisticactivitiesandconcernscometobeofparticularinterest.Forthepurposesofthisshortpaper,itmaysufficetomentionhow,aroundtheendofthenineteenthcentury,thediscoveryofnewwavesandrays,forexample,extendedtherealmofmaterialforcesostensiblyintomoremysteriousrealms.Atthesametime,newmediatechnologiesfosteredthepossibilitytocommunicateacrosstimeandspacewiththeemergenceofnewformsofmediaandspeciallydesignedeventsandsitesfortheirtransmissionandreception.Inthemidstoftheseturbulenttransformations,therationalsubjectoftheenlightenmentintimatedarathercontestedandproblematicconceptofthepsycheapainfullydominantspacethatdevelopedthroughoutthetwentiethcentury,forcingpsychologyandseveralotherhumanitiesintoexistence.
Neonatalmacaquemonkeyimitatingfacialexpressions.Photographsfromstudyonmirrorneurons.
Wasthebanonanimismaprerequisitefortheemergenceofthepsyche?Thehistoryofideasrarelyfollowssuchanoscillatinglogic,butthetwowerecertainlyintertwined.Given,thattheveryactofconceptualizinganimismforcharacterizingallegedlyprimitiveformsofreligionfollowedfromacolonialistEuropeanperspectiveuponnonEuropeancultures,givenfurthermore,thatanimismoweditsplausibilitytothenewlyestablishedevolutionaryframework,andfinallygiven,thatanimismaddressedimplicitlyalsomanyepistemologicalproblemsbackinEuropeatthetime,itbecomesobviousthattheseproblemswerenotsolvedsimplybytheinventionofthisconcept.Infact,animisminitspolemicalandideologicalsensedidnotandwillnotsolveanyepistemologicalproblemsbutitmayacquirenewmeaningasadescriptivetermforcapturingtheeeriequalitiesofscientificpracticesthemselves.Inthisregard,itcouldbesaidthatanimismistheflipsideofrationalismandthebeliefintechnoscientificprogress.Here,animismacquiresanotherlayerofmeaningonethatdoesnotpointtoastrangeformofreligionbuttotheparadoxicalandanimatingeffectsofendorsedtechnologicalandscientificpractices.Inadditiontoitspotentialforthehistoryandphilosophyofscienceandreligion,animismmayhencealsoserveasadescriptive,heuristicconceptinthehistoricalepistemologyoftheemergenceoftodays
-
powerfulnano,techno,andbiosciences.
PossibleseweldonatedbyEdwardBurnettTylortothePittRiversMuseum,andrecordedasspecimenofaWitchesLadder.
Onthesurface,modernsciencesincludingthehumanities,biology,andlifesciencesstillappeartosubscribetoasimilar,ifnotthesame,scientificepistemologythatTylorregardedasprogresstowardsrationality,andthathecelebratedastheevolutionaryvictoryofEurope.Regardlessofthemanyspiritualists,speculativeesoterics,andmysticsamongtheeminentscientistssinceTylorsdays,thereisofficiallynospaceforspiritualism,religion,orextranaturalpowerswithinthesciencestheystrictlyfollowtheirnaturalizingagenda,searchingacrossthematerialworldforfinergrainedanalysesofthevariouspowersatwork.Atthesametime,however,anddespitetheirmodern,rationalagendatonaturalizetheworldinthebrightandcoldlightofscientificexplanationandtechnologicalcontrol,todaystechnosciencesarecharacterizedbywaysofknowinganddoingthathardlycomplywiththisepistemology.
-
SpiritTechnologyInboard1000authoredbyRobertA.Waters.
Todaystechnosciencesconstituteevermoreentitieswithagencyinrelationtobiological,individual,subjective,collective,orpoliticallevelsofbeing.Inthiscontext,animismmaydemonstrateanunexpectedpotentialasaconceptualtoolforhighlightinganddescribingpreciselythosedeviationsfrommodernepistemologythatpassunderitsownguidance.Inthename(orunderthedisguise)ofanaturalizingepistemology,animationseemstoflourishasapowerfultopicinresearch,development,andinteractioninboththesocialandspiritualworlds.Nearlytwentyyearsago,BrunoLatouralarmeduswhenhedeclared,Wehaveneverbeenmodern,andthatthereareallkindsofnonhumanactorsincontemporaryscienceandtechnology.Latourhasbeencriticizedfortheanimismimplicitinthispositionandperhapsquiterightlyso,becausehishybridsremainnonspecifictheyaretoogeneral,ignoringspecificitiesandlocalcircumstances.However,onecouldequallyarguethat,ifanything,suchhybridsarenotanimisticenoughforevaluatingthedynamicsandefficaciesofnewontologiesinthetechnosciences.Thereismuchthatcanbesaidhere,butforthesakeofbrevityIwillhighlightjusttwoexamplesoftheanimismofcontemporarytechnoscientificpractices.
Todayssciencesconstituteplentystrangetechnonatureculturalhybrids,take,forexample,cancergenetics.Morethanonehundredyearsofcancerresearchhasresultedinseveralnewtreatmentoptionsleukemiainchildrenisinmanycasesnowregardedasacurabledisease.Cancerresearch,however,hasnotbeenasmashingsuccessacrosstheboard,regardlessofinsightsincludingthosefromnineteenthcenturypathologyortwentiethcenturyendocrinologyandimmunology,amongmanyothers.Thenewhorseinthestableismoleculargenetics,andindeedverypromisingresultshavebeenreported,withstrongcorrelationsbetweenthediseaseandinstancesofmutation.Circumventingaverycomplexregulatoryprocess,cancerhasnowbeendeclaredtobetheeffectofagene.Thisisaclearcaseofmagicalthinking,asthiscanonlyoperatewithinaframeworkthatbridgesdirectlyfromgenetodiseasewhenthemanymediatingfactors,circumstances,alternativescenariosarenottakenintoaccount.Potentiallymoredangerousaretheveryconcreteandrealconsequencesofthisfantastictheorizing.Breastcancerdiagnosticstransformawholelifeyettobelivedintoonethatwillfallunderthespellofagene,andwithathreateningdiseasethatmayneveroccurplacedastheimaginedendofthislife.There
-
certainlyarecasesinwhichgenetictestinghasproventoprovidesignificant,medicallyrelevant,andexistentiallyusefulinformation,enablingthoseinvolvedtogetonwiththeirlives(sometimesbetterthanbefore).
Anothercurrentexampleoftheanimisticpowersofmoderntechnosciencescanbefoundinthecommunicativepowersofdigitalsocialnetworks.Howexactlynewmediawillchangethepoliticalsphere,andtheconceptualizationofthepolitical,isstillfarfromclear,yetsocialmediahasalreadyinterruptedtraditionalprocessesofrepresentationaldecisionmaking.FacebookandTwitterhavebeenidentifiedasimportantmeansforbringingnondemocraticregimesintocollapse,andmostrecently,asFacebookslaudedIPOofferingdemonstrated,tointerrupteconomicspeculation.Whereispowersituatedinthesenewformsofcommunicationandinteraction?Wherecancontrolbelocalized?Doestheefficacyofthesenetworksrelatetotheplainfactthatallelectronicequipmentisutterlymaterial?
Aparticularlyrevealingexampleoftheanimisticeffectsofanallegedlynaturalizingepistemologycanbeseeninthewonderworldsofmirrorneuronsthatconnecthumansandotherprimatesthroughnetworksofempathy.Thisisnottosaythatmirrorneuronsarenotrealonthecontrary,theyarethefocusofstudiesandevermoreexperimentsatthetopneurosciencelaboratoriesaroundtheworld,andhavebeenanalyzedinthousandsofpublications.Mirrorneuronsarethelatestresultinasequenceofinvestigationsthatoncebeganundertheimperativetodebunkspeculativeandspiritualisticentitiesbymeansofdissolvingthemintostrictlynatural,materialprocessesperception,feeling,reasoning,decisionmaking,andmemorizing,onceunderstoodasresultsofneurophysiologicalprocessing.
Theagendastillholds,butthetoolstopursueithavebecomesopowerfulthattheyallowsophisticatedquestionstobeaddressed.Withintheframeworkofthemodern,naturalizingepistemology,theseexperimentsnolongerreducespeculativestufftothehardfactsofactionpotentials,geneexpression,andcausalityinstead,theyincreasinglyconstituteaspectsofsocialinteractionsasreal,asexperimentallydetectedandobjectivelyverifieditems.Materializationswereoncetheresultsofsancesandstrangeencounterswithghostlypowers,andphotographywasmobilizedtodocumenttheseinstancestypicallyintheformofmilkyandplasmalikesubstancesprotrudingsomewherefromthemedium.Onehundredyearslater,todayshightechmachinesdetecttheresultsofsocialinteractionsasamorphouscolorblobsintheactivebrainsoftheparticipants.Thisistrulyfascinatingstuff,attractinglargesumsoffundingitisthelatesttooltodemonstratethatmattercanbeanimated.
-
EtienneJulesMarey,fromtheseriesMouvementsdelair,18301904.
Thelistcouldeasilygoon.ThepatentingofDNAanditsmutationshasalreadybeenidentifiedasnewavenueforbiocapitalism,aneconomizationofthepotentialitiesofbiologicalsubstancessmarttechnologiesturneverydayobjectsintorespondingalliesthatlearnquicklyandadapttothespecialneedsoftheiruserspsychoactivedrugsadjustbehaviorandlearningabilitiestosocialneedsthebrainis,anyway,auniverseofplasticity.Idonotintendtosaythatalloftheseactivitiesarethesame,butratherthattheseexamplessharecertainfeaturesthatmightbegintoassembleananimistepistemologyofwhichsomecontourshavealreadybecomerecognizable,thoughitsgeneralshapeandstructureremainunclear.Theseexamplesalludetopracticesthatconstituteentitiesofnewontologiesbeyondthenature/culturedivide.Thesenewthingsareclearlyconstructedbutarealsononethelessnaturalentitiestheyareveryreal,materiallyaswellasconceptually,andtheirmultipleeffectsmoveinseveraldirections,frommattertoselfandthroughoutsociety.
ThefantasticriseoffunctionalneuroimagingrecentlyprovokedacleverMITcognitivesciencestudenttoaccuseitofminglingvoodoowithscience.Thechargewasmadeindefenseofcriticalrationalismandpropermethodologiesandtheaccusedaccordinglyrespondedbyassertingthattheirsciencefollowedthestrictestmethodologicalprinciples.Infact,voodooisperhapspreciselywherescienceandtechnologyareheadinganimationeverywhere.
2012efluxandtheauthor
-
AnselmFranke
IntroductionAnimism
IsabelleStengers
ReclaimingAnimism
HarryGaruba
OnAnimism,Modernity/Colonialism,andtheAfricanOrderofKnowledge:ProvisionalReflections
SpyrosPapapetros
DarwinsDogandtheParasol:CulturalReactionstoAnimism
DiedrichDiederichsen
Animation,Dereification,andtheNewCharmoftheInanimate
MichaelTaussig
TheStoriesThingsTellAndWhyTheyTellThem
AnselmFranke
Animism:NotesonanExhibition
AngelaMelitopoulosandMaurizioLazzarato
Assemblages:FlixGuattariandMachinicAnimism
RaneWillerslev
LaughingattheSpiritsinNorthSiberia:IsAnimismBeingTakentooSeriously?
-
AlejandroHaber
SeverosSeverityandAntolnsParadox
CorneliusBorck
AnimismintheSciencesThenandNow
TomHolert
Alivemonsterthatisfruitfulandmultiplies:CapitalismasPoisonedRat?
CorneliusBorckistheDirectoroftheInstitutefortheHistoryofMedicineandScienceStudiesattheUniversityofLbeck.Hismainareasofresearcharethehistoryofbiomedicalvisualizationtechniques,theepistemologyofthemanmachinerelationship,experimentalculturesonthebrainandmind,andsensoryandneuralprostheses.
