Anthropologia hodierna plenam cogitationis magicae et religionis continuitatem adsumit,[1] atque eam omnino opus culturale esse,[5] et rem proiectionis psychologicae. Plena continuitas magicae et religionis fuit res postulata ab anthropologia hodierna saltem ex circa 1935.[1][6] Religio in anthropologia hodierna habetur genus proiectionispsychologicae; quod est sententia methodologica quae adsumit omnem religionem creatam esse a civitate humana quae eam veneratur: "industria creans Deo adscripta ex homine proicitur."[7][2][8][9]
Maior quaestio in anthropologia religionis est definitio notionis religionis ipsius. Anthropologi olim crediderunt certos usus et opiniones religiosas esse in omnibus culturis plus minus universales aliquando in earum progressu, sicut opinio spirituum vel manium, usus magiae ut ratiosupernaturaliorum continendorum, usus divinationis ut ratio scientiae arcanae inveniendae, et actio rituum sicut oratio et sacrificium ut ratio consecutionum eventuum variorum per supernaturalia motorum, aliquando proprietates shamanismi vel venerationis maiorum habens. Secundum Geertz, religio est "(1) symbolorum ratio quae agit ad (2) constituendos animi habitus et incitamenta valida, diuturna, undique circumfusa in hominibus per (3) informationes ordinis vitae generalis figurandas et (4) has informationes tali veritatiscolore tegendas ut (5) animi habitus et incitamenta videantur unice verisimilia."[22][23] Hodie, anthropologi disputant de firmitate inter culturas harum categoriarum, quas multi reiciunt, exempla primitivismiEuropaei saepe putantes. Anthropologi varias normas religionis definiendae consideraverunt—sicut fides supernaturalibus vel fiducia rituum—sed pauci has normas universe firmas esse affirmant.
Religio in cultura Occidentali plus minus facta est idem ac monotheismus variique codices morales quos monotheismus mandat. Codices morales una cum fideHinduistica et Buddhistica creverunt, a monotheismo distincti. Praescriptivi autem codices morales, vel etiam normativi codices ethici, necessarium opinionum vel usuum elementum plus quam necessarium scientiae et rationis scientificae elementum non sunt.
Ernestus Cassirer (1944) An Essay On Man[nexus deficit], pt.II, ch.7 Myth and Religion, pp.122–213: "It seems to be one of the postulates of modern anthropology that there is complete continuity between magic and religion. [Nota 35: "See, for instance, RR Marett, Faith, Hope, and Charity in Primitive Religion, the Gifford Lectures (Macmillan, 1932), Lecture II, pp. 21ff."] . . . We have no empirical evidence at all that there ever was an age of magic that has been followed and superseded by an age of religion."
T. M. Manickam (1977), Dharma according to Manu and Moses, p. 6: "Religious anthropology suggests that every religion is a product of the cultural evolution, more or less coherent, of one race or people; and this cultural product is further enriched by its interaction and cross-fertilization with other peoples and their cultures, in whose vicinity the former originated and evolved."
Robertus Ranulphus Marett (1932) Faith, Hope and Charity in Primitive Religion, in Gifford Lectures, lectura 2, Hope: "In conclusion, a word must be said on a rather trite subject. Many leading anthropologists, including the author of The Golden Bough, would wholly or in the main refuse the title of religion to these almost inarticulate ceremonies of very humble folk. I am afraid, however, that I cannot follow them. Nay, I would not leave out a whole continent from a survey of the religions of mankind in order to humour the most distinguished of my friends. Now clearly if these observances are not to be regarded as religious, like a wedding in church, so neither can they be classed as civil, like its drab equivalent at a registry office. They are mysteries, and are therefore at least generically akin to religion. Moreover, they are held in the highest public esteem as of infinite worth whether in themselves or for their effects. To label them, then, with the opprobrious name of magic as if they were on a par with the mummeries that enable certain knaves to batten on the nerves of fools is quite unscientific; for it mixes up two things which the student of human culture must keep rigidly apart, namely, a normal development of the social life and one of its morbid by-products. Hence for me they belong to religion, but of course to rudimentary religion—to an early phase of the same world-wide institution that we know by that name among ourselves. I am bound to postulate the strictest continuity between these stages of what I have here undertaken to interpret as a natural growth."
Jacob Pandian, "The sacred integration of the cultural self: An anthropological approach to the study of religion," in The Anthropology of Religion, ed.S. Glazer (1997), p. 507.
Anglice" "a projection of the social values of society," "a means of making symbolic statements about society," "a symbolic language that makes statements about the social order."
Anglice: "(1) a system of symbols which acts to (2) establish powerful, pervasive, and long-lasting moods and motivations in men by (3) formulating conceptions of a general order of existence and (4) clothing these conceptions with such an aura of factuality that (5) the moods and motivations seem uniquely realistic."
Clifford Geertz, "Religion as a Cultural System," in Anthropological Approaches to the Study of Religion, ed. M. Banton (Londinii: Tavistock, 1966), 1–46.
Arnold, Wilhelm Karl, Hans Jürgen Eysenck, et Richard Meili, eds. 1993. Lexikon der Psychologie. Ed. undecima. 3 vol. Freiburgi: Herder ISBN 3451231298.
Bowie, Fiona. 2000. The Anthropology of Religion: An Introduction. Malden Massachusettae: Blackwell Publishers. ISBN 0631208488, ISBN 063120847X.
Guthrie, Stewart Elliott. 2000. Projection. In Guide to the Study of Religion, ed. Willi Braun et Russell T. McCutcheon. Londinii et Novi Eboraci: Cassell.
Leroi-Gourhan, André. 1964, 1981. Die Religionen der Vorgeschichte: Paläolithikum. Francofurti: Suhrkamp. ISBN 351811073X.
Lewis-Williams, David. 2004. The Mind in the Cave. Consciousness and the Origins of Art. Londinii: Thames & Hudson. ISBN 0500284652.
Oeser, Erhard. 2006. Das selbstbewusste Gehirn: Perspektiven der Neurophilosophie. Darmstadt: WBG. ISBN 3534190688.
Ries, Julien. 1994. Ursprung der Religionen. Monaci: Pattloch. ISBN 3629000789.
Ries, Julien, et al., eds. 1989–2009. Über die Anthropologie des Heiligen. 10 vol. Jaca Book.
Schmidt, Klaus. 2006. Sie bauten die ersten Tempel: Das rätselhafte Heiligtum der Steinzeitjäger. Monaci: Beck. ISBN 3406535003.
Spineto, Natale, Fiorenzo Facchini, et Julien Ries. 2003. Die Symbole der Menschheit. Ostfildern: Patmos. ISBN 3491961459.
Tokarew, Sergei Alexandrowitsch. 1968. Die Religion in der Geschichte der Völker. Berolini: Dietz.
Wilber, Ken. 1987. Das Spektrum des Bewusstseins: Ein metaphysisches Modell des Bewusstseins und der Disziplinen, die es erforschen. Bernae: Scherz. ISBN 3502158525.
Lang, Andrew. 1900. "Anthropology and Religion,"The Making of Religion, capitulum 2 (Londinii, Novi Eboraci, Bombay: Longmans, Green, and Co.), 39–64.
.jpg)
.jpg)
