Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!laura
From: laura@utzoo.UUCP (Laura Creighton)
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Re: Science & Religion
Message-ID: <4716@utzoo.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 2-Dec-84 19:59:13 EST
Article-I.D.: utzoo.4716
Posted: Sun Dec  2 19:59:13 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 2-Dec-84 19:59:13 EST
References: <704@umcp-cs.UUCP> <20@cmu-cs-k.ARPA>, <676@gloria.UUCP>
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
Lines: 24

Unless I am misunderstanding what George Sicherman means by the
scientific method, I think that his claims about non-mechanised
society are incorrect. Among all peoples, even the most primitive
ones, you will find a great deal of ritual associated with ``important
events'' usually connected together by religion.

Rituals are expected to produce results. Dancing naked in the fields
really is supposed to make the crops grow better. Pouring water on
the ground really is supposed to make it rain. Bloody sacrifices 
really are supposed to make the gods act more in your favour. And
so on. It is not the case that any village shaman makes up a new
ritual on the spur of the moment for any occasion -- that is why
they have to serve an apprenticeship under another shaman -- to
learn the old rituals.

Primitive man may not have been particularily scrupulous about isolating
all of the independent variables in his experiments to change his
environment through magic, but I don't think he was ignorant of the
scientific method. After all, a lot of the working magic is now called
``medicine'' but still works pretty well the same way ``eat this herb
and you'll feel better''.

laura creighton
utzoo!laura