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