This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Fall 2005, M,W,F 9:30 — 10:20, Chambers 1027 Prof. Eriberto P. Lozada Jr. Office: Chambers B12 Telephone: 704-894-2035 Office Hours: M, W, F 10:30 – 11:30 am T, Th 10:00 – 11:15 am or by appointment Email: email@example.com Web: http://www.davidson.edu/personal/erlozada Lecture Notes, 31 October 2005 Evans-Pritchard, “The Notion of Witchcraft Explains Unfortunate Events” • “… the concept of witchcraft provides [the Azande] with a natural philosophy by which the relations between men and unfortunate events are explained and a ready and stereotyped means of reacting to such events” (p. 18) – witchcraft as a religious system and the issue of theodicy witchcraft is also part of the everyday Zande world; “there is nothing remarkable about a witch – you may be one yourself, and certainly many of your closes neighbors are witches” (p. 19); not people with pointed hats problem of translation: people, including Evans-Pritchard, have translated this kind of cultural practices as witchcraft in English – but the implications are very different the example of the boy who knocked his foot against a stump of wood; the stump was not caused by witchcraft, what was caused was why he struck his foot against that particular stump on that particular occasion, and why the sore festered after that particular incident as opposed to other incidents the example of the granary: Zande people know that granaries collapse, because the wooden supports are eaten away by termites; they also know that people sit under the granaries to get into the shade: Evans-Pritchard says “We have no explanation of why the two chains of causation intersected at a certain time and in a certain place, for there is no interdependence between them.” (p. 23) perhaps EP is wrong – we would call it “bad luck,” “fate,” improper adherence to OSHA standards; but for the Zande, they would call it witchcraft witchcraft then can be seen as a theory of causation; we refer to “science” as explaining causality, and science is developed as a body of knowledge through empirical observation; Zande also empirically observe events, and recognize a plurality of causes (natural) – what witchcraft provides is a social explanation
• • •
Theoretical Interlude • religion as a system of knowledge is often compared with two other systems: magic and science; witchcraft was normally assigned to the realm of “magic” in the early 20th century; Evans-Pritchard and other anthropologists’ contribution was to move witchcraft and other similar practices of non-Western societies into the realm of religion • science: “rational mastery of the universe” – science as explaining the workings of the universe, in a way that is referred to as “rational,” using experimental techniques; Bronislaw Malinowski, anthropologist of the early 20th century, saw magic as the way
you shall eat no blood whatever. religion seeks to explain things. The Lord said to Moses. whether of fowl or of animal. as is science (and technology) – magic and science focus in on the “how” question. and be unclean until the evening. taboo serve as a system of knowledge gained from experience. When any man has a discharge from his body. his discharge is unclean. and everything on which he sits shall be unclean. but on no account shall you eat it. myth. religion perpetuates that body of knowledge through time for a particular society. that person shall be cut off from his people. ritual. focuses on the “why” question • magic among as a “natural science” is then a cultural method of systematizing knowledge. it shall be burned with fire. re-arranged based on experience. And this is the law of his uncleanness for a discharge: whether his body runs with his discharge. And whoever sits on anything on which he who has the discharge has sat . or sheep. or his body is stopped from discharge. and bathe himself in water. it is uncleanness in him. the structures of mythical thought are built upon through “fitting together events. religion was also seen as a pre-modern way of systematizing knowledge • Levi-Strauss: “science of the concrete vs.• • • that “primitive people” attain a kind of rational mastery of their surroundings. And any one who touches his bed shall wash his clothes. from Leviticus (15: 2-7): Say to the people of Israel. that person shall be cut off from his people. ritual practices. but the person who eats of the flesh of the sacrifice of the Lord’s peace offerings while an uncleanness is on him. whether the uncleanness of man or an unclean beast or any unclean abomination. modern science fall under the realm of “science of the abstract” “primitive humans” acted as “bricoleur” – an arranger of things. You shall eat no fat. of ox. or goat. magic is used to do things. or rather the remains of events” modern science is built upon hypotheses and theories. For every person who eats of the fat of an animal of which an offering by fire is made to the Lord shall be cut off from his people. Moreover. The fat of an animal that dies of itself and the fat of one that is torn by beasts. science of the abstract”: science of the concrete: myth. All who are clean may eat flesh. that person shall be cut off from his people. And if any one touches an unclean thing. Whoever eats any blood. Every bed on which he who has the discharge lies shall be unclean. or what others have called “natural science” • understanding of magic and science as manipulating nature. may be put to any other use. and then eats of the flesh of the sacrifice of the Lord’s peace offerings. from Leviticus (7:19-27): Flesh that touches any unclean thing shall not be eaten. “Say to the people of Israel. taboo. in any of your dwellings.
(from the Enlightenment. to remove it from the field of play. the umpire(s) will make this determination. how does “luck. and be unclean until the evening. Women’s Rules 2002: Rule 7F: Players may not wear jewelry on the field of play except for Medic-alert jewelry with information visible. from US Lacrosse. what are the criteria that make one way of thinking more rational than others? • the issue of rationality and “common sense” – for the Azande. Western culture has a legacy of considering one overriding rationality). which must be taped securely to the player. Thinking about Magic. The umpire has the power to rule any decoration as dangerous to other players. and be unclean until the evening. and bathe himself in water. If a uniform shirt is changed. In the absence of medical personnel. If there is blood on any part of a player’s uniform/personal equipment. and to penalize it as a minor foul. gloves. etc. Science. A uniform is considered saturated when blood has soaked through the uniform to the player’s skin or is capable of being transferred to another player. The same saturation criteria should be applied to a player’s personal equipment (stick. and bathe himself in water.” fate. Barrettes are legal as long as they do not endanger other players. and Religion • is there one system of thought that can be considered “rationality” .• shall wash his clothes.). how does one compare their “common sense” with Western scientific “common sense”. And whoever touches the body of him who has the discharge shall wash his clothes. probability fit into our own “common sense”? . medical personnel should determine whether the blood has saturated the uniform/equipment enough to require a change. the player’s new number must be recorded in the score book before she re-enters the game. knee brace.