Creation of the Sacred: Tracks of Biology in Early Religions

Rating:
Summary: Why we believe
Review: Burkert has assembled the rituals, myths, and outlook of a global retinue of religions to demonstrate the universality of human approaches to the unknown. An amazing range of cultures have developed nearly identical attitudes and practices in coping with the mysteries of life. Where did this universality originate? Burkert sees its roots in the deep time of pre- literate humanity. He makes this connection loosely, but the connection is surely there. Loss of body parts by trapped or threatened animals becomes ritual sacrifice in humans. Social hierarchy in primates becomes kneeling before an altar with downcast eyes, submitting to some superior entity. These habits, practiced over endless generations have almost certainly become entrenched in the genetic messages making up each of us. There might just be a gene for religion by now, although Burkert avoids such a radical assertion. The logic behind his contentions clamors for acceptance; the validity of Burkert's assertions too thoroughly supported to contest. In Burkert's

Although there are other books on comparative elements in religion, few have drawn the picture so clearly; none have reached into such our distant past in seeking origins of religious practices. He assembles a wealth of supportive material, much of it European in origin. Historically, European religious attitudes have anticipated those in North America; Ernest Renan in France, for example, preceded Robert Ingersoll in America. Burkert, however, has confined himself too much in reviewing his sources in compiling this book. His studies have stopped at the water's edge by ignoring two decades of development of Richard Dawkins' suggestion that cultural elements, such as religion, are the result of the memes.

While Burkert superbly describes the universal aspects of religious practice, he fails to present us with the reasons for its persistence. In the most literate age in human history, why does a concept as illogical as 'god' continue to draw on such a wealth of human time and resources? The science of memetics, which bases its theory on replication and dissemination in imitation of genetic methods, would have been the fulfilling conclusion to Burkert's otherwise flawless analysis of religion's survival. His conclusion argues that 'direct imprinting of parental attitudes, nor arbitrary transfer of information [by which we assume 'not traceable] can account for it['s success]'. Yet these two mechanisms are precisely the way memes, cultural principles transmitted over generations, works. You need not go all the way to the end of the book; simply review the opening chapter and use 'meme' to account for each of the factors Burkert lists in the inventory of topics he further develops. Not one eludes the definition of how a meme functions.

This lack of addressing a concept that has been with us for a generation doesn't flaw this book, it merely renders it incomplete. Read Burkert closely for he has much to say and says it well. Then go pick up Susan Blackmore's THE MEME MACHINE for the complete picture. The pair will complete any library's collection of religious studies. Only someone bringing these two concepts together will further add to your thinking on 'why we believe'.

Rating:
Summary: Why we believe
Review: Burkert has assembled the rituals, myths, and outlook of a global retinue of religions to demonstrate the universality of human approaches to the unknown. An amazing range of cultures have developed nearly identical attitudes and practices in coping with the mysteries of life. Where did this universality originate? Burkert sees its roots in the deep time of pre- literate humanity. He makes this connection loosely, but the connection is surely there. Loss of body parts by trapped or threatened animals becomes ritual sacrifice in humans. Social hierarchy in primates becomes kneeling before an altar with downcast eyes, submitting to some superior entity. These habits, practiced over endless generations have almost certainly become entrenched in the genetic messages making up each of us. There might just be a gene for religion by now, although Burkert avoids such a radical assertion. The logic behind his contentions clamors for acceptance; the validity of Burkert's assertions too thoroughly supported to contest. In Burkert's

Although there are other books on comparative elements in religion, few have drawn the picture so clearly; none have reached into such our distant past in seeking origins of religious practices. He assembles a wealth of supportive material, much of it European in origin. Historically, European religious attitudes have anticipated those in North America; Ernest Renan in France, for example, preceded Robert Ingersoll in America. Burkert, however, has confined himself too much in reviewing his sources in compiling this book. His studies have stopped at the water's edge by ignoring two decades of development of Richard Dawkins' suggestion that cultural elements, such as religion, are the result of the memes.

While Burkert superbly describes the universal aspects of religious practice, he fails to present us with the reasons for its persistence. In the most literate age in human history, why does a concept as illogical as 'god' continue to draw on such a wealth of human time and resources? The science of memetics, which bases its theory on replication and dissemination in imitation of genetic methods, would have been the fulfilling conclusion to Burkert's otherwise flawless analysis of religion's survival. His conclusion argues that 'direct imprinting of parental attitudes, nor arbitrary transfer of information [by which we assume 'not traceable] can account for it['s success]'. Yet these two mechanisms are precisely the way memes, cultural principles transmitted over generations, works. You need not go all the way to the end of the book; simply review the opening chapter and use 'meme' to account for each of the factors Burkert lists in the inventory of topics he further develops. Not one eludes the definition of how a meme functions.

This lack of addressing a concept that has been with us for a generation doesn't flaw this book, it merely renders it incomplete. Read Burkert closely for he has much to say and says it well. Then go pick up Susan Blackmore's THE MEME MACHINE for the complete picture. The pair will complete any library's collection of religious studies. Only someone bringing these two concepts together will further add to your thinking on 'why we believe'.

Rating:
Summary: Burkert over his head...
Review: Burkert is a great scholar, and I strongly recommend his book "Greek Religion." However, in this book he tries to tie his encyclopedic knowledge of classical cultures to his knowledge of biology (animal behavior), psychology and anthropology. This is an ambitious project, and appropriately, he attempted it for the Gifford Lectures, dedicated to "natural theology in the widest sense." He is all the more brave for attempting such a synthesis when structural descriptions of religion are out of style.

However, most of Burkert's connections are too loose to feel convincing. He piles on loads of examples from primarily classical and Near Eastern cultures--neglecting altogether China and India, and most other cultures--but they do not really come together to form a theory or even a series of compelling insights.

It was a noble attempt, and he remains a titan in classical studies, and I recommend "Greek Religion" wholeheartedly. Read that before you read this, at least because it will help you understand this one. But consider books by Max Weber, Claude Levi-Strauss, Mircea Eliade, Rudolf Otto.

Rating:
Summary: Convincing and accessible treatment of a complex subject
Review: This is an excellent work (by a respected author) which boldly tackles the task of presenting a clear and coherent explanation for the practice of sacrifice in religions. Mr. Burkert both enhances the reader's understanding of the practice of sacrifice, and dispels many foolish romantic views of ancient religions.

Rating:
Summary: Intriguing
Review: While I found Walter Burkert's book, Creation of the Sacred, very interesting, well written and persuasive, I'm not certain that I entirely agree with some of his concepts. I was most impressed with the gentleman's erudition. As a professor of Classics at the University of Zurich, he has, as expected, a thorough knowledge of Greek and Roman classical literature, but he also exhibits a very broad spectrum of knowledge in history, anthropology, linguistics, psychology and sociology. He also has a good command of the professional literature on these subjects from the world's scholars, citing topics from journals in English, German, French and Italian.

From the perspective of research on the issue, I have no doubt that some of the author's arguments with respect to the evolution of religious ideas are very plausible. They are certainly interesting and suggestive. I'm not as certain, however, that they constitute "proof," and there is a distinct difference between the proven and the plausible.

Among the topics he subjects to scrutiny are: the function of religion in the context of a world of information, the design features of myths, legends and fairy tales, the reinforcement of hierarchy, the concept of "religious therapy," the cultural function of reciprocity of giving, and the process of validation through signs and oaths.

Some of the concepts I found particularly interesting. The author's suggestion, for instance, that, "By a process of reduction, religion provides orientation within a meaningful cosmos for those who feel helpless vis-à-vis infinite complexity (p. 26)." Certainly in a world where information seems infinite, not always consistent, and mistakes can be dangerous, the possibility that a superior force can help narrow things down to a few key pieces of data would reduce the anxiety of dealing with life. As he points out in later chapters, this is probably why belief in things like astrology have been so long lived. It might be pointed out that science serves this function for the modern world, but that it often seems counter intuitive and inaccessible to many.

I also found Burkert's suggestion that sacrifice was a form of gift giving between the Gods and mankind and was a form of manipulation, even bribery, logical. Certainly in ancient society it had a capacity to bind society together, and even to effect reciprocity between nations. Other authors have suggested that gift giving between widely spaced societies may have operated to spread risk over a greater population and territory.

Again, a very plausible book with many interesting ideas to think about.

Rating:
Summary: Intriguing
Review: While I found Walter Burkert's book, Creation of the Sacred, very interesting, well written and persuasive, I'm not certain that I entirely agree with some of his concepts. I was most impressed with the gentleman's erudition. As a professor of Classics at the University of Zurich, he has, as expected, a thorough knowledge of Greek and Roman classical literature, but he also exhibits a very broad spectrum of knowledge in history, anthropology, linguistics, psychology and sociology. He also has a good command of the professional literature on these subjects from the world's scholars, citing topics from journals in English, German, French and Italian.

From the perspective of research on the issue, I have no doubt that some of the author's arguments with respect to the evolution of religious ideas are very plausible. They are certainly interesting and suggestive. I'm not as certain, however, that they constitute "proof," and there is a distinct difference between the proven and the plausible.

Among the topics he subjects to scrutiny are: the function of religion in the context of a world of information, the design features of myths, legends and fairy tales, the reinforcement of hierarchy, the concept of "religious therapy," the cultural function of reciprocity of giving, and the process of validation through signs and oaths.

Some of the concepts I found particularly interesting. The author's suggestion, for instance, that, "By a process of reduction, religion provides orientation within a meaningful cosmos for those who feel helpless vis-à-vis infinite complexity (p. 26)." Certainly in a world where information seems infinite, not always consistent, and mistakes can be dangerous, the possibility that a superior force can help narrow things down to a few key pieces of data would reduce the anxiety of dealing with life. As he points out in later chapters, this is probably why belief in things like astrology have been so long lived. It might be pointed out that science serves this function for the modern world, but that it often seems counter intuitive and inaccessible to many.

I also found Burkert's suggestion that sacrifice was a form of gift giving between the Gods and mankind and was a form of manipulation, even bribery, logical. Certainly in ancient society it had a capacity to bind society together, and even to effect reciprocity between nations. Other authors have suggested that gift giving between widely spaced societies may have operated to spread risk over a greater population and territory.

Again, a very plausible book with many interesting ideas to think about.