This is, this also has like, a lot of parallels, i think, with a buddhist way of understanding reality. Animacy, or animateness, he calls it animacy is just like the kind of part of the fundamental features of reality. And how that manifests itself is going to be different depending on what kind of thing we're talking about. But they're all independent, ir sorry, interdependent. Like when i think, when he says, reciprocally, bringing themselves into existence continually, that make, i mean, it still, it still,. to me, is a highly implausible view to hold.
Panpsychism didn't give us river spirits or mischievous sootballs, so this time we go straight to the source - a defense of animism, and in a top 10 analytic philosophy journal. Could a failed argument for the existence of God establish the existence of trees and mountains with “interiority” and “social characteristics”? Tamler wants to believe, but is the argument that'll push him over the edge?
Plus – speaking of top journals, a doozy of social psych article: Is forgiveness better than revenge at rehumanizing the self? Let's check the voodoo dolls to find out. Tamler is delighted by David’s reaction to this one.
Sponsored By:
Support Very Bad Wizards
Links:
- The Common Consent Argument for the Existence of Nature Spirits by Tiddy Smith
- Peoples, H. C., Duda, P., & Marlowe, F. W. (2016). Hunter-gatherers and the origins of religion. Human Nature, 27(3), 261-282.
- Ingold, T. (2006). Rethinking the animate, re-animating thought. Ethnos, 71(1), 9-20.