Primal Religions 2025

 Art seems to have even more relevance than music when it comes to religions. Art has been used for preserving thoughts, recording history, and performing rituals. Art is used for communicating the desires of the Australian Aboriginals to the spirits to the Dreamtime, it’s used to ask a higher power for a successful hunt or safe pregnancy, and it’s used for preserving events that are deemed worth remembering. Art is complementary to any discipline imaginable and that is no less true for ancient religions.

 David Abram believes that nature itself is sentient and intelligent like people are. If nature were sentient in that way then would it not have tried to prevent the industrialization of the world for the sake of its continued survival? If I were in danger of having my body being destroyed for others to build things with I would go out of my way to make sure that such a thing were not feasible. Intelligent life shows signs that it is intelligent and nature as a collective has not done so. 

 The class has outlined that storytelling is better when done out loud than when read from written text, but is reading written text out loud a good bridge between the two styles of information spreading. If you read a book out loud you are engaging in the community and cementing a memory for those who hear it to share, but the text is static and unconnected to the world around it. If an oral story were to be written and read aloud in the same place later that connection to nature is still there, but is it diminished due to nature no longer being the only connecting point for the story as it has the written word as well? Does this distinction matter at all if it is in the same place and if it does not does that mean that myths should not be spread beyond those that can hear it at the correct place?

 Is a trickster defined more by their personality or their actions? To me a trickster is someone that has certain personality traits that make them different from others. A character can perform all the same actions as a trickster, but if they lack a certain level of whimsy, levity, or above it all mirth than I do not think of them as a trickster. On the other hand there are actions that feel integral to a trickster based on those personality traits. A whimsical person that does not try and manipulate is not a trickster, but neither is a serious manipulator. A combination of both is good for the classic trickster, but where is the defining line of a trickster? Or is that vagueness intentional?

 How do oral religions survive in the modern age? I know that they can simply choose not to engage in anything from their end, but with how nosy people are I don’t see how it’s possible. The videos we watched in class point out how the Australian Aboriginals are almost out of practicing people and even then some have regular jobs as well. With how connected the world is now it seems impossible to be an isolated group. Do the oral societies adapt to writing but keep their beliefs or do they go out of their way to make sure that the only way knowledge can be spread is word of mouth?

 I think that the use of masks in rituals is really interesting as they remove the person performing the ritual from it. Whether it is a mask of a spirit, a god, or an ancestor by wearing a mask you are surrendering your identity to who the mask is. They serve as mediums for the ritual to connect to the supernatural while also narrowing down the purpose of the ritual to specific purposes. The number of purposes that have been given to masks is surprisingly high as they can be used for communing with the dead, ask for a good harvest, show status, or honor ancestors. 

 The use of music in oral religions can have many different benefits, but I think that the most important one is that it keeps the tempo for a ritual. Rituals are supposed to be these very big deals that need to be performed perfectly, but it is very difficult to perfect steps without something for your brain to latch on to. Music becomes that connection between what you can do and what you want to do. Assigning specific actions to shifts in tempo, rhythm, or octave is something easy to latch onto and serve as a guide for when you should make a specific action. It also has the added benefit of improving the performance of the ritual to any observers and thus making it more memorable.

 The idea that certain places are sacred is something that I think will always be around because it is so ingrained in almost every belief possible. What I think is a little weird is the ease that people can get to sacred places. If a place is important to the creation of the universe or the transition from the chaotic to the orderly then why are they always conveniently close to the people that believe it to be sacred. I feel that if a place were actually sacred rather than just having been assigned a special status by those that believe it to be so. I cannot suspend my disbelief that all these different religions all found their sacred places rather than someone in the past just deciding it to be so and that being passed on.

 The importance that is placed on the written constitution feels like the direct antithesis to oral society. To an oral society the most important thing about living is the connection they have with nature through story, but the constitution exists completely separate from nature, is not told as a story for it to connect to people as a community, and does not have a connection to a creation myth. It’s relatively new and only exists as an idea put to paper, yet it’s the basis for our entire society. We look to the he constitution as a guide the same way that oral societies looked to their myths, but they exist as the antithesis of each other conceptually.

 I’ve read a book called WARD and the setting makes me think of how oral civilizations live. It takes place on a virgin earth after their previous one was destroyed by a catastrophe, so while all the people have the experience with living in the modern world they no longer have those amenities. It’s a kind of nebulous state between a literate society where people no longer live in nature and an oral society that does not use writing. How would a society that does know how to read and progress beyond living in nature, but is not doing so be classified? Does the knowledge of how to live a certain way and the attempt to go back to it matter more than the way that people are living in that moment?

 The Spell of the Sensuous brought up stories that are tied to locations rather than the words themselves. I think that sounds really interesting as almost every story I know comes from reading it, so it’s novel to think of a story that requires you to be in a specific place to really get the entire story. It also makes sense that specific locations are tied to stories as without words there needs to be something to tie the story together across generations without words to carry the impact. It makes me think on how I don’t really care about a location of a story outside of visualization because I do not think it is important while oral people need the location to serve as an anchor. It goes back to my core experiences not placing importance on location while to the oral people it is of great importance.

 Orality and Literacy brings up how a culture that has never looked up anything would have a completely different way of living than someone that has to illustrate the difference between an oral and written society and the impossibility of imagining one from the other’s point of view accurately. This made me think of how even twenty to thirty years ago the internet was a completely different experience and how people’s lives have differed because of that change. Due to how much faster and easier it is to get whatever you want people that grew up on the internet do not have the same patience as people who grew up on a dialup connection. The ease of access to information today has changed how we prioritize things as we no longer need to physically go to a library to find a specific book or article. Just 30 years has produced a completely different mindset from one change in daily convenience, so I can’t imaging how much impact writing has had on culture when compared to those who do ...

 Morality and Literacy makes an interesting point on the discrepancy between the number of spoken languages and the number that have been written. For how important writing is to people in the modern age there are shockingly only 106 written languages compared to the thousands of oral ones. If writing is so intrinsic to how people function now then why is it not more popular? Writing is one of the first things that we make sure is taught to children when they develop the ability to go to school, yet only 78 languages have literature of any kind. I never realized how few languages have a written word due to the importance of it. Even this class is centered on how oral religions have a completely different way of life, but it makes sense why they would be like that if there were only so many written languages actually developed.

 When reading The Ritual Process it starts by introducing how there is a ritual for many things like coming of age, circumcising, and initiation. This made me think on how these kinds of rituals come to be in the first place. How do a group of people come together and decide that by wearing masks and dancing they are calling their ancestors or spirits? I’m not discrediting these people for performing rituals in these ways, but I do wonder their origin. Does one person have an experience that they shared with others as a sort of messenger on what they are to do or was it a group decision that had since been so ingrained into their culture that it is inseparable? 

 The Spell of the Sensuous starts with the author explaining how he got a grant to explore different types of magic and their possible uses in medicine. This caught me off guard because I don’t see how he would get a scientific grant for studying magic due to its nature as something thought not to be real. He mentions sleight of hand in the same breath as healing rituals which actually makes me take the rituals less seriously as it is common knowledge that stage magicians are not really magic. Why would he make the connection to a magic that is fake with a magic that is hoped to be something real? I can see how he would be given a grant to study the techniques and rituals of a religion, but not how one would be given to research magic.

I was listening to IGOR by Tyler the creator the other day, and it made me think about how music and myth are connected. Especially when talking about concept albums, the artist embodies a real part of themselves by transforming into a fantastical character or taking on an alter ego. In a way, this is similar to how myth explores the reality of the world by attributing natural phenomena to stories, and then using those stories to inform lifestyle. Just like how cultures are defined by the "lore" that surrounds them, individually, we are defined, at least in part, by music.

 Bias can rear its ugly head in the simplest ways. Like thinking that you're having the worst day ever when in reality you have just been inconvenienced. Half the time the days itself isn't even bad, it just feels that way because you're the one living it.  Others shrug things off like they're nothing, but when it happens to you it feels like a personal attack. This is just our selfish brains setting us as the center of the universe. This isn't to say our problems aren't real, but rather our perception of them is often skewed by personal bias, making inconveniences felling like catastrophe. I find it good to take a step back and look at my situation from another's point of view, realizing that my situation isn't as dire as I'm making it out to be. As my mom always says, "take a few deep breaths and think big picture". 

 Waiting is a weird concept to me yet I find myself falling victim to it all the time. Whether it be sitting in traffic or waiting in line to get in the dining hall, waiting is inevitable. It makes me feel like my brain is turning to mush just waiting for something to happen. But sometimes it is needed. It can help you reset between big events like exams, or appointments. Nothing is asked or expected of you in that time, you simply are. I feel it gives me time to reflect on things Iven gone through recently, or planning for what I do next as the world slows down before it speeds up again. It always speeds up again. 

 Eliade argues that modern people have melding the world into a flat 2 dimensional being. Things simply don't hold the value they once did. Traditional cultures used spaces, objects, and happenings as sacred, things of importance that helped them navigate meaning in the world. The closest thing I can observe in the modern day is how Texan's go crazy over Buccee's, to us its just a big gas station, but to them it holds importance because of the feeling of community it brings. We treat life as one thing after another, tasks to be completed and moved on from., never taking a break to stop and look around. Eliade suggests that these breaks from the norm are necessary in order to feel connected to something bigger. It made me wonder what people hold sacred today, what would be sacred to me?

 The idea of liminality is one of those concepts that you start to see everywhere once you learn about it. Kind of like when you get a new car. He talks about transitional times in life where the structure of normal life is uprooted and uncertainty becomes common, feeling like you're running on instinct and becoming a shell of yourself. However this is not treated as a bad thing, I enjoy this as sometimes its necessary to go through periods like that in order to see growth. That is exactly what Turner is talking about. I have been stuck in situations like this, mainly the transition from highschooler to college student where your structured reality seems to fall apart and there's nothing you can do but pick up the pieces that make you who you are. 

 Helen Keller moment at the water pump stuck out to me, it was something simple yet world changing. As water flowed on her hand at the same time "water" was spelled in the something finally clicked. She could piece together that the spelling and the sensation were the same thing. Her world finally started to make sense, if I remember correctly this was the moment she finally felt human. Things finally had a meaning to them and I cannot begin to imagine the sense of clarity she felt. It reminds me of Plato's cave allegory about how foreign concepts seem when they are new to us. Only after time and observation can we see what things really mean. Something like water can feel entirely new to us when we pay attention, things seem distant because we haven't been experiencing them fully with physicality and wonder. Knowledge is a lived experience. 

 As I was researching quotes and sources to use in my thesis paper, I came across this one line from the Bhagavad Gita in I believe chapter 7: "Thus, at all times think of Me only, and fight. With mind and Reason set on Me, without doubt, thou shalt come to Me. He who thinketh upon the Ancient, the Omniscient, the All-Ruler, minuter than the minute, the supporter of all, of form and unimaginable, refulgent as the sum beyond the darkness, in the time of forthgoing...he goes to the spirit, supreme, divine."  I really liked this verse because of its mystery. It reminded me of other literary religious texts that tell its practitioners to think on the positive, divine, and good things of this world. One comes to mind from the Bible. I cannot remember the chapter or verse, but I believe it is when Jesus tells His disciples to think on "things above, everything that is righteous, beautiful, heavenly, pure," etc. etc. This made me wonder: Are there similarities in oral trad...

 In my thesis paper, I argued that the Adivasi, an oral society in India, preserved their environment better than Hindu practices do, which are literary because they use religious texts. A quote I used was from the author and researcher, Emma Tomalin, who states,  "There is a difference in emphasis where it is sacred therefore it should be protected rather than the contemporary religious environmentalist position which says it should be protected therefore it is sacred. " I thought this quote was really interesting, because it acknowledges not only the effect but moreso the intent and regard for the environment one has. This is important. This connects to what I was discussing in my thesis, because I used this quote to show that the Adivasi were localized to a specific environmental niche, whereas Hindus are not. This means that the environmental intent of the Adivasi is that more evident.

 One thing I found interesting throughout the semester was how our senses are kind of how we make up the world. I know I have discussed this in a previous post, but I realized something again as I was thinking about it - This transcends time! I find it so beautiful how even during ancient times or during the times of cavemen, people still made art like we do today. People still ponder up at the stars like they did, wondering what the meaning of life is, and we still find connections to the earth, to nature, and to symbols in all things. Its a full circle moment. Humans never really change in our essence in this way, and I love that so much, because it shows how we are a lot more similar than we think. 

 One quote from the Merlau-Ponty stood out to me: "t he whole landscape is overrun with words as with an invasion, it is henceforth but a variant of speech before our eyes the whole landscape is overrun with words as with an invasion, it is henceforth a variant of speech before our eyes." I thought this was interesting, because it shows how we associate things with letters that form words. It is a very metaphysical way of thinking about things. It seems so obvious yet so simple and no one really acknowledges it. It reminds me of an assignment I once had in my AP language class in high school. The assignment was to write an essay on an object that has a close personal connection to you and write how that object's physical characteristics show its true purpose. For my essay, I wrote it on silicone wristbands, because I always wear one everyday to fiddle with. I wrote how its smooth texture helps with stress, because it is in a circular shape. It is meant for everyone, no ma...

 I remember one day in class we listened to the song "Message in a Bottle" by The Police. I think the purpose of this class was to see the meaning behind the words, how the lyrics show that everyone is alone and sending out messages in a bottle to be found by someone. I think that myth and ritual are a way that we can not be so alienated all of the time. I know for a lot of teens and young adults especially, it can be hard to enter adulthood with a sense of stability. New jobs, new places, and people can be hard to adapt to. This is why I think a lot of us feel so alone and lonely. We are all just going through the same thing, but none of us actually know it! If we talked to one another, was honest with the way we feel, and just acted like another human being to one another, none of us would feel as lonely as we are. I think human connection is such an important thing because it is how we grow as a species. It is how we adapt and overcome our challenges. Let's be honest, ...

 I remember once in class we listened to this song. The purpose of the class that day was learning about how we allow ourselves to become servants to technology. The problem with this is not that we have more help to make our lives more easier and more efficient, but that we become too dependent on it for every single thing. For example, if we use an alarm clock everyday to wake us up, we dread the morning and waking up. But if we go to sleep at a reasonable hour (couldn't be me) and wake up at a reasonable time in the morning (again, could never be me) without the use of technology, we entrust ourselves to our primal essence as biological mammals. I think this is super cool because we often forget that we are not just "smart people" but animals!! We have urges and drives just like any other animal does in the natural world. 

 Something I found interesting that relates to what we discussed in class all semester is how myths are not symbolic or explanations. I thought this was interesting, because it reminded me of how we use symbols in our everyday life all of the time. For example, the blinking "walking man" sign on crosswalks lets people know that they are safe to cross the street. Even for the blind, the little red bumps that you can find on the corners of intersections let the blind know that they are at the end of the sidewalk. The symbol is not indicative of the thing its representing, but it is meant to instill emotion into us that, after a while, becomes almost instinctual. Like the alarm sound that we use to wake up. I don't know about all of you, but if I heard that sound in the afternoon, I would feel a sense of dread, because I am so used to hearing it and instinctually knowing that I have to get out of bed. 

 In Artistic Expressions as Vehicles of Cultural Memory: Bridging Identity, Heritage, and Intercultural Understanding , I read about the use of art as a memory aid, and a vehicle for evoking memories of past events or important stories. In it, the authors explain that art can serve a vital function in an oral society, as it can contain motifs, patterns, or figures that each represent something -- in this way, the art is intended to preserve the story. Given the nature of art as an interpretive medium, I wonder if the meanings of certain pieces have been preserved perfectly, or if some of the meanings have changed over time. For example, the artwork of that deity who crawls off the wall each night -- if I remember correctly, it had been thousands of years since that artwork had been painted. The explanation we're receiving is, of course, contemporary, as the story has been passed down for millennia.  What if that wasn't always the story behind the piece, and it was an embellish...

A ccording to Karen Sullivan's 2009 analysis of 160 painters' statements in New American Paintings , "all types of artists describe their work metaphorically as linguistic communication via words such as language, conversation, vocabulary and dozens of other terms and phrases related to language." This captured my attention immediately as it relates to the rock art we discussed in class (in case it wasn't immediately apparent, I am very fixated on rock art, and find it a beautiful example of culture and history). I would love to hear the Aboriginal perspective on art and language. If I remember correctly, one of the movies shown in class -- I can't remember which -- suggested that much of the art we see on the rocks was intended to be a sort of dialogue between the painter, the medium (which extends to the earth itself), and the viewer. Furthermore, the art can communicate complex ideas and meanings, just as written language can. Would a rock artist from one ...

In personal readings of a rock art study by McDonald and Clayton, I have discovered something particularly fascinating about Australian Aboriginal rock art. A site not dissimilar to Djulirri in the Kimberley region features 'Gwion Gwion,' or stylized humanoid figures -- in these, anthropologists suspect we find the "earliest date for spears in Australia, and the earliest date for boomerangs and spear-throwers anywhere in the world." This is extremely interesting, and it really helps give me a perspective on just how old the rock art can really be. There are pieces suspected to date back 20,000+ years -- but, understandably, this is very difficult to conceptualize. Having a clear benchmark in "the origin of spears in Australia" has helped me contextualize the truly, truly ancient nature of these works, and given me a better appreciation for their anthropological significance.

Right now in school I am learning about how to be a therapist since that is what I am going to school for. I am learning about different mental health problems and different practices I can do and methods to help people. Although we have only briefly talked about the shaman in class, I am writing my final paper about it so I know some stuff. i decided to ask myself "how alike are shaman and therapists?" In my opinion, the shaman and therapists are kind of similar. They are both “healers” not just physically but spitiau;;y and mentally. Therapists use mindfulness, (sometimes medication), plan to feel better, and talk to help with someone. This could be compared to rituals that the shaman practices, also to help people and heal them. I think this connection is cool because sometimes it is hard to connect primal religion to my future hopeful job.  

 connecting to the class 4  In class we talked about the meaning of a ritual. A ritual is a type of special practice that symbolizes a bigger picture. A ritual that I see often in  religion is communion. In communion we do a ritual act of eating a piece of bread (symbolized as Christ's body) and drinking wine (symbolized as his blood). We do this in remembrance of Jesus dying on the cross for our sins. This is a very common and important ritual in christianity. Prayer is another thing I would consider a ritual. It's a special practice and the bigger picture is the idea that you're talking to God, our creator. Although these rituals are very common, there are many rituals in different religions that are very private and only certain people can do. this made me reflect on how important chrsitian rituals are in my life

 connecting to the class 3 In class, we have talked a lot about how things change over time. Whether it's oral words, stories, meaning, or rituals, eventually most things change in one way or another. And sometimes the reason for that change is due to us. One example hippy kipps used in class was dogs. When we view dogs, most of us view them as our emotional support. Something that we can pet and cuddle and make us feel better. We train our dog not to pee in the house, not to bark, not to chew things, etc. but this is not what dogs were meant to do. Dogs were created and meant to hunt. They were meant to bark to communicate and chew to strengthen their teeth. However, due to us people using dogs as pets, we train them to do otherwise. I liked this example because I never thought about it in that way. I never thought about how we are physically suppressing what a dog is supposed to be and it made me think about how many other things we do. This example really changed how I view life...

 connecting to the class 2 Although we don't thoroughly go into the natural world, I think some of the readings about how we can experience the natural world ourselves through senses and oral words sort of connect to how hippy kippy brings us fruit from his garden. I like when he brings us fruit and vegetables from his garden because not only is it nice, I also get to sort of experience where he lives and his own “culture” or “world”. I don't have a garden myself and I also don't have one at school. When I get vegetables or fruit I go to the grocery store and pick them out and pay for them. They are fresh for the most part but still have pesticides and other stuff. But when hippy kippy gives us his fruit and vegetables I get to experience my natural world and then we orally talk about how he grew them and saved them. from this i asked myself "what are some other ways i can experince my natural world?" i think i could expericne it more by taking daily nature walks.

 connecting to the class One thing we talked about in class was how things change over the years. Stories can change, memories can change, oral words can change, many thighs change as years go by. One example we used in class that stuck with me was the great lawn example. Right now, in 2025, the great lawn is in the middle of all of our student buildings, there is nothing in the middle of the grass, no fountains, buildings, etc. it is completely green grass, actively grown. However, 40 years from now this will change. The grass might be dead, maybe trees and flowers will be planted. As CNU grows in capacity maybe new buildings will be added on top of the great lawn like dorms or school buildings. I think the great lawn was a great example of the idea that life is changing around us. What things don't change?

  outside reading 5 One of the current movies we are learning about in class is a man named Ishi. He was the only remaining Indian in the group and it is a very interesting movie. It goes in depth about how his whole tribe was taken from him and he thought he was the only remaining person. Then he was found and there was a very big barrier between him and the rest of the world - he acted differently and they couldn't understand what he said. They stiffened him, trying to understand what he was trying to tell them. Eventually he started telling stories all about his life, rituals, and group. Everybody began to understand what he meant but the meanings are still considered. This connected to what we've learned about written vs oral language. When they figured out what he was eating and wrote it down it was great but the meaning was lost. If they were in his society and hearing him tell and describe the stories passed on while connecting to the natural world, maybe then they would...

 outside reading 4 In our class we talked about the meaning of “the sacred.” From what we've learned in class the definition of something that is sacred is something that is very holy and deserves high respect. One thing that I consider sacred in my personal life is my bible. To me and society as a whole, the bible is viewed as a holy, sacred text that Christians use to learn more about God. It is holy because Jesus' words are in the bible and it talks about how he himself is holy and about the holy things he did like miracles, dying for our sins, raising from the dead, etc. this made me ask myself "what other things in my life are sacred?"

 outside reading 3 I am currently reading a book called the Case for Christ. I think it is relative to what we've learned in class about myths. The book is about an atheist journalist whose wife one day decided she wanted to be a christian. He didn't like this idea so, as a journalist, he decided to go on to prove the non-existence of god (because he thought all of this was mythical). From what I've learned a myth is something that is a person's personal narratives/beliefs that are not false , but also do not tend to be historically true either. In lee strobels opinion, he did not think anything about christianity or christ was historically true so he went on a mission to prove it wrong. Throughout his book he tries to answer difficult questions that many people have about christianity - was jesus the son of god, what if that was a lie - would someone in their right mind die for a lie - was jesus in his right mind - what is the proof of jesus being the son of god - were...

 outside readings 2 - sundance One religion we talked about that has really stuck with me over this class was sundancing. I think it was very interesting that indigenous tribes use pain and torture as a method of spiritual renewal. When they dance they want to see a spiritual vision. What I've learned from the sundance is that indigenous people pierce their skin as a way of giving themselves to their creator as well as communicate with them. During the sundance period they do a lot of things involving prayer, fasting, dancing, and getting together as a community. At first I asked myself “why do they hurt themselves as an act of giving themselves to God and communicating with him?" but I've found that it's relative in a way to sacrifice. In a way they are sacrificing themselves, giving their flesh to their creator as a way of surrender and to communicate with their god and get visions from him. 

 outside readings 1 I think the black robe movie was a great visual of the difference between oral culture and written culture. Father Laforgue carried around his bible and was focused on what he believes based off of a written book whereas the ingenious people got their beliefs through oral words. Father Laforgue was focused on the afterlife mentioned in his bible and the indigenous people were focused on the present moment and experiences. I think this is also a really great example of faith in general. Faith is usually supported off of what you cannot see but what you hear and read. I think this movie was a great example of having faith based off of different beliefs and different ways of supporting them. Most christians use the bible like Father Laforgue, but some cultures, like indigenous people today as well have faith fully based off of other ways and i think this goes to show how different, but how impactful each form of literature is on someone, especially on their beliefs...

 article 5 In this passage, I learned about the meaning of a myth. This passage says that myths have the power of revealing the bond between man and what he considers sacred. I think that is a really cool statement. This made me ask myself “what myths do I know that helped me connect more to myself?” In my opinion, I think Prometheus made me connect more to myself. Prometheus is known for stealing fire and giving it to the community. I look at myself as a very giving person but the gift Prometheus gave was far bigger than anything I could give someone. This made me connect with myself and try to think about the biggest gifts I can give to people that I care about that are not necessarily physical. I've concluded that a gift that I feel compares to being as big as the gift of fire is giving my love to others, because it is something that can not be replaced, just like fire.

 article 4 In Kip's article, he talks about the distinction from home in homelessness. For home, he describes home as being the place where people and animals come together and connect. Home is a happy place where healing takes place. On the contrary, he talks about homelessness. He describes homelessness as leaving familiarity. Homelessness is being separated from what you know and your role in your environment. I loved this paper because it emphasizes how important “home” can be. This article made me question “what does home mean to me?” To me, home is my family, my pets, the places I love to go to. Homelessness for me is graduate school, something I am not familiar with and will force me to be different. 

 article 3 Walter Ong agrees with what Abram says mostly but he goes deeply in talking about how we live in a sensory world that is described through our personal experiences and spoken words. It's described through how we interpret the world around us through our senses and repeated words. I agree with this. I think about storytelling and how when someone tells me a crazy story I can actually experience through them. By listening to how their voice changes and how strong they get, their personal experience. And by watching their actions and movements to describe the event. But if I were to have just read a text about the same event I really don't think I would experience it in the same way. It wouldn't be as cool, it wouldn't catch my attention as much, i would remember it more if it was told verbally. Because of this, I did like both abram, and ong but the way the book goes in depth about the experience itself of oral words is just different. How much does a story cha...

 article 2 In Abrams' book he talks a lot about how written language has distanced us from perceiving the world around us and that it creates a separation from the real natural world around us. In most ways I could agree with this but I was confused at some points reading it because in life a lot of things are written and even if you want to learn things more verbally, in today's society it's hard to. Take school for example - we can learn verbally (ish) from our teacher but usually our teacher is just reading off of written words on slides that they got from a book or journal. I think in some ways it can definitely distance us but at the same time we can learn something from written words and then experience it ourselves by explaining it further. However, I do think oral language is better because you are really able to experience what the person is saying and the world around you through listening as well as observation. I think his biggest thing is that things expressed ...

 article 1 One of my favorite articles/excerpts that we looked at was the Helen Keller one. I always wondered how someone could live their life blind and deaf and knowing names for things but not really understanding their meanings and what they are. The hellen keller excerpt showed how important written culture was for her. It brought her life. She was actually able to understand and grasp things solely because a word was joined with what she felt or understood. Once she tied words to things, her world became less blurred and strange. I think this article showed me that written words also tie with present experiences, just like oral literature. In her view, oral words did not help her, it was solely written words. Maybe each literature (oral and written) is a great way to explain things but which is better, depends on the person. How could someone go throughout life without these common senses and how much of their experience in life is taken away from them when this happens? How ...

 Lately I’ve been thinking about how weird it is that the smallest parts of the day end up sticking with you more than the big stuff. You can go through classes, errands, a whole schedule, and the thing you remember most is something tiny, like the way the sidewalk smelled after it rained or how someone laughed in a hallway. It makes me think that maybe the “important” parts of life are not actually the things we plan out. Maybe the little accidental moments matter more because we aren’t trying to control them. They just happen, and for whatever reason they feel real in a way the big moments don’t. I kind of like that. It takes the pressure off having everything figured out.

 Reading Original Visions made me realize how differently oral cultures experienced the world compared to how we do now. In the stories, everything feels alive and meaningful. People talk to landscapes, animals, dreams, and signs like they’re part of the community. Nothing is “just” symbolic or “just” nature. It all matters. What really hit me is how comfortable these cultures are with mystery. They do not need every experience to be proven or explained. If something happens, it is taken seriously. Meanwhile, we want a scientific reason for everything before we trust it, and even then we still doubt ourselves. The book made me think about how much awareness we’ve traded away. These people noticed things, paid attention to the world, and let meaning come from experience instead of apps, schedules, or constant noise. It made me wonder what we might hear or feel if we actually slowed down enough to listen again. In the end, Original Visions felt less like learning about old traditions...

 One thing I thought was interesting about the virtual meeting with Ian McIntosh was learning about how during The Dreaming, the Uluru can see the Eternal! Ian talked about how this contrasts with the Christian idea that God lives up in Heaven, in the sky, away from other human beings. I've always found Native American mythologies to be really beautiful, because it tells us so much about the importance of having a connection with nature. I really think that a lot of us can learn from the Uluru in this, because it can also teach us a lot about how our relationship with the Divine connects with Nature, as well as how our relationship with the Divine is inherently within our own control. Yes, the Divine is wholly different than us (human beings) in regard to Being and Substance, but that does not mean that the Divine has to be something we can't attain or reach. 

 This is an expansion of something I had mentioned in a previous post. Recently I've been thinking about how no one seems to be able to get around unless their phones tell them where to go. People used to have a natural sense of direction, it wasn't as good as a bird's, but good enough to find a trail, follow a river, or remember where the sun sets. If google and apple maps ceased to exists, half or more of the world would be lost spinning around like a top. its crazy how fast we swapped intuition for instructions. However I feel it is not entirely lost, its like a muscle that needs to be trained. I love being able to tell the general direction of where a landmark is without having to consult a map, just relying on intuition. 

In Cabeza de Vaca what stood out to me was how fast the main characters identity falls apart once he loses control. Starting as a proud Spanish explorer, but as hunger, sickness, and isolation in a new place set in, he falls apart and is reconstructed by the world around him. No longer seeking to conquer the people, but to cohabit and learn from them, as without their aide he would not have survived. Once he returns to his people, he is changed. He'd seen that the natives weren't savage at all, but have not experienced it his countrymen could have no true way of knowing that. Sometimes you need to go through hardship to see things more clearly.  

 Within the past month or so we spent some time in class viewing various sex icons from across the world. The one that sticks out to me was the man hunched over wielding a tomahawk in one hand, while masturbating with the other. Its like this is what a man was in ancient times, masculinity was centered around sex and violence. On the other hand feminine figures typically represented fertility, often with wide hips and a broad chest  or mirroring female reproductive organs. They held a sacred power that was not taboo. Bodies served as tools to teach important lessons of life.   In the modern day these icons have been warped. The depth and symbolism has been lost to the times, making these symbols a shell of their former selves. Modern masculinity often reflects "alpha male" mindset, where sex and power are treated as commodities and have been stripped of their inherit value. This is a literate version of masculinity that's detached from lived experiences. Similarly fe...

Faith and truth are presented contrastingly in the film Black Robe, and especially so when you consider how the cultures of the Algonquin and French Jesuits interacted with suffering. From the Jesuit perspective, suffering seemed to be displayed and treated as a consequence--an occurrence one must endure during the process of atonement. The Algonquin view, however seemed to me to be more matrer-of-fact. The film portrays a lack of interest in why the suffering take place and treats it at a fact of nature, opting instead to tell us how the natives value perseverance in the larger scheme of their culture.

 thinking about the recent turn in the century with technology being this almost over arching change. it makes me think about how the first people who figured out how to write felt. like this brand new thing that would revolutionize their world was just beginning.  when in class we talk about the big change and how we couldn't know how its like to live in an oral only culture. just like today im not sure people could know what its like to live without a smartphone. I hate my phone its super annoying and wont leave me alone. 

I honestly thought this movie was a rollercoaster from start to finish. It takes so many surprising turns that you never expect the movie would take. In the beginning, I thought de Vaca would stay enslaved to the Natives forever until he died. How little I was wrong! I thought it was really interesting and also kind of heartwarming in a way to see how he slowly becomes willing to his role. I don't condone slavery at all, but I only thought it was heartwarming, because de Vaca and the shaman become friends and allies :)  The fact that this is inspired by a real man makes the movie that more significant and shocking! I think the movie did a great job of showing how there really is not a "one size fits all" for religion. I am in love with the idea of syncretism, because it means that religion is not a box! Anyone can practice any religion in any way they want, even if it is deemed not the standard way by the rest of society or members of that religion.  One question I had ...

 I thought this reading was really interesting, because it framed the cultural significance of certain religious and cultural Apache sacred sites as only having power when the individual is present, "speaking silently." In other words, the site only contains power when it is attached to a sacred ritual, religious deity or cultural/religious practice. I thought this was really interesting, because it attempts to answer whether or not the site has power in and of itself, or if it is simply similar to a social construct.  That reminds me of a question I once wondered myself: Is religion a social construct? This question is really heavy, because it cannot be answered easily. How does one even begin to answer it? Is there an answer? For me, I think that this depends on what the Truth is. Not just what someone personally believes to be true, because you never know if what this person believes is the real   Truth , or just their own truth. I don't know if that makes sense, but ...

Human consumption is far more than the act of eating, but is a reflection of our relationship with life itself. Consumption is different across many cultures and has various meanings spiritually and  historically. Like in some cultures is not just served as an act of killing but as an act of power. They consume their power, literally. In other cultures they often scare or torment the person before eating, therefore, they sustain all of the power, or greater power.  Consumption overall is greatly misunderstood due to social media which frames it as performance rather than necessity. 

  Mother Nature is one of humanity’s most enduring symbols, a way of personifying the living, breathing force of the natural world. She represents the cycles of growth, decay, and renewal, embodying both nurturing abundance and untamed power. To speak of Mother Nature is to acknowledge that the earth is not just matter but a dynamic presence, one that sustains us while reminding us of our dependence on her rhythms. Across many cultures, Mother Nature is depicted as a guardian and teacher. In modern times, she is invoked as a metaphor for ecological balance and environmental responsibility. To honor Mother Nature is to recognize that our survival and when we disrupt her harmony, we invite chaos.

 Throughout the semester, I have been thinking about one of the main themes of the class - how our senses make up our ordered reality. How what we see, taste, feel, hear, and smell builds the foundation for what we know. My question is, how does this change when a society that was once an oral society changes into a textual-dependent one? Because people who depend on written text like we do obviously still have senses that we use to structure our world. But I think it could be boiled down to the fact that the focus is different. For example, in oral societies, people are focused more on the people around them, their environment, their space/place. But for text-dependent societies, it is not that we have necessarily lost these things, but rather that we are more focused on  words  to give us meaning, rather than the world around us.  Going off of this, I genuinely think its interesting, because it shows that we have a strong tendency to become a little unattached and...

Nature is the foundation of existence the given reality that precedes human will. It is the forests, oceans, seasons, the cycles of birth and death that reminds us of something larger than ourselves. Nature reminds us of our limits, grounding us in laws we cannot escape gravity, time, mortality. It is both nurturing and indifferent, offering abundance yet demanding respect. In many traditions, nature is sacred precisely because it is not made by us; it is the eternal backdrop against which human life unfolds. Creation, by contrast, is the human act of shaping and transforming nature into meaning. Creation is not opposed to nature but arises from it. Where nature is given, creation is chosen; where nature is eternal, creation is temporal but transformative. Together, they form a dialogue, nature grounds us and creation expresses us. 

 Ritual is the human way of shaping chaos into cosmos, turning ordinary acts into meaningful patterns. Whether through prayer, dance, or daily routines, rituals create order, grounding us in a rhythm that resists uncertainty. They mark transitions of birth, marriage, death and remind us that life’s passages are not random but woven into a larger design. In this sense, ritual is both practical and symbolic; it gives structure to time, connects individuals to communities, and transforms fleeting moments into enduring meaning. Beyond tradition, rituals also serve as personal anchors. A morning meditation, a martial arts practice, or even the act of journaling can become ritual when performed with intention. At its core, rituals are circles of cosmos drawn against the disorder of existence, affirming that human life is not only about survival but about shaping experience into significance.

 In many traditions, the cosmos represents an ordered reality, the structured, intelligible world where meaning, law and harmony prevail. It is symbolized by the circle, a shape without beginning or end, which embodies wholeness and balance. In contrast, chaos. lies out the circle, disorder. An example like, a king who brings order to their kingdom but outside their kingdom is chaos. The king's role is not only to guard against chaos but to continually expand the circle of order, being more of reality into harmony. 

Death is one of the few experiences that unites all living beings, yet it remains one of the most mysterious aspects of existence, Across many cultures and spiritual traditions, death is rarely seen as a simple ending. Instead it is understood as a passage into another state of being, a return cycle of nature, or a transformation that reshapes both the individual and the community left behind.  In a nature's perspective, seasons embody death and rebirth; as autumn and winter comings to an end, spring represents renewal; a continuous cycle of life, death, and rebirth throughout each year. In eastern traditions, Hinduism and Buddhism, death is part of a similar cycle of samsara, birth, death, and rebirth. Or in Indigenous traditions, death is viewed as a return to earth, where the spirit continuous to stay alive in harmony with ancestors and the natural world.

In my Great Philosophers class with Dr. Sakal (and more recently in my Senior Seminar), I explored the idea of 'via negativa,' or 'the negative way.' For those unfamiliar, it's a type of theological truth-seeking in which what you don't say is more important than what you do. The great Jewish philosopher Moses Maimonides claims that language itself is insufficient to capture God's essence, so a wise person wouldn't even try to speak plainly and risk error. I wonder if there's a parallel to be made here from "language" to "writing." Certainly, according to Ong and Abram, there's a lot that's lost when information is transmitted through writing rather than speech. Could there be some sort of theology among members of oral cultures in which writing should be forbidden, at least as it relates to important concepts? Abram writes that many of these cultures in the modern age are keenly aware of writing as a technology, and large...

Abram writes that, while staying with members of an oral culture, he had an interaction with some of the spirits they presented offerings to. These were not ghosts, as westerners might understand them, but rather a horde of small black ants. The offerings were not only symbolic (as it is of course a religious act to offer something to spirits), but practical: by giving the ants a source of food close to their homes, one could effectively keep the ants from trying to steal their own food. The idea of spirits as corporeal beings is very interesting to me. It's not merely that the ants have spirits, but if I'm understanding Abram correctly, the ants are the spirits. I would love to see where this line of reasoning leads -- I think it could be very interesting to consider. Are we, as human beings, a type of spirit? Do all living things (or at least animals) count as spirits, if even the ants do? What distinguishes the spirits of the living from the spirits of the dead, if anything?

To post about Ishi a second time, against my better judgement: I have not only an academic interest in this topic but an admittedly emotional one. To quote one of the other students -- I forget who -- " this really, really pisses me off. " The lack of care with which this man was treated, and the callous insistence of the perpetrators that it was justified by necessity -- there's just something patently wrong about it. The man has been dead for over a hundred years, and I still can't help but mourn for the loss he must've felt. I hope, sincerely, that Ishi's spirit finds some sort of peace, if it does continues to exist as he believed it would. Part of me hopes he's wrong about his soul, and it doesn't work as he described -- the alternative, of course, is that he would have no body with which to join his tribe in the afterlife.  It's comforting to see modern anthropologists being so careful and respectful of oral cultures, but disappointing that i...

Where does anthropology end, and something else entirely begin? Throughout the story of Ishi as seen in class, I had mixed emotions. On the one hand, they paraded this poor man around like a circus animal, like some sort of attraction to be marveled at, rather than a human being with his own unique feelings and thoughts and experiences. On the other, it seemed at times that Ishi had found genuine friendship in at least one of the men who was ostensibly studying him. I would be interested in understanding the thought process behind the decisions made by these anthropologists. Certainly, the study itself was in its infancy, and can't be expected to have been perfect by any means... but even at the time, was there no consideration for how Ishi might have felt? Even among the most morally bankrupt of the anthropologists, to whom poor Ishi would have been a lesser animal, did anybody stop to think that this is a poor way of conducting research? The whole thing feels cruel and unusual. A...

Cabeza de Vaca disheartened me greatly. That was a deeply depressing ending for a story that showed the audience a great deal of hope at the halfway point. The main character discovers something beautiful about the natives and their way of life, and they discover similar truths about his. The audience is lulled into a false sense of security for a while, thinking that our intrepid protagonist will get a happy ending. This is all stripped away by the end. The closing shot depicts a group of enslaved natives carrying a massive and inexplicably iron-wrought cross through the desert. This is, of course, a blatant metaphor for Christian attempts at dominating and subjugating native cultures -- ostensibly "in the name of" a God who would never order any such thing. While the symbolism is heavy-handed, I did appreciate it, because it helps reinforce the message that these cultures are beautiful, fragile things, and can be -- but shouldn't be -- steamrolled by foreign influence.

How would members of an oral culture, in which magic is taken to be a real and practical element of daily life, respond to a western understanding of magic? Is their concept of magic so common to the everyday person and so inviolable that our version would be taken as inoffensive? Or, since magic is often equated with divinity, would our version seem sacrilegious to them? I'm struck with the humorous, yet no less relevant, image of explaining to an oral-culture shaman what our understanding of magic is -- it often involves pointy-hatted wizards throwing fireballs and lightning from their fingertips, or white-gloved performers in tailcoats making rabbits appear with a wand. To a person whose whole life is surrounded by magic, and who lives alongside magical forces every day, how would this comparison feel? What would it say about our culture?

In many oral cultures, as we discussed in class, the dead are believed to still exist as spirits in the physical world. In some cultures, speaking the names of the dead would risk calling them back, when they're supposed to be on a journey -- Ishi explained that the dead journey somewhere far to the South (if I remember correctly), then either (A) climb up a ladder into the heavens, and float away like clouds, or (B) jump, one after another, into a great hole in the earth. What would happen if one were to speak one of those names? If, for example, somebody were to accidentally reference a dead family member, how would one send them back on their journey? It seems like it would be terribly disheartening to have accidentally disrupted a beloved friend or family member on their spirit-form journey. Surely there must be a method of atoning for this, right? I can't imagine the spirit would simply wander around forever, but could that be a risk? This is less a concern of language, an...

I'm very interested in the concept of religious experiences induced through mind-altering substances. What is it about that altered state that makes a person so clearly susceptible to experiencing 'the divine?' Is it merely that a person associates such strange new experiences with something magical, and associates the magical with the divine? Or is there really something in there at the base of human consciousness that's easier to 'tap into' while in an altered state?  How would anybody be able to know the difference between a real vision and a trip, if there is one? Don't visions feature prominently in religions even as mainstream as Christianity? What makes those visions 'more valid' than others, according to critics? I don't think God dwells in some sort of hallucinogenic higher dimension, but it's fun to contemplate the possibilities. (For legal and academic purposes, of course, my interest in this is purely hypothetical, and I've no...

While sitting in class and listening to Dr. Redick's stories of personal religious experiences, I had a thought: isn't this just how oral cultures learn? Previously, I'd been working under the flawed assumption that it must be categorically different in oral cultures, and that their learning experiences, especially as they relate to religion, would be alien to me. I don't think I was correct in that. There's something familiar and engaging about listening to a trusted authority's stories as a form of learning. It feels much more intimate than simply reading a book, and makes me feel more directly engaged with the subject matter. A very interesting revelation to have consciously, though one that I'm sure was a bit late.

Ong writes that literacy "is absolutely necessary for the development not only of science but also of history, philosophy, explicative understanding of literature and of any art, and indeed for the explanation of language (including oral speech) itself." I don't necessarily agree, but would love to hear more on this topic specifically. Is there any code of conduct that is not in some way indicative of an underlying philosophy? Is fire-starting alone not a type of science? Can it really be said that oral cultures lack a history, when it surely exists, if only in a different form? I obviously cannot answer these questions alone, but I think these are very interesting issues. I wish Ong would have spent a bit more time on them. 

For my term paper, I'm writing about how art can be considered a form of language, or possibly a precursor to it. I'm fascinated by the fact that our alphabet emerged from symbols representative of animals, water, and other concepts. I wonder if it's plausible that, given enough time, any oral culture could end up naturally developing an alphabet over time. We can certainly see representations of things as complex as full-scale galleons, so consistency in symbology is absolutely not a concern. It would just be a matter of pairing images with sounds, and eventually developing a system to correlate them. This is, of course, not to say that the development of an writing system is inevitable in any way. I'm simply curious whether there's something that drives us toward that system.

  “Thus it was that the progressive spread of Christianity was largely dependent upon the spread of the alphabet, and, conversely, that Christian missions and missionaries were by far the greatest factor in the advancement of alphabetic literacy in both the medieval and the modern eras.” (Abram p. 254)      In Abram’s The Spell of the Sensuous he comments on how the spread of Christianity went hand in hand with the spread of the alphabet/literacy. This made me consider what implications this had for oral cultures. Christian missionaries effectively spread literacy because the technology of the alphabet was essential to replacing the existing oral world view. Oral traditions are inherently fluid and constantly adapting, forgetting outdated information to reflect present needs. Christianity, however, requires fidelity to a fixed, unchangeable text (the Bible) written centuries ago. To establish Christian authority, missionaries had to install the alphabet as the sole...

  “For the Navajo, then, the Air—particularly in its capacity to provide awareness, thought, and speech—has properties that European, alphabetic civilization has traditionally ascribed to an interior, individual human ‘mind’ or ‘psyche.’ Yet by attributing these powers to the Air, and by insisting that the ‘Winds within us’ are thoroughly continuous with the Wind at large…the Navajo elders suggest that that which we call the ‘mind’ is not ours, is not a human possession. Rather, mind as Wind is a property of the encompassing world.” (Abram, p. 237)      This quote comes from Abram’s The Spell of the Sensuous in a section where he writes in depth about air, specifically wind in this case. Abram’s observation highlights how, for the Navajo people, Wind holds the properties that European civilization traditionally assigns to an interior mind or psyche. The key difference is location and ownership. Western philosophy, influenced by the alphabet and the written word, te...

  “By contrast with literate societies, oral societies can be characterized as homeostatic (Goody and Watt 1968, pp. 31-4). That is to say, oral societies live very much in a present which keeps itself in equilibrium or homeostasis by sloughing off memories which no longer have present relevance.” (Ong, p. 46)      This quote comes from Walter Ong’s Orality and Literacy. His observation that oral societies are homeostatic, living in a present that maintains equilibrium by “sloughing off memories which no longer have present relevance,” describes a necessity of the constraints of the mind. In an oral culture, every piece of critical information, like history, law, ritual, or genealogy, must be stored in the living memory of the people. This collective memory has a limited capacity. Therefore, the society must prioritize what it remembers. Information that no longer has immediate, practical relevance to the community’s survival or social structure becomes a useless bu...

  “I walked into my room chuckling to myself: the Balkan and his wife had gone to so much trouble to placate the household spirits with gifts, only to have their offerings stolen by little six-legged thieves. What a waste! But then a strange thought dawned on me: what if the ants were the very ‘household spirits’ to whom the offerings were being made?” (Abram, p. 12)      In this section of The Spell of the Sensuous , Abram describes his hostess’s habit of setting out offerings for “household spirits.” He witnesses ants coming and taking the food she has put out. At first he thinks this is funny, but then he comes to the realization that indigenous cultures don’t anthropomorphize spirits like most Western tradition does. This offers insight in how oral cultures perceive the spiritual realm. Abram’s initial reaction of laughing is rooted in a Western, anthropomorphic tradition, which assumes that spirits must be unseen, abstract, and often human-like entities who ope...

  “A long line of philosophers, stretching from Friedrich Nietzsche down to the present, have attempted to demonstrate that Plato’s philosophical derogation of the sensible and changing forms of the world…contributed profoundly to civilization’s distrust of bodily and sensorial experience, and to our consequent estrangement from the earthly world around us.” (Abram, p. 94)      This quote by David Abram in The Spell of the Sensuous powerfully summarizes a long standing critique: that the philosophical tradition stemming from Plato is fundamentally responsible for civilization’s deep estrangement from the earth and sensuous experience. Plato’s core philosophical project involved the primacy of the eternal, unchanging forms (the perfect concepts residing outside of our sensory world) over the sensible and constantly changing formats of material reality (the world we perceive with our bodies). This created an intellectual devaluation of the body and sensory experience....

     We have discussed several times in class why the use of technology distances us from the earth. From the moment humanity first created a hammer or sharpened a stick to use as a spear, we initiated a process of increasing separation from the unmediated experience of the earth. Technology is any invention that acts as a mediator between the human body and the natural world. This mediation, while solving problems and ensuring survival, gradually removes us from the necessity of fully understanding the world through our senses.        This separation fundamentally alters our relationship with the environment from one of immersion to exploitation. In the pre-tool world, survival was a relentless negotiation with the raw power of the earth; a process that required intimate ecological knowledge and physical respect for the resources accessed only by hand. The earliest tools provided efficiency, but they also introduced the capacity for abstraction and s...

     At one point in class, we discussed how animals live in the world like water in water, lacking transcendence. The question is raised: Do humans ever live like water in water after learning language? This question addresses the fundamental split between unmediated existence (the animal state of pur immersion) and the transcendent human condition. Language permanently shatters this unity by forcing us to apply abstract concepts, categories, and labels to our environment. We don’t just perceive a sensation, rather we name it and compare it to a concept stored in our memory. This act of naming creates a permanent gap between the self and the world. This gap is transcendence, the unique human ability to reflect on the past, plan the future, and question existence. This lens is always present, preventing a complete return to an instinctive, unmediated state.      While full immersion may be impossible for the developed mind, humans can achieve temporary ret...

     In one of my classes this semester, we have done a deep dive into the works of Friedrich Nietzsche. One of his core concepts is the Apollonian/Dionysian distinction, which are two forces of life that counter each other. The Dionysian is the true chaos of life, while the Apollonian is the illusion that humans apply to make meaning of life. Nietzsche emphasizes the dream-like state that we enter through Apollonian tendencies. I couldn’t help but notice parallels when we reviewed Aboriginal Dream Time.      The parallel lies in how both the Apollonian impulse and the Aboriginal concept of Dreaming function as a system of order designed to manage the chaos that is existence. Nietzsche’s Apollonian drive is the human creation of structure, logic, and form—a necessary ‘dream’ to make the terrifying, formless chaos of the Dionysian experience bearable. Similarly, the Aboriginal Dreaming is the ultimate, eternal source of order. It is the sacred law that esta...