Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Making the myth-ritualist theory scientific.
View graph of relations

Making the myth-ritualist theory scientific.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

Making the myth-ritualist theory scientific. / Segal, Robert A.
In: Religion, Vol. 30, No. 3, 07.2000, p. 259-271.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

Segal, RA 2000, 'Making the myth-ritualist theory scientific.', Religion, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 259-271. https://doi.org/10.1006/reli.2000.0274

APA

Vancouver

Segal RA. Making the myth-ritualist theory scientific. Religion. 2000 Jul;30(3):259-271. doi: 10.1006/reli.2000.0274

Author

Segal, Robert A. / Making the myth-ritualist theory scientific. In: Religion. 2000 ; Vol. 30, No. 3. pp. 259-271.

Bibtex

@article{cb5f463eae9b4ff9b70151338bc574d5,
title = "Making the myth-ritualist theory scientific.",
abstract = "Working from his base in ancient Greek religion, Walter Burkert has come to propose a theory of religion generally. That theory rests on the work of ethologists and, more recently, of sociobiologists. While concentrating on ritual, which for him is the heart of religion, Burkert links ritual to myth to offer his own version of the myth–ritualist theory. Rejecting the old-fashioned view, epitomised by James Frazer, that myth and ritual function to spur the crops to grow, he maintains that the two function at once to unify society and to alleviate anxiety. Their function is sociological and psychological rather than magical. Put another way, their function is symbolic rather than practical. For Burkert, as for Frazer, myth–ritualism arose in the stage of agriculture, but for Burkert it is tied to the prior stage of hunting. How original is Burkert's theory of myth–ritualism and of religion? Why does he turn to ethology in particular? If he is seeking to provide a scientific theory of religion, what does he mean by {\textquoteleft}scientific{\textquoteright}?",
author = "Segal, {Robert A.}",
year = "2000",
month = jul,
doi = "10.1006/reli.2000.0274",
language = "English",
volume = "30",
pages = "259--271",
journal = "Religion",
issn = "0048-721X",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "3",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Making the myth-ritualist theory scientific.

AU - Segal, Robert A.

PY - 2000/7

Y1 - 2000/7

N2 - Working from his base in ancient Greek religion, Walter Burkert has come to propose a theory of religion generally. That theory rests on the work of ethologists and, more recently, of sociobiologists. While concentrating on ritual, which for him is the heart of religion, Burkert links ritual to myth to offer his own version of the myth–ritualist theory. Rejecting the old-fashioned view, epitomised by James Frazer, that myth and ritual function to spur the crops to grow, he maintains that the two function at once to unify society and to alleviate anxiety. Their function is sociological and psychological rather than magical. Put another way, their function is symbolic rather than practical. For Burkert, as for Frazer, myth–ritualism arose in the stage of agriculture, but for Burkert it is tied to the prior stage of hunting. How original is Burkert's theory of myth–ritualism and of religion? Why does he turn to ethology in particular? If he is seeking to provide a scientific theory of religion, what does he mean by ‘scientific’?

AB - Working from his base in ancient Greek religion, Walter Burkert has come to propose a theory of religion generally. That theory rests on the work of ethologists and, more recently, of sociobiologists. While concentrating on ritual, which for him is the heart of religion, Burkert links ritual to myth to offer his own version of the myth–ritualist theory. Rejecting the old-fashioned view, epitomised by James Frazer, that myth and ritual function to spur the crops to grow, he maintains that the two function at once to unify society and to alleviate anxiety. Their function is sociological and psychological rather than magical. Put another way, their function is symbolic rather than practical. For Burkert, as for Frazer, myth–ritualism arose in the stage of agriculture, but for Burkert it is tied to the prior stage of hunting. How original is Burkert's theory of myth–ritualism and of religion? Why does he turn to ethology in particular? If he is seeking to provide a scientific theory of religion, what does he mean by ‘scientific’?

U2 - 10.1006/reli.2000.0274

DO - 10.1006/reli.2000.0274

M3 - Journal article

VL - 30

SP - 259

EP - 271

JO - Religion

JF - Religion

SN - 0048-721X

IS - 3

ER -