Pantheism vs. Monistic Animism

[Inka]

As the underlying philosophical assumption for both of them is monism (variety of existing things can be explained in terms of a single reality or substance), what is the difference? They seem closely related... ?

[NeoPlatonic]

Re: Pantheism vs. Monistic Animism

I could always be wrong, but I think it is a matter of focus. A panentheist places more emphasis on the Earth/Universe as a whole, whereas a an animist takes more interest on animal spirits even if both eventually agree that "all is one".

[thalassa]

Re: Pantheism vs. Monistic Animism

I think the mistake is looking at religious ideas as if they are separate ideas and concepts. Instead they can be looked at in a variety of ways--as ideas on a continuum, or on an x-y or x-y-z axis, or as overlapping (or not overlapping) ideas on a venn diagram. Religions in general (and Paganism in particular) are one of the concepts that require polythetic classification (many people are either unfamiliar or uncomfortable with polythetic classification, or both...but as a person with a background in biology, its a pretty common idea)---more specifically, they form what is called a soft cluster.

If you look at these two ideas graphically, they overlap...but they are not necessairly the same. Its a bit like the "a square is a rectangle, but a rectangle is not always a square, and both are parallellograms, but not all parallellograms are rectangles and even fewer are squares" example. Panentheists are Pantheists, but they are not Monists, etc...you have to look closer at the individual's beliefs and not so much at the big picture, and then you can figure out the carachteristics for a polythetic classification and how to cluster the ideas.

As a confusing example: I am a Pantheist* (and not a Panentheist) but I am not a Monist---I believe that the Universe is the body of "god" (in this instance, "god" being the originator and totality percievable existence)...but the universe is NOT of one substance, whether you look at it metaphorically or (especially) literally. On a quantum level, there are different types of quarks; on a atmoic level, we know of at least 118 different atoms; etc... But...I'm also agnostic--I fully understand and accept that the only only intellectually honest position on the existence of god at this time is that its untestable, and therefore, undemonstratable and unknowable. And, I'm (in praxis) a polytheist--I worship multiple deities, and I do so because I'm a humanist (religion is a natural phenomemon, a product of evolution of both culture and biology, and the practice of religion has personal and communal benefits) and and experientalist (experience is a source of knowlege--whether religious excstatic experience comes from within or without is unimportant, what is important is how we apply the experience itself). Additionally, I practice a bioregionally based polytheism--the deities I worship, I do so in context of literally worshipping the land itself, because when it comes down to it, I'm also a hylozoist of sorts--I believe that the land itself and the features of the land are, in a sense, alive (though not life in the biological definition of life)--they are part of a living (as in growing, changing, creating, dying, and *maybe* reproducing Universe).

Especially when it comes to opinions on theisms, people like to pretend they are either-this-or-that options; but the reality is that these ideas exist on multiple levels and it is absolutely possible to accept more than one of them that would seem to be mututally exclusive on a first superficial glance...and people tend to take differences of opinion personally, and feel threatened by more expansive (or more narrow) ways of thinking.





*academic discussions of Pantheism tend suffer from a seriously Christian bent, in terms of thinking about *god* as a concept

[NeoPlatonic]

Re: Pantheism vs. Monistic Animism

As a confusing example: I am a Pantheist* (and not a Panentheist)

I know this is directed at me because I realized too late what the OP wrote. That said, interesting post above. It is always good to read how people reconcile different ideas.