Religion, Magic and Science | Anthropology Optional for UPSC PDF Download

Similarities Between Magic and Science
The early and later anthropologists like Tylor, Frazer, Malinowski and others who delineated the fundamental similarity between religion and science have also described the following similarities between magic and science.
1. Both magic and science assume that certain causes create certain effects.
2. Both magic and science are governed by a body of principles. The principles reveal how a magician or a scientist has to proceed to get the result.
3. Both magic and science are oriented towards a desired end.
4. Both magic and science reveal the confidence of humans in their ability to bring about results.

Similarities Between Magic and Religion
Edward Bunett Tylor, Sir James Frazer, Bronislaw Malinowski and many other anthropologists delineated the similarities between magic and religion.
1. Magic and religion are concerned with non- empirical aspects. Anything non-empirical is beyond logic and experimentation. It refers to intangible and non-measurable things. It cannot be experimentally justified.
2. The relationship of magic to science is the same as that of religion to science. Primitives do not make a distinction between religion and magic. They consider the supernatural as real.
3. Magic and religion are pervasive ana symbolic i.e. ordinary objects are i.e., ordinary objects are

considered as having endowed with religious and magical power.
4. Magic and religion contain a ritual system that includes traditional lore and formulated procedures.
5. Magical and religious ritual system contains many anthropopsychic entities which are moody which can be threatened or can be petitioned or praised.
6. Magic and religion arise and function in situations of emotional stress.
7. Magic and religion are surrounded by taboos and observances.
Primitive people are not greatly concerned with the analytical distinctions between magic and religion. Rather, they blend magic and religion as best as they can to attain their specific goals.
Brownislaw Malinowski and his student Hogbin have pointed out the impersonal and instrumental nature of magic. But Robert Harry Lowie has slightly modified this notion and said that this was not at all a universal truth.
Robert Ranulph Marett said that a thin partition often divides magic from religion. He argued that a slight change in the formulation of words, possibly transitory personification may convert the magical formula into a religious petition. Alexander Goldenweiser and others expressed almost the same view.
Melville Jean Herskovits argued that in many societies magic is an integra part of religion. For example, among the Dahomeans of Africa, the essential nature of magic and religion is the same. Raymond William Firth argued that one can find overlapping of the religious and magical practices. It is only after careful observation and investigation one can differentiate magic from religion in primitive, societies because in primitive societies what is primarily classified as magic can also contain elements of religion.
Differences Between Religion and Science
The major differences as explained by Tylor, Frazer, Malinowski and many other anthropologists. Religion is a closed system of thought and beliefs. Religious beliefs are sacred They are not to be questioned. Therefore they are not open to any empirical testing. Science on the other hand, is an open system of thought. It provides explanations that are not considered absolutely valid, but are open to empirical testing. Moreover, in Science there is an awareness of alternative theory or explanation. As old explanations are found invalid, new ones will be accepted.
Science is instrumental, individualistic, less emotional,- sometimes malevolent and sometimes benevolent and specific goal oriented but religion is supplicative, an end in itself, collective, relatively more emotional mostly benevolent and general welfare-oriented.

Differences Between Magic and Religion
Francis L .K. Hsu has criticized the contrast made between magic and religion by Malinowski and many other anthropologists. He showed that in many societies it is very difficult to separate magic and religion from one another or even sometimes to say which is which. Magicians may make use. of religious practices and appeal to spirits for help, while priests may make use of magical techniques such as sprinkling of holy water, and pursuit of immediate practical ends like a prayer-meeting' for rain magic is not always individual, nor. is religion always collective. Several Red Indians fast alone in woods and engage in a religious quest. Then religion is individualistic. Despite such lack of agreement, with regard to a few points, all anthropologists delineate following differences between magic and religion.
1. Magic is simple in its form. It consists practitioner (shaman, magician and sorcerer)  practical aim (protective, productive or destructive aim) and magical formula (like medicines etc). Religion, however is complex in Its form. It consists' of prayers (thanks giving, request or demand spontaneous or memorized, private or public, silent or aloud; prayer language includes a special stance, gesture or tone of voice and perhaps special, often archaic speech patterns), music (musical renderings, music or chanting); psychological experience (like going into trance or acquiring a feeling of euphoria by means of sensory deprivation or mortification of flesh, especially by self-flagellation, prolonged sleeplessness, piercing of the flesh and amputations, by means of deprivation of food or water or by means of using drugs and hallucinogens); exhortation or preaching, recitation of myths and sacred literature; taboos (not touching certain objects food and people to' avoid the effects of their power); feasts (the eating of sacred meals); sacrifices (personal, animal or human including money, tobacco, alcohol, abstinence from sex, etc.); congregation, inspiration (states of ecstasy, possession, conversion and revelation) and symbols (paintings, coins, statues, masks, dolls and others which symbolize gods). (Frazer, Firth and Wallace.
2. Magic is everywhere uniform in its principles whereas religious diversities are more common common everywhere. (Frazer)
3. Magic involves secrecy. Secrecy always surrounds the magician and his disciples seIdom know each other. Therefore, magic is mostly individual. Religion, on the other hand is public. It has a congregational aspect arid is hence communal. (Frazer)

4. Magic is mostly used for good and bad purposes. It is essentially anti-ethical. Religion is most commonly used for good purposes. It is essentially moral. (Frazer)
5. Magic has concrete specificity  of goals. That means, magic is always directed towards a clearly stated goal. "Religion ahs goals that are concerned with general welfare, health and goodness. (Frazer, Malinowski and Goode)
6. Magic is manipulative. It involves coercion with the supernatural, it affirm s human control of supernatural. Magical spells command obedience of supernatural. Thus magic involves the attempt to manipulate the higher powers to compel the supernatural tor blend to Human wishes. Success is seen as inevitable provided one knows the right formula. Religion is supplicative. It involves Human submission to the supernatural. It relies on extra-human aid. Prayers, appeal to the supernatural for their help. Thus, religion involves the attempt to pray  to propitiate or to cajole the  higher powers  to grant requests. Success is assumed as the grace, blessing, or boon of  the supernatural power who are free agents and who may not grant requests. (Frazer and Goode)
7. Magic includes only specialists but not followers. That means magic includes professional client relationship. Religion includes priests and many followers. That means religion includes prophet to flower relationship. (Frazer and Goode)
8. Magic more frequently revolves around individual ends while religion more frequently revolves around collective or group ends. (Frazer, Durkheim and Goode)
9. Magical practitioner or customer goes through his activities as a private individual or individuals functioning much less as groups. Religious activities are carried out by groups or by representatives of groups. (Frazer, Durkheim and Goode)
10. Magicians are feared for they are generally malevolent while religious specialists command respect for they are generally benevolent. (Frazer)
11. Failure of magic and failure to achieve the goals inspires a magician to use a substitution or introduction of other techniques. Stronger magic will be used, or magic to offset the counter magic of enemies, or even a different magician will be employed. Religious activity is less specifically instrumental. It is concerned more with the intrinsic meaning of the ritual. It is expected to achieve concrete goals indirectly by maintaining the proper continuing relationship with the deities. Therefore, a substitution is far rarer in the realm of religion. (Frazer and Goode) 12. Although the magician may feel cautious in handling such powerful forces, a lesser degree of emotion is present in magic. However, in religion one expects a greater degree of emotion, possibly awe "or: woHKIp.* (Frazer and Goode)
13. In the case of magic, the practitioner decides whether the process is to start at all. In the case of religion, the ritual must be carried out. That it must be done is a part of the structure of universe. (Frazer, Malinowski and Goode)
14. Magic is thought of as potentially directed against the society or a rexspected individual. Religious rituals are not thought of as even potentially directed against the society or such respected people.
15. Magic is used only instrumentally, i.e.., for goals. Religion may. be used for goals but ideally the practices are ends in themselves. (Tylor, Durkheim, Frazer, Malinowski, Goode and Wallace)