From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
For other uses, see Animism (disambiguation).
Part of a series on
Anthropology of religion
Jarai tomb (guardian spirit sculpture).jpg
Social and cultural anthropology

Animism (from Latin anima, "breath, spirit, life")[1][2] is the worldview that non-human entities—such as animals, plants, and inanimate objects—possess a spiritual essence.[3][4][5]

Animism is used in the anthropology of religion as a term for the belief system of some indigenous tribal peoples,[6] especially prior to the development of organized religion.[7] Although each culture has its own different mythologies and rituals, "animism" is said to describe the most common, foundational thread of indigenous peoples' "spiritual" or "supernatural" perspectives. The Animistic perspective is so fundamental, mundane, everyday, and taken-for-granted that most animistic indigenous people do not even have a word in their languages that corresponds to "animism" (or even "religion");[8] the term is an anthropological construct.

Largely due to such ethnolinguistic and cultural discrepancies, opinion has differed on whether animism refers to a broad religious belief or to a full-fledged religion in its own right. The currently accepted definition of animism was only developed in the late 19th century by Sir Edward Tylor, who created it as "one of anthropology's earliest concepts, if not the first".[9]

Animism encompasses the beliefs that there is no separation between the spiritual and physical (or material) world, and that souls or spirits exist, not only in humans, but also in some other animals, plants, rocks, geographic features such as mountains or rivers, or other entities of the natural environment, including thunder, wind, and shadows. Animism thus rejects Cartesian dualism. Animism may further attribute souls to abstract concepts such as words, true names, or metaphors in mythology. Some members of the non-tribal world also consider themselves animists (such as author Daniel Quinn, sculptor Lawson Oyekan, and many contemporary Pagans).[10]

Theories of animism[edit]

Old animism[edit]

Earlier anthropological perspectives – since termed the "old animism" – was concerned with knowledge surrounding what is alive and what factors make something alive.[11] The "old animism" assumed that animists were individuals who were unable to understand the difference between persons and things.[12] Critics of the "old animism" have accused it of preserving "colonialist and dualist worldviews and rhetoric".[13]

Edward Tylor's definition[edit]

Edward Tylor developed animism as an anthropological theory

The idea of animism was developed by the anthropologist Sir Edward Tylor in his 1871 book Primitive Culture,[1] in which he defined it as "the general doctrine of souls and other spiritual beings in general." According to Tylor, animism often includes "an idea of pervading life and will in nature";[14] i.e., a belief that natural objects other than humans have souls. This formulation was little different from that proposed by Auguste Comte as "fetishism",[15] although the terms now have distinct uses.

For Tylor, animism represented the earliest form of religion, being situated within an evolutionary framework of religion which has developed in stages and which will ultimately lead to humanity rejecting religion altogether in favor of scientific rationality.[16] Thus, for Tylor, animism was fundamentally seen as a mistake, a basic error from which all religion grew.[16] He did not believe that animism was inherently illogical, but suggested that it arose from early humans' dreams and visions, and thus while being a rational system, it was based on erroneous, un-scientific observations about the nature of reality.[17] Stringer notes that his reading of Primitive Culture led him to believe that Tylor was far more sympathetic in regard to “primitive” populations than many of his contemporaries, and that Tylor expressed no belief that there was any difference between the intellectual capabilities of “savage” people and Westerners.[3]

Tylor had initially wanted to describe this phenomenon as "spiritualism," however he decided against this upon recognizing that it would cause confusion with the modern religion of Spiritualism which was prevalent across Western nations during his own time.[18] He adopted the term "animism" from the writings of the German scientist Georg Ernst Stahl,[19] who, in 1708, had developed the term animismus as a biological theory that souls formed the vital principle and that the normal phenomena of life and the abnormal phenomena of disease could be traced to spiritual causes.[20] The earliest known usage in English appeared in 1819.[21]

Social evolutionist conceptions[edit]

Tylor's definition of animism was a part of a growing international debate on the nature of 'primitive society' by lawyers, theologians, and philologists. The debate defined the field of research of a new science – anthropology. By the end of the nineteenth century, an orthodoxy on 'primitive society' had emerged, although few anthropologists today would accept their definition; the 'nineteenth century armchair anthropologists' argued 'primitive society' (an evolutionary category) was ordered by kinship and was divided into exogamous descent groups related by a series of marriage exchanges. Their religion was animism – the belief that natural species and objects had souls. With the development of private property, these descent groups were displaced by the emergence of the territorial state. These rituals and beliefs eventually evolved over time into the vast array of "developed" religions. According to Tylor, the more scientifically advanced a society became, the fewer members of that society believed in animism; however, any remnant ideologies of souls or spirits, to Tylor, represented "survivals" of the original animism of early humanity.[22]

"The term ["animism"] clearly began as an expression of a nest of insulting approaches to indigenous peoples and the earliest putatively religious humans. It was, and sometimes remains, a colonialist slur."

— Graham Harvey, 2005.[23]

In 1869 (three years after Tylor proposed his definition of animism), the Edinburgh lawyer, John Ferguson McLellan, argued that the animistic thinking evident in fetishism gave rise to a religion he named Totemism. Primitive people believed, he argued, that they were descended of the same species as their totemic animal.[15] Subsequent debate by the 'armchair anthropologists' (including J. J. Bachofen, Émile Durkheim and Sigmund Freud) remained focused on totemism rather than animism, with few directly challenging Tylor's definition. Indeed, anthropologists "have commonly avoided the issue of Animism and even the term itself rather than revisit this prevalent notion in light of their new and rich ethnographies."[24]

According to the anthropologist Tim Ingold, animism shares similarities to totemism but differs in its focus on individual spirit beings which help to perpetuate life, whereas totemism more typically holds that there is a primary source, such as the land itself or the ancestors, who provide the basis to life. Certain indigenous religious groups such as the Australian Aboriginals are more typically totemic, whereas others like the Inuit are more typically animistic in their worldview.[25]

From his studies into child development, Jean Piaget suggested that children were born with an innate animist worldview in which they anthropomorphized inanimate objects, and that it was only later that they grew out of this belief.[26] Conversely, from her ethnographic research, Margaret Mead argued the opposite, believing that children were not born with an animist worldview but that they became acculturated to such beliefs as they were educated by their society.[26] Stewart Guthrie saw animism – or "attribution" as he preferred it – as an evolutionary strategy to aid survival. He argued that both humans and other animal species view inanimate objects as potentially alive as a means of being constantly on guard against potential threats.[27] His suggested explanation, however, did not deal with the question of why such a belief became central to religion.[28]

In 2000, Guthrie suggested that the "most widespread" concept of animism was that it was the "attribution of spirits to natural phenomena such as stones and trees".[29]

New animism[edit]

Many anthropologists ceased using the term "animism", deeming it to be too close to early anthropological theory and religious polemic.[13] However, the term had also been claimed by religious groups – namely indigenous communities and nature worshipers – who felt that it aptly described their own beliefs, and who in some cases actively identified as "animists".[30] It was thus readopted by various scholars, however they began using the term in a different way,[13] placing the focus on knowing how to behave toward other persons, some of whom aren't human.[11] As the religious studies scholar Graham Harvey stated, while the "old animist" definition had been problematic, the term "animism" was nevertheless "of considerable value as a critical, academic term for a style of religious and cultural relating to the world."[31]

Five Ojibwe chiefs in the 19th century; it was anthropological studies of Ojibwe religion that resulted in the development of the "new animism"

The "new animism" emerged largely from the publications of the anthropologist Irving Hallowell which were produced on the basis of his ethnographic research among the Ojibwe communities of Canada in the mid-20th century.[32] For the Ojibwe encountered by Hallowell, personhood did not require human-likeness, but rather humans were perceived as being like other persons, who for instance included rock persons and bear persons.[33] For the Ojibwe, these persons were each wilful beings who gained meaning and power through their interactions with others; through respectfully interacting with other persons, they themselves learned to "act as a person".[33] Hallowell's approach to the understanding of Ojibwe personhood differed strongly from prior anthropological concepts of animism.[34] He emphasized the need to challenge the modernist, Western perspectives of what a person is by entering into a dialogue with different world-views.[33]

Hallowell's approach influenced the work of anthropologist Nurit Bird-Davis, who produced a scholarly article reassessing the idea of animism in 1999.[35] Seven comments from other academics were provided in the journal, debating Bird-Davis' ideas.[36]

After a lengthy period of disinterest, post-modern anthropologists are increasingly engaging with the concept of animism. Modernism is characterized by a Cartesian subject-object dualism that divides the subjective from the objective, and culture from nature; in this view, Animism is the inverse of scientism, and hence inherently invalid. Drawing on the work of Bruno Latour, these anthropologists question these modernist assumptions, and theorize that all societies continue to "animate" the world around them, and not just as a Tylorian survival of primitive thought. Rather, the instrumental reason characteristic of modernity is limited to our "professional subcultures," which allows us to treat the world as a detached mechanical object in a delimited sphere of activity. We, like animists, also continue to create personal relationships with elements of the so-called objective world, whether pets, cars or teddy-bears, who we recognize as subjects. As such, these entities are "approached as communicative subjects rather than the inert objects perceived by modernists."[37] These approaches are careful to avoid the modernist assumptions that the environment consists dichotomously of a physical world distinct from humans, and from modernist conceptions of the person as composed dualistically as body and soul.[24]

Nurit Bird-David argues that "Positivistic ideas about the meaning of 'nature', 'life' and 'personhood' misdirected these previous attempts to understand the local concepts. Classical theoreticians (it is argued) attributed their own modernist ideas of self to 'primitive peoples' while asserting that the 'primitive peoples' read their idea of self into others!"[24] She argues that animism is a "relational epistemology", and not a Tylorian failure of primitive reasoning. That is, self-identity among animists is based on their relationships with others, rather than some distinctive feature of the self. Instead of focusing on the essentialized, modernist self (the "individual"), persons are viewed as bundles of social relationships ("dividuals"), some of which are with "superpersons" (i.e. non-humans).

Tim Ingold, like Bird-David, argues that animists do not see themselves as separate from their environment: "Hunter-gatherers do not, as a rule, approach their environment as an external world of nature that has to be 'grasped' intellectually ... indeed the separation of mind and nature has no place in their thought and practice."[38] Willerslev extends the argument by noting that animists reject this Cartesian dualism, and that the animist self identifies with the world, "feeling at once within and apart from it so that the two glide ceaselessly in and out of each other in a sealed circuit."[39] The animist hunter is thus aware of himself as a human hunter, but, through mimicry is able to assume the viewpoint, senses, and sensibilities of his prey, to be one with it.[40] Shamanism, in this view, is an everyday attempt to influence spirits of ancestors and animals by mirroring their behaviours as the hunter does his prey.

The religious studies scholar Graham Harvey defined animism as the belief "that the world is full of persons, only some of whom are human, and that life is always lived in relationship with others".[11] He added that it is therefore "concerned with learning how to be a good person in respectful relationships with other persons".[11] Graham Harvey, in his 2013 Handbook of Contemporary Animism, identifies the animist perspective in line with Martin Buber's "I-thou" as opposed to "I-it". In such, Harvey says, the Animist takes an I-thou approach to relating to his world, where objects and animals are treated as a "thou" rather than as an "it".[41]

Guthrie expressed criticism of Bird-David's attitude toward animism, believing that it promulgated the view that "the world is in large measure whatever our local imagination makes it". This, he felt, would result in anthropology abandoning "the scientific project".[42]


A tableau presenting figures of various cultures filling in mediator-like roles, often being termed as "shaman" in the literature.

There is ongoing disagreement (and no general consensus) as to whether animism is merely a singular, broadly encompassing religious belief[43][44] or a worldview in and of itself, comprising many diverse mythologies found worldwide in many diverse cultures.[45][46] This also raises a controversy regarding the ethical claims animism may or may not make: whether animism ignores questions of ethics altogether[47] or, by endowing various non-human elements of nature with spirituality or personhood,[48] in fact promotes a complex ecological ethics.[49]


Main articles: Fetishism and Totemism

In many animistic world views, the human being is often regarded as on a roughly equal footing with other animals, plants, and natural forces.[50]


Main article: Shamanism

A shaman is a person regarded as having access to, and influence in, the world of benevolent and malevolent spirits, who typically enters into a trance state during a ritual, and practices divination and healing.[51] Shamanism encompasses the premise that shamans are intermediaries or messengers between the human world and the spirit worlds. Shamans are said to treat ailments/illness by mending the soul. Alleviating traumas affecting the soul/spirit restores the physical body of the individual to balance and wholeness. The shaman also enters supernatural realms or dimensions to obtain solutions to problems afflicting the community. Shamans may visit other worlds/dimensions to bring guidance to misguided souls and to ameliorate illnesses of the human soul caused by foreign elements. The shaman operates primarily within the spiritual world, which in turn affects the human world. The restoration of balance results in the elimination of the ailment.[52]

Distinction from pantheism[edit]

Animism is not the same as pantheism, although the two are sometimes confused. Some religions are both pantheistic and animistic. One of the main differences is that while animists believe everything to be spiritual in nature, they do not necessarily see the spiritual nature of everything in existence as being united (monism), the way pantheists do. As a result, animism puts more emphasis on the uniqueness of each individual soul. In pantheism, everything shares the same spiritual essence, rather than having distinct spirits and/or souls.[53][54]


  • Mun, (also called Munism or Bongthingism) is the traditional polytheistic, animist, shamanistic, and syncretic religion of the Lepcha people.[55][56][57]
  • The New Age movement commonly demonstrates animistic traits in asserting the existence of nature spirits.[58]
  • Some Neopagan groups, including Eco-Pagans, describe themselves as animists, meaning that they respect the diverse community of living beings and spirits with whom humans share the world/cosmos.[59]

Other usages[edit]

Science and animism[edit]

In the early 20th century, William McDougall defended a form of Animism in his book Body and Mind: A History and Defence of Animism (1911).

The physicist Nick Herbert has argued for "quantum animism" in which mind permeates the world at every level.

The quantum consciousness assumption, which amounts to a kind of "quantum animism" likewise asserts that consciousness is an integral part of the physical world, not an emergent property of special biological or computational systems. Since everything in the world is on some level a quantum system, this assumption requires that everything be conscious on that level. If the world is truly quantum animated, then there is an immense amount of invisible inner experience going on all around us that is presently inaccessible to humans, because our own inner lives are imprisoned inside a small quantum system, isolated deep in the meat of an animal brain.[60]

Werner Krieglstein wrote regarding his quantum Animism:

Herbert's quantum Animism differs from traditional Animism in that it avoids assuming a dualistic model of mind and matter. Traditional dualism assumes that some kind of spirit inhabits a body and makes it move, a ghost in the machine. Herbert's quantum Animism presents the idea that every natural system has an inner life, a conscious center, from which it directs and observes its action.[61]

Socio-political impact[edit]

Harvey opined that animism's views on personhood represented a radical challenge to the dominant perspectives of modernity, because it accords "intelligence, rationality, consciousness, volition, agency, intentionality, language and desire" to non-humans.[62] Similarly, it challenges the view of human uniqueness that is prevalent in both Abrahamic religions and Western rationalism.[63]

In literature[edit]

Harvey expressed the view that animist worldviews were present in various works of literature, citing such examples as the writings of Alan Garner, Leslie Silko, Barbara Kingsolver, Alice Walker, Daniel Quinn, David Abram, Linda Hogan, Patricia Grace, Chinua Achebe, Ursula Le Guin, Louise Erdrich, and Marge Piercy.[64]

See also[edit]


  1. ^ a b EB (1878).
  2. ^ Segal, p. 14.
  3. ^ a b Stringer, Martin D. (1999). "Rethinking Animism: Thoughts from the Infancy of our Discipline". Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 5 (4): 541–56. doi:10.2307/2661147. 
  4. ^ Hornborg, Alf (2006). "Animism, fetishism, and objectivism as strategies for knowing (or not knowing) the world". Ethnos: Journal of Anthropology 71 (1): 21–32. doi:10.1080/00141840600603129. 
  5. ^ Haught, John F. What Is Religion?: An Introduction. Paulist Press. p. 19. 
  6. ^ Hicks, David (2010). Ritual and Belief: Readings in the Anthropology of Religion (3 ed.). Rowman Altamira. p. 359. Tylor's notion of animism—for him the first religion—included the assumption that early Homo sapiens had invested animals and plants with souls ... 
  7. ^ "Animism". Contributed by Helen James; coordinated by Dr. Elliott Shaw with assistance from Ian Favell. ELMAR Project (University of Cumbria). 1998–99. 
  8. ^ "Native American Religious and Cultural Freedom: An Introductory Essay". The Pluralism Project. President and Fellows of Harvard College and Diana Eck. 2005. 
  9. ^ Bird-David, Nurit (1999). ""Animism" Revisited: Personhood, Environment, and Relational Epistemology". Current Anthropology 40 (S1): S67. doi:10.1086/200061. 
  10. ^ Harvey, Graham (2006). Animism: Respecting the Living World. Columbia University Press. p. 9. 
  11. ^ a b c d Harvey 2005, p. xi.
  12. ^ Harvey 2005, p. xiv.
  13. ^ a b c Harvey 2005, p. xii.
  14. ^ Sir Edward Burnett Tylor (1871). Primitive Culture: Researches Into the Development of Mythology, Philosophy, Religion, Art, and Custom. J. Murray. p. 260. 
  15. ^ a b Kuper, Adam (2005). Reinvention of Primitive Society: Transformations of a Myth (2nd Edition). Florence, KY, USA: Routledge. p. 85. 
  16. ^ a b Harvey 2005, p. 6.
  17. ^ Harvey 2005, p. 8.
  18. ^ Harvey 2005, p. 7.
  19. ^ Harvey 2005, p. 5.
  20. ^ Harvey 2005, pp. 3–4.
  21. ^ Bird-David, Nurit (1999). ""Animism" Revisited: Personhood, Environment, and Relational Epistemology". Current Anthropology 40 (S1): S67–S68. doi:10.1086/200061. 
  22. ^ Kuper, Adam (1988). The Invention of Primitive Society: Transformations of an Illusion. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. pp. 6–7. 
  23. ^ Harvey 2005, p. xiii.
  24. ^ a b c Bird-David, Nurit (1999). ""Animism" Revisited: Personhood, Environment, and Relational Epistemology". Current Anthropology 40 (S1): S68. doi:10.1086/200061. 
  25. ^ Ingold, Tim. (2000). "Totemism, Animism and the Depiction of Animals" in The Perception of the Environment: Essays on Livelihood, Dwelling and Skill. London: Routledge, pp. 112–113.
  26. ^ a b Harvey 2005, p. 14.
  27. ^ Harvey 2005, p. 15.
  28. ^ Harvey 2005, p. 16.
  29. ^ Guthrie 2000, p. 106.
  30. ^ Harvey 2005, pp. xii, 3.
  31. ^ Harvey 2005, p. xv.
  32. ^ Harvey 2005, p. 17.
  33. ^ a b c Harvey 2005, p. 18.
  34. ^ Harvey 2005, p. 19.
  35. ^ Harvey 2005, p. 20.
  36. ^ Harvey 2005, p. 21.
  37. ^ Hornborg, Alf (2006). "Animism, fetishism, and objectivism as strategies for knowing (or not knowing) the world". Ethnos 71 (1): 22–4. doi:10.1080/00141840600603129. 
  38. ^ Ingold, Tim (2000). The Perception of the Environment: Essays in Livelihood, Dwelling and Skill. New York: Routledge. p. 42. 
  39. ^ Willerslev, Rane (2007). Soul Hunters: Hunting, Animism and personhood among the Siberian Yukaghirs. Berkeley: University of California Press. p. 24. 
  40. ^ Willerslev, Rane (2007). Soul Hunters: Hunting, Animism and personhood among the Siberian Yukaghirs. Berkeley: University of California Press. p. 27. 
  41. ^ Harvey, Graham (2013). The Handbook of Contemporary Animism. London: Routledge. 
  42. ^ Guthrie 2000, p. 107.
  43. ^ David A. Leeming; Kathryn Madden; Stanton Marlan (6 November 2009). Encyclopedia of Psychology and Religion. Springer. p. 42. ISBN 978-0-387-71801-9. 
  44. ^ Insoll, Timothy (2004). Archaeology, Ritual, Religion. Psychology Press. p. 144. 
  45. ^ Harvey (2006), p. 6.
  46. ^ Quinn, Daniel (2012). "Q and A #400". 
  47. ^ Edward Burnett Tylor (1920). Primitive culture: researches into the development of mythology, philosophy, religion, language, art, and custom. J. Murray. p. 360. 
  48. ^ Clarke, Peter B., and Peter Beyer, eds. (2009). The World's Religions: Continuities and Transformations. London: Routledge, p. 15.
  49. ^ Curry, Patrick (2011). Ecological Ethics (2 ed.). Cambridge: Polity. pp. 142–3. 
  50. ^ Fernandez-Armesto, p. 138.
  51. ^ Oxford Dictionary Online.
  52. ^ Mircea Eliade, Shamanism, Archaic Techniques of Ecstasy, Bollingen Series LXXVI, Princeton University Press 1972, pp. 3–7.
  53. ^ Paul A. Harrison Elements of Pantheism 2004, p. 11
  54. ^ Carl McColman When Someone You Love Is Wiccan: A Guide to Witchcraft and Paganism for Concerned Friends, Nervous parents and Curious Co-Workers 2002, p. 97
  55. ^ Hamlet Bareh, ed. (2001). "Encyclopaedia of North-East India: Sikkim". Encyclopaedia of North-East India 7. Mittal Publications. pp. 284–86. ISBN 81-7099-787-9. 
  56. ^ Torri, Davide (2010). "10. In the Shadow of the Devil. traditional patterns of Lepcha culture reinterpreted". In Fabrizio Ferrari. Health and Religious Rituals in South Asia. Taylor & Francis. pp. 149–156. ISBN 1-136-84629-8. 
  57. ^ Barbara A. West, ed. (2009). Encyclopedia of the Peoples of Asia and Oceania. Facts on File library of world history. Infobase Publishing. p. 462. ISBN 1-4381-1913-5. 
  58. ^ Wouter J. Hanegraaff New Age religion and Western culture 1998, p. 199
  59. ^ Murphy Pizza, James R. Lewis Handbook of Contemporary Paganism, 2008, pp. 408–409
  60. ^ Nick Herbert Holistic Physics – or – An Introduction to Quantum Tantra 2002, retrieved on 2014-05-01 from
  61. ^ Werner J. Krieglstein Compassion: A New Philosophy of the Other 2002, p. 118
  62. ^ Harvey 2005, p. xviii.
  63. ^ Harvey 2005, p. xix.
  64. ^ Harvey 2005, p. xxiii.


Adler, Margot (2006) [1979]. Drawing Down the Moon: Witches, Druids, Goddess-Worshippers and Other Pagans in America (Revised ed.). London: Penguin. ISBN 978-0-14-303819-1. 
"Animism". The Columbia Encyclopedia. 6th ed. 2001–07. Inc. (10 July 2008).
Armstrong, Karen. A History of God: The 4,000-Year Quest of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Ballantine Books, 1994.
Bird-David, Nurit (2000). ""Animism" Revisited: Personhood, Environment, and Relational Epistemology". Current Anthropology 41 (S1): 67–91. JSTOR 10.1086/200061. 
Dean, Bartholomew 2009 Urarina Society, Cosmology, and History in Peruvian Amazonia, Gainesville: University Press of Florida ISBN 978-0-8130-3378-5. (Online)
Fernandez-Armesto, Felipe. Ideas that Changed the World. Dorling Kindersley, 2003.
Guthrie, Stewart (2000). "On Animism". Current Anthropology 41 (1): 106–107. JSTOR 10.1086/300107. 
Harvey, Graham (2005). Animism: Respecting the Living World. London: Hurst & Co. 
'Lamphun's Little-Known Animal Shrines' (Animist traditions in Thailand) in: Forbes, Andrew, and Henley, David, Ancient Chiang Mai Volume 1. Chiang Mai, Cognoscenti Books, 2012.
Oughter Lonie, Alexander Charles (1878), "Animism", Encyclopædia Britannica, 9th ed., Vol. II, New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, pp. 55–57 .
Segal, Robert (2004). Myth: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press. 
Thomas, Northcote Whitridge (1911), "Anet", Encyclopædia Britannica, 11th ed., Vol. II, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 53–55 .

Further reading[edit]

  • Hallowell, A. Irving. "Ojibwa ontology, behavior, and world view" in Stanley Diamond (ed.) 1960. Culture in History (New York: Columbia University Press). Reprinted in Graham Harvey (ed.) 2002. Readings in Indigenous Religions (London and New York: Continuum) pp. 17–49.
  • Harvey, Graham. 2005. Animism: Respecting the Living World (London: Hurst and co.; New York: Columbia University Press; Adelaide: Wakefield Press).
  • Ingold, Tim: 'Rethinking the animate, re-animating thought'. Ethnos, 71(1) / 2006: pp. 9–20.
  • Wundt, W. (1906). Mythus und Religion, Teil II. Leipzig 1906 (Völkerpsychologie, volume II).
  • Quinn, Daniel. The Story of B
  • Käser, Lothar: Animismus. Eine Einführung in die begrifflichen Grundlagen des Welt- und Menschenbildes traditionaler (ethnischer) Gesellschaften für Entwicklungshelfer und kirchliche Mitarbeiter in Übersee. Liebenzeller Mission, Bad Liebenzell 2004, ISBN 3-921113-61-X.
    • mit dem verkürzten Untertitel Einführung in seine begrifflichen Grundlagen auch bei: Erlanger Verlag für Mission und Okumene, Neuendettelsau 2004, ISBN 3-87214-609-2.
  • Badenberg, Robert: "How about 'Animism'? An Inquiry beyond Label and Legacy". In: Mission als Kommunikation. Festschrift für Ursula Wiesemann zu ihrem 75. Geburtstag, edited by Klaus W. Müller. VTR, Nürnberg 2007; ISBN 978-3-937965-75-8 and VKW, Bonn 2007; ISBN 978-3-938116-33-3.

External links[edit]