Agnostic.com

2 1

Creation stories the world over often have features common in other creation stories. Scott Leonard in his book "Myths and Religion" includes Marta Weigel's detailed classification:

  1. Primordial elements meet or mingle or otherwise get disturbed.
  2. A god creates by secreting something, like sweat or blood or semen or a parthenogenetic child or a spun web or excretions.
  3. A god either sacrifices him/herself or gets sacrificed to form the raw materials for creation.
  4. The hatching of a cosmic egg or dividing a closely-embraced earth and sky.
  5. Someone dives into the primordial ocean to get some sand or mud to create land with.
  6. The first people emerge from a small, cramped world into our larger world.
  7. There are two creators who either cooperate or compete.
  8. Deus faber is the "divine maker"; where a god forms something out of some material.
  9. Ex nihilo is "out of nothing", often creation by a god's command. Poof! and it exists.

It is easy to find these motifs in well-known creation stories:

  • The first Genesis story has #9, of course, though it also has a vestige of #3 in the form of God doing three separations.
  • The second Genesis story has #8, with God forming Adam out of dust and Eve from Adam's side or rib. It also has a bit of #2 in God breathing the dust Adam into life.
  • Hesiod's Theogony starts off with #1 and continues with #4 (Kronos separating Ouranos and Gaia) and lots of #2 (gods having children). It also has some #8 in Epimetheus and Prometheus creating humanity and animals.
  • The Norse one in the Elder Edda starts off with #1, and contains #3 (the dismemberment of Ymir to create our Universe) and #8 (creation of the first people, Ask and Embla, from wood).

The Universe according to modern science also fits some of these motifs:

  • Biological evolution is #2, where the kind of secretion is ordinary reproduction.
  • The origin of the Solar System is #1, where an interstellar cloud collapses under its own weight. Likewise for the origin of galaxies, which originated in that fashion about a billion years after the Big Bang.
  • The origin of the Universe remains a mystery, but the common speculation of origin from a quantum fluctuation is essentially #1. The Big Bang itself is vaguely like #4 (the hatching of a cosmic egg).
lpetrich 5 Mar 11
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

2 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

0

The attempt to pattern match science to creation myths is overdetermined and clearly a stretch compared to the creation stories to their own mythos. Some aspects of scientific discovery will arguably resonate with the same tropes, but that doesn't make the comparison or analogy useful. In fact one could legitimately suggest that that very resonance is simply confirmation bias from the operant conditioning of people to religious mythos -- which, if it weren't present, would just leave the naked scientific facts.

Are you saying that the Universe of modern science fits none of these creation motifs? I think that some things fit very well. Descent with modification involves reproduction, and that is obviously a form of secretion.

I will concede that some attempts at a fit do not work very well, like with the two Genesis creation stories.

@lpetrich I am mostly just saying that science isn't presuppositionalist and so doesn't represent an attempt (even an unconscious one) to fit with any of the 9 listed features. It's a synthesis of known facts into a proven explanatory framework. If the outcome of that process happens to somewhat fit some of those 9 features, or not, the scientific method would be indifferent to that.

At to whether either Genesis account constitutes any of those 9 features, it is interesting to consider, but ultimately doesn't change the fact that it is mythos-building and story-telling which has some arguable value as allegory or metaphor, and zero value as a literal account.

0

If you create nine vague categories everything will fit one or more of them. I will now go make myself a cup of tea, fits 8. Sorry I see my girlfriend put the kettle on for me, fits 7.

How are they vague? What would you consider well-defined?

I think that it is a reasonable classification. If it is not, then where does it go wrong?

@lpetrich Yes I think that it is a reasonable classification too, My point however is that since virtually nothing is excluded, there are no exceptions, it therefore works as a classification but can not provide any insights.

But even if a classification is comprehensive, it can provide insights. Like covering a range of possible actions:

  • Sacrificing oneself
  • Secreting
  • Physically forming
  • Commanding

@lpetrich Yep that's it, covers just about every possible way you could bring someting into existence, so proving that it is mainly just random, ( it isn't) but that is all you get from this list. And remember you are only classifing fiction anyway, even if you do find a pattern it could just be a misleading false one.

You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:308730
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.