Please write about 120 words for each topic. Total about 600 words.

Encyclopedia of Science and Religion J. Wentzel Vrede van Huyssteen

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS CATALOGING-IN-PUBLICATION DATA

Encyclopedia of science and religion / J. Wentzel Vrede van Huyssteen, editor in chief. — 2nd ed.

p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index.

ISBN 0-02-865704-7 (alk. paper) — ISBN 0-02-865705-5 (v. 1 : alk. paper) — ISBN 0-02-865706-3 (v. 2 : alk. paper) 1. Religion and science—Encyclopedias. I. Van Huyssteen, Wentzel.

BL240.3 .E43 2003 291.1’75—dc21

2002152471

© 2003 by Macmillan Reference USA. Macmillan Reference USA is an imprint of The Gale Group, Inc., a division of Thomson Learning, Inc.

Macmillan Reference USA™ and Thomson Learning™ are trademarks used herein under license.

For more information contact Macmillan Reference USA 300 Park Avenue South, 9th Floor New York, NY 10010 Or you can visit our Internet site at http://www.gale.com

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED No part of this work covered by the copyright hereon may be reproduced or used in any form or by any means—graphic, electronic, or mechanical, including photocopying, record- ing, taping, Web distribution, or information storage retrieval systems—without the written permission of the publisher.

For permission to use material from this product, submit your request via Web at http://www.gale-edit.com/permissions, or you may download our Permissions Request form and submit your request by fax or mail to:

Permissions Department The Gale Group, Inc. 27500 Drake Rd. Farmington Hills, MI 48331-3535 Permissions Hotline: 248-699-8006 or 800-877-4253 ext. 8006 Fax: 248-699-8074 or 800-762-4058

Cover image reproduced by permission of Corbis (Shooting Stars Over the Meteor Crater).

While every effort has been made to ensure the reliability of the information presented in this publication, The Gale Group, Inc. does not guarantee the accuracy of the data contained herein. The Gale Group, Inc. accepts no pay- ment for listing; and inclusion in the publica- tion of any organization, agency, institution, publication, service, or individual does not imply endorsement of the editors or publisher. Errors brought to the attention of the publish- er and verified to the satisfaction of the pub- lisher will be corrected in future editions.

Macmillan Reference USA 300 Park Avenue South, 9th Floor New York, NY 10010

Macmillan Reference USA 27500 Drake Road Farmington Hills, MI 48331-3535

Printed in the United States of America 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

FrontMatter.qxd 3/20/03 9:37 M Page iv

ART, ORIGINS OF

— 2 9 —

ART, ORIGINS OF

Some thirty-three thousand years ago a human being living in what is now Germany carved a fig- ure like a man with a lion’s head from a piece of mammoth tusk. Other ivory figurines were made

nearby—felines, horses, bison, and mammoth— some with incised markings. Personal decorations appear even earlier. Some beads made from shells from distant shores indicate something special about the materials themselves. Some of the paint- ings in Chauvet Cave in France have been dated to thirty thousand years before the present, and other cave art may be just as old. Painted slabs from South Africa’s Apollo Cave are more than twenty- seven thousand years old, and Australian wall en- gravings, though less securely dated, may be forty thousand years old. Early Aurignacian sites from thirty-two thousand years ago have produced mul- tiholed bone flutes. Percussion instruments are nearly as old. Footprints beaten into the floors of some Paleolithic caves may suggest dancing.

Over twelve thousand items of Paleolithic portable art have been found in Western Europe alone. There are now three hundred decorated cave sites known, some with only a handful of fig- ures, others with thousands. Humans have been producing art for at least three hundred centuries, portable and parietal, in varied materials, and in widely separate parts of the world. Unfortunately, it is not clear how much this knowledge reveals about the origins of art.

Temporal beginnings and the nature of art

Even asking where and when art began is more complicated than it seems. Because researchers de- pend on the vagaries of preservation and some- times chance discovery, it is likely that many other works were created but not (yet) found. Even Chauvet Cave was unknown before 1994. A further complication concerns what qualifies as art or can be conceived as a “precursor” to art. The zoologist Jane Goodall observed wild chimpanzees engaged in a kind of rain dance. Desmond Morris found that apes like to paint—they do so without re- wards—and their paintings show balance, control, and varied themes. John Pfeiffer detected among Homo habilis (an extinct member of the human genus that lived in Africa approximately 2.5 million years ago) a possible a preference for green lava and smooth pink pebbles, and the geologist and anthropologist Kenneth Oakley notes that fossils that may have been used as charms are common in Paleolithic sites. A rough female form on a peb- ble from Berekhat Ram, Israel, dated to 230,000 years ago. Is this art or our own imagination? The

Letter .qxd 3/18/03 1:05 PM Page 29

ART, ORIGINS OF

— 3 0 —

amazingly early date makes it both more interest- ing and more difficult to accept.

Art is not easily defined. Robert Layton notes an imprecise, shifting boundary, and different ap- proaches that are hard to correlate, especially with regard to the aesthetic perspective and to art as communication. Anthropologists now commonly shy away from using the term art. Margaret Con- key and Olga Soffer advocate not thinking of these images as art but studying them as examples of human symbolic behavior. Some forms of art, such as song, dance, and storytelling, are transient, but other art is more enduring, separating communica- tion from the constraints of time and location. Ex- ternal symbolic storage is of inestimable value in human history, and the arts were among the first media so used.

Sources of art: cogitations, motivations, adaptations, and inspirations

Just as fundamental as the timing and context of its first appearance are the sources from which art arose. Steven Mithin believes the dramatic devel- opment of culture, seen in some places as early as fifty thousand years ago and established wherever humans lived by thirty thousand years ago, repre- sents a major redesign of the human mind. The premodern mind had consisted of a suite of rela- tively separate, specialized intelligences (social, lin- guistic, natural historical, technical) and the rapid appearance of art and religion is evidence that a generalized intelligence, similar to that of modern humans, allowed people to combine thoughts from the formerly separate intelligences.

Psychological explanations had proliferated even by 1900 when Yrjö Hirn’s The Origins of Art reviewed many suggestions, from James Mark Baldwin’s “self-exhibiting impulse” to Hirn’s own preference for locating the art impulse in the human tendency to externalize feeling states, heightening the pleasure and relieving the pain of these feelings and awakening similar feelings in others. The nineteenth-century Russian novelist Leo Tolstoy similarly saw art as a communication of feelings, dependent upon and nurturing empa- thy. Jumping ahead many years and theories, Nancy Aiken also attributes the origins of art to its emotional effects. This need not involve beauty but could engage any emotion. Some of the same stim- uli (lines, shapes) that naturally trigger reactions

are used in art to trigger emotional responses that are evaluated as aesthetic. This connection with biologically built-in responses accounts for the uni- versality of the human aesthetic response.

Many models are selectionist, proposing more or less plausible scenarios for how art aids adapta- tion and so is increasingly favored in early popula- tions. Charles Darwin suggested that the ability to create feelings with music gave certain individuals an edge in attracting mates. Interestingly, his fellow discoverer of natural selection, Alfred Russel Wal- lace, believed natural selection could not account for artistic faculties and proposed a “spiritual essence,” a kind of God-of-the-gaps view of human development. Some arguments involve ecological adaptation rather than the psychology of emotion or sexual selection. Pfeiffer proposed that art arose out of necessity to hold the group to- gether, reduce conflict, and pass on a growing body of wisdom. Looking back, art is an advance, but Terrence Deacon believes it was really a des- perate response to change, perhaps to a degrading environment. Such models seem to take a pes- simistic view of human freedom and creativity, yet wracking one’s brains for a solution takes as much creativity as dreaming on a sunny afternoon.

Ellen Dissanayake’s ethological approach in- volves finding core behaviors that natural selection could work on. Most important is “making special,” through which reality is elaborated, reformed, and placed in a different realm, usually a magical or su- pernatural world, though often today a purely aes- thetic realm. In contrast Helena Cronin suggests a pre-adaptation route in which art arose as an unse- lected by-product of some other adaptation. This may be true of many potentials of the human mind, some of which, perhaps, have yet to be discovered.

John Barrow pushes the causal nexus with the fascinating notion that the structure of the universe itself helped shape human creativity and aesthetic sense. Scale is important—if people were the size of ants, they would lack the strength to break chemical bonds as they do when chipping stones or carving ivory. Human associations of colors with emotions may relate to properties of light. Barrow also attempts to trace some aesthetic preferences to human adaptation to an ancestral savanna homeland. While intriguing, however, there really was no single “ancestral environment” upon which

Letter .qxd 3/18/03 1:05 PM Page 30

ART, ORIGINS OF

— 3 1 —

to base such an argument. Indeed, Rick Potts con- vincingly argues that the time of human evolution was marked by intense environmental variability and that the flexible cognition of human beings was an adaptation to instability. Perhaps human creativity and the aesthetic sense also developed in response to environmental instability.

Or did the arts grow from the human need to impose order on human intelligence and its capac- ity for self-revelation? Once human beings “left the garden,” they needed art to cope with their new knowledge, for natural selection could not keep up. In thus recognizing art’s connection with the deepest questioning of humans, sociobiologist Ed- ward O. Wilson offers an almost theological argu- ment, though his aim is consilience, the interlock- ing of causal explanations across disciplines.

Because of the human predicament Wilson captures so well, the arts have been deeply con- nected with religion. Much of the world’s art is re- ligious and so are many interpretations. Returning to the caves, the most influential is the idea, cham- pioned by the Abbé Breuil, that the art was in- volved in hunting magic. Structuralism, via Annette Laming-Emperaire and André Leroi-Gourhan, has also been important. Whatever one thinks of struc- turalism, art is deeply symbolic, and its meaning not easily perceived from another culture. David Lewis-Williams notes that Leonardo da Vinci’s Last Supper has little to do with men eating. And for Clifford Geertz, the cultural significance of art is a “local matter.” Jean Clottes and Lewis-Williams argue for a connection with shamanism in which the caves are spaces for ritual such as making im- ages expressing the trance and hallucinatory expe- riences of shamanic activity.

Noting Jeremy Begbie’s defense of art as knowledge, John Polkinghorne sees art as a vehi- cle for access to truth, a view not uncommon among artists and writers such as Madeleine L’En- gle, C. S. Lewis, Larry Woiwode, and John Keats, who famously wrote in Ode on a Grecian Urn that “Beauty is truth, truth beauty.” Ursula Goodenough also sees in art a source of nobility, grace, and pleasure, and Thomas Dubay notes that even in mathematics and science, beauty is evidence for truth. Beauty and art are not coextensive but surely related. Polkinghorne points out “That a temporal succession of vibrations in the air can speak to us of eternity is a fact that must be accommodated in

any adequate account of reality” (p. 45). Intima- tions of truth and contact with eternity are power- ful motivations. In art and music, like religion, there is a dimension of reality that transcends the material world. Indeed, Alejandro García-Riviera suggests that if God is truth, goodness, and beauty, experience of these is an experience of God.

Interlocking causal explanations

An interlocking of explanations may be crucial for understanding the origins of art. Theological per- spectives are not necessarily at odds with other ideas, and they may add an important dimension to theories of art’s causation and motivation. Art as a window onto truth not otherwise apprehended makes sense of the deepest experience of art. It is a motivation for “making special” and may also be why the shaman creates art after one spiritual jour- ney as an aid to the next. In some models, this “truth” consists in the capture and communication of an experience or feeling. This also makes sense, for whatever their ultimate sources, revelations and intimations come to an artist through experi- ences or feelings dependent on the human nerv- ous and cognitive systems. And by whatever route, people have natural selection to thank for this wonderful facility for exploring truth. It is the uni- versality of certain human experiences and certain truths so conveyed that allows (some) art to com- municate across generations. Lascaux, arguably the most famous of the painted prehistoric caves in France, still conveys real truth, very possibly some of what the artists had in mind, if only in the back of their minds, so many centuries ago.

See also ANTHROPOLOGY; CULTURE, ORIGINS OF;

PALEOANTHROPOLOGY

Bibliography

Aiken, Nancy E. The Biological Origins of Art. Westport,

Conn.: Praeger, 1998.

Bahn, Paul, and Vertut, Jean. Images of the Ice Age. Leices-

ter, UK: Winward, 1988.

Barrow, John. The Artful Universe: The Cosmic Source of

Human Creativity. Boston: Little, Brown, 1996.

Clottes, Jean, and Lewis-Williams, David. The Shamans of

Prehistory: Trance and Magic in the Painted Caves.

New York: Abrams, 1998.

Letter .qxd 3/18/03 1:05 PM Page 31

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE

— 3 2 —

Conkey, Margaret W.; Soffer, Olga; Stratmann, Deborah,

eds. Beyond Art: Pleistocene Image and Symbol. San

Francisco: California Academy of Sciences, 1997

Dissanayake, Ellen. What is Art For? Seattle: University of

Washington Press, 1988.

Geertz, Clifford. “Art as a Cultural System.” In Local

Knowledge: Further Essays in Interpretive Anthropol-

ogy, 2nd edition, ed. Clifford Geertz. New York: Basic

Books, 2000.

Hirn, Yrjö. The Origins of Art: A Psychological and Socio-

logical Inquiry. London: Macmillan, 1900.

Layton, Robert. The Anthropology of Art, 3rd edition. Cam-

bridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1991.

Lewis-Williams, J. D. Discovering South African Rock Art.

Cape Town, South Africa: David Philip, 1990.

Mithin, Steven. The Prehistory of the Mind: The Cognitive

Origins of Art, Religion, and Science. New York:

Thames and Hudson, 1996.

Pfieffer, John E. The Creative Explosion: An Inquiry into

the Origins of Art and Religion. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell

University Press, 1982.

Polkinghorne, John. The Faith of a Physicist: Reflections of

a Bottom-up Thinker. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton Uni-

versity Press, 1994.

Renfrew, Colin, and Scarre, Chris, eds. Cognition and Ma-

terial Culture: The Archaeology of Symbolic Storage.

Cambridge, UK: McDonald Institute for Archaeologi-

cal Research, 1998.

Tattersall, Ian. Becoming Human: Evolution and Human

Uniqueness. New York: Harcourt, 1998.

PAUL K. WASON

Letter .qxd 3/18/03 1:05 PM Page 32