In
chapter 1 of her famous "Purity and Danger", titled "Ritual Uncleanness", structuralist anthropologist Mary Douglas bases her distinction
between the clean and sacred and the unclean and unsacred, while refuting dominant
attitudes in 19th century British anthropology. Douglas argues with
the "evolution of culture" paradigm represented by thinkers such as
James Frazer and Robertson Smith.
Frazer
defined three evolutionary stages in the human cultural development: magic,
religion and science. This classification established a hierarchy of cultures
based on their position in this evolutionary course. Primitive (or
"savage") cultures, according to Frazer, are characterized by faith
in magic while modern culture in one of science with religion positioned in the
middle.
According
to Douglas, the evolution of culture approach is an example of how western anthropologists
established a condescending approach towards other cultures, expressing their euro
centrism and allowing for distinctions between cultures.
Like
Douglas, Frazer, Smith, Emile Durkheim and other anthropologists established the relationship between sanctity and
profanity as central element in religious life, but 19th century
thinkers saw it as the touchstone for differentiating primitive and advanced cultures.
They argued that primitive religions did not separate sanctity from profanity
while more advanced beliefs, like Christianity, did. Douglas mentions two characteristics
of the primitive religion according to Frazer: 1. Primitive religion is instrumental and
mechanical because it perceives rituals (magic) as supposed to bring about a
predicted outcome and influence the course of events. The other feature of
primitive religions according to Frazer is the lack of moral principles.
Douglas
heavily criticizes these notions and accuses Frazer of being condescending and theoretically
invalid. For Douglas, even if religious and cultural features are different
from one culture to another, the substantial manner in which people think is
not that different. Douglas further argues that the differentiation between
sanctity and profanity, cleanness and uncleanness, is exemplary of all
cultures, including "primitive" ones. In addition, Douglas claims
against Frazer that magic is not a lesser form of faith for like more
"advanced" religions it is a symbolic action through which people
organize their word-view, values and actions.
A heavy
influence by Emile
Durkheim can be found in Douglas's account of the relation between
cleanness and uncleanness. Durkheim, in his discussion of the "Totemic
Principle" saw religion as a symbolic manifestation of society itself.
But while Durkheim differentiated magic from religion Mary Douglas sees magic
as the same in the respect of is social ordering function.
