comparative religionsuperstitious aspects of Christianity that should be replaced by empir-
ical and rational science.
Even though it is possible to find some antecedents of comparative reli-
gion in the West, it basically erupts during the nineteenth century within
the field of anthropology, with figures such as Edward B. Tylor (1832–
1917) and Sir James George Frazer (1854–1941). Tylor devises a precon-
ceived plan of human evolution: savage or hunter-gatherer; barbaric stage,
characterized by domestication of animals and plants; and civilized stage,
which begins with the art of writing. According to Tylor, animism is the
foundation of religion among lower tribes, and this originates from a belief
in the existence of the deceased person’s soul. Tylor is especially interested
in what he calls “survivals,” beliefs or customs that are perpetuated from
the past by force of habit to the present time, which he refers to as supersti-
tions. Frazer’s evolutionary sequence is somewhat different: magic, reli-
gion, and science. Religion, a propitiation and conciliation of powers, is
believed to be superior to humans and stands in fundamental opposition to
magic and science, with magic being necessarily false because it represents
the mistaken application of the association of ideas. Frazer envisions a day
when magic and religion would be replaced by science. This day can be
hastened by a comparative study of the beliefs and institutions of human-
kind, which can expose weak points of modern society.
Like Tylor and Frazer, Lucien Lévy-Bruhl (1857–1939), a French
anthropologist, uses the comparative method to contrast archaic mental-
ity with modern Western modes of scientific thinking. Finding the former
lacking in rigor and rationality, Lévy-Bruhl labels archaic mentality
“prelogical reasoning,” mystical, and affectional participation, because
some archaic people conceive of themselves as animals or birds without
thinking metaphorically or symbolically about this type of identity.
Prelogical thinking thus does not avoid contradictions because of its
indifference to logical laws of contradiction.
Another important figure in the development of comparative religion
is Max Müller (1823–1900), an Oxford University professor and editor
of the famous Sacred Books of the East collection, who is called by many
the father of comparative religion. Within the visionary context of united
humankind, Müller calls for a science of religion that must be compara-
tive because all knowledge is comparative as well as inductive, adhering
to the laws of cause and effect. Not only can the comparative method give
a scholar a broader perspective, but it can also lead to a fuller understand-
ing of the nature of religion. Comparative religion, moreover, enables a
scholar to test their own religion against others.
While Müller and others are developing their use of comparative reli-
gion, two Dutch scholars are making important contributions: Cornelis