Animism is one of the oldest spiritual frameworks, rooted in the belief that all entities—human and non-human, animate and seemingly inanimate—are imbued with life or spirit. While often viewed through the lens of pre-modern belief systems, animism is experiencing a resurgence in both academic and practical discourse, particularly as the environmental crisis pushes us to rethink our relationship with the natural world. This article will introduce animism, tracing its anthropological origins and modern interpretations, while exploring its connections to contemporary theoretical frameworks such as assemblage theory and the work of thinkers like Jacques Derrida. It will also consider how an animist worldview can reshape our understanding of sustainability and regenerative practices.

Traditional Interpretations of Animism

The term "animism" was first coined by the anthropologist Edward Burnett Tylor in his 1871 work Primitive Culture, where he used it to describe the belief systems of so-called "primitive" cultures. For Tylor, animism was the earliest form of religion, characterized by the idea that souls or spirits inhabit objects, animals, and natural phenomena. For example, a tree or river might be understood as possessing a spirit, leading to rituals or taboos intended to honor or appease these non-human beings.

Tylor’s work reflected the Victorian anthropological perspective, which often viewed non-Western cultures as evolutionary "earlier" forms of civilization. His definition of animism thus relegated these belief systems to the past, something to be outgrown by rational, scientific thought. However, more recent scholarship has challenged this view, emphasizing that animism is not a vestige of pre-modern thought but a rich and complex ontology that still informs the worldviews of many Indigenous cultures today.

For instance, Graham Harvey in his book Animism: Respecting the Living World (2005) argues that animism should not be dismissed as primitive superstition but understood as a sophisticated way of relating to the world. Harvey redefines animism not as the attribution of souls to objects but as the recognition of personhood in non-human entities. This interpretation focuses on the relationships between humans and the more-than-human world, emphasizing respect, reciprocity, and interconnectedness.

Reconciling Animism with Assemblage Theory

One of the more intriguing developments in the rethinking of animism is its alignment with assemblage theory, a framework most notably developed by Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari. Assemblage theory moves away from the idea of objects as isolated entities and instead considers how different elements—objects, bodies, technologies, social practices—come together to form dynamic networks or assemblages.

Animism, when viewed through the lens of assemblage theory, no longer focuses solely on whether non-human entities have souls but instead examines how these entities interact with each other and with human beings within larger systems. In this view, humans are not the center of the universe; rather, they are one part of a vast network of relationships. This approach resonates with Indigenous animist cosmologies, which often emphasize kinship between all beings, human and non-human alike.

Assemblage theory provides a useful framework for understanding the interconnectedness that animism espouses. For instance, a forest can be seen not simply as a collection of individual trees but as an assemblage of trees, animals, fungi, microorganisms, and humans, all interacting in complex ways. Within this assemblage, the “personhood” of individual entities may emerge not from an internal spirit but from their relations and interactions within the larger system. The forest, in this sense, is alive not because its trees possess souls, but because its interconnected components work together to sustain life.

Derrida’s Notion of the Other and Animate Worlds

The philosopher Jacques Derrida provides another avenue through which we can deepen our understanding of animism in contemporary thought. Derrida’s work often focuses on the relationship between the self and the Other, particularly in terms of how we construct our identities through encounters with what we perceive as different or foreign. In his later work, Derrida extended this concept of the Other to include animals and non-human entities, urging us to rethink the traditional human-centered approach to ethics and ontology.

In The Animal That Therefore I Am (2002), Derrida critiques the way Western philosophy has historically reduced animals—and, by extension, the entire non-human world—to objects of human use and contemplation. Derrida argues that this reduction blinds us to the alterity or “otherness” of non-human beings, leading to an objectification of nature that fuels environmental degradation. By recognizing the Otherness of animals and non-human entities, Derrida invites us to reconsider our ethical obligations toward the natural world.

Derrida’s critique of Western metaphysics aligns with animism in its insistence that humans are not inherently superior to other beings. In an animist worldview, animals, plants, rivers, and mountains are not merely resources to be exploited but Other beings with whom we are in relationship. This perspective encourages a deep attentiveness to the needs, desires, and agency of the more-than-human world, fostering a more ethical and reciprocal approach to how we interact with nature.

Animism and Sustainable Decision-Making

One of the most compelling aspects of animism is how it can inform our approaches to sustainability and regenerative living. An animist worldview, which sees the world as alive and imbued with agency, fundamentally shifts how we make decisions about the environment. Instead of viewing nature as a backdrop for human activity or a resource to be managed, animism suggests that we consider the well-being of all entities in an ecosystem.

In practical terms, this can have profound implications for how we approach environmental conservation, resource management, and community planning. For example, in some Indigenous cultures, decisions about how to manage land and resources are made through consultation with the spirits of the land itself. In the Ojibwe tradition, for instance, rituals and ceremonies are used to communicate with the spirits of the waters and animals, ensuring that decisions are made with the consent and well-being of these entities in mind. This contrasts sharply with Western approaches to resource management, which often prioritize efficiency and productivity over the health of ecosystems.

The animist perspective encourages a more holistic and relational approach to sustainability. Rather than imposing human will on the land, animism asks us to listen to the land, to recognize its agency and to make decisions that foster balance and reciprocity. This approach aligns closely with contemporary movements such as permaculture and regenerative agriculture, which emphasize working with natural systems rather than against them. In these practices, farmers are encouraged to observe and understand the natural dynamics of their land—its water flow, soil health, and biodiversity—and to design agricultural systems that enhance rather than disrupt these dynamics.

Animism, Assemblages, and Regenerative Culture

Bringing together animism and assemblage theory creates a powerful framework for thinking about how we can build more sustainable and regenerative cultures. By recognizing that the world is made up of complex networks of relationships, both animism and assemblage theory challenge the notion that humans are separate from or superior to the natural world. Instead, they suggest that we are part of a larger, dynamic system in which all entities play a role in maintaining balance and health.

For example, in the practice of rewilding, conservationists seek to restore ecosystems by reintroducing species that have been driven out or diminished by human activity. Rewilding is not simply about preserving individual species but about restoring the relationships between species, landscapes, and natural processes. This is a profoundly animist approach, recognizing the agency of all entities within the ecosystem and their role in creating a self-sustaining, regenerative system.

This worldview also extends to how we design our communities and social systems. Animism, as reframed through assemblage theory, invites us to think of our cities, neighborhoods, and farms as living systems, where human and non-human entities co-create the conditions for life. By focusing on the interactions between different elements—whether they are people, animals, plants, or infrastructure—we can begin to develop communities that are not only sustainable but regenerative, continuously evolving in ways that benefit all participants in the ecosystem.

Conclusion: Animism as a Framework for Rethinking Sustainability

As the world grapples with the twin crises of climate change and biodiversity loss, animism offers a radical reimagining of how we relate to the natural world. By viewing all entities as alive, animate, and imbued with agency, animism challenges the extractive logic of modern industrial society and encourages us to adopt more sustainable, regenerative practices.

When combined with contemporary theoretical frameworks such as assemblage theory and the ethical insights of thinkers like Derrida, animism emerges not as an archaic belief system but as a profoundly relevant ontology for the 21st century. It invites us to recognize the interconnectedness of all life and to make decisions that honor the agency and well-being of the more-than-human world.

In doing so, animism offers a path toward a more equitable, ethical, and sustainable future, one in which humans live not as masters of nature but as co-participants in a living, breathing world.