The Similarities or Differences of the Theories from those Two Authors

Essay
Name
Institution
Essay
The two articles are comprehensive and strive to present their ideas in a manner that is clear and logical. While the ideas presented are different and the conclusions as well, there are indeed some similarities in how both authors approach their topics as well as some of the views. The topics the authors focused on are some of the most elusive and ones in which further research is still needed. Researchers often find closure in some topics, but the ones tackled in the articles under review seem to warrant years of research. The theories presented are not new, however, they help to further knowledge in the topic of animality or animalism. There has never been consensus on this topic, and these authors helped to build on the already existing body of knowledge. The notion of man being animalistic in his essential identity often elicits different views, and it is only after analyzing man’s attributes and behaviors that the truth can be established. However, Georges Bataille points out one setback which researchers often grapple with. “Just as we can speak fictively of the past as if it were present, we speak finally of prehistoric animals, as well as plants, rocks, and bodies of water, as if they were things, but to describe a landscape tied to these conditions is only nonsense, or a poetic leap” (Bataille). The above only means that researchers can only go so far and therefore, regardless of how comprehensive their research might be, they will always fall short.
One of the similarities between the two authors is their acknowledgment of research limitations. In his article, Bataille made it clear that while perceiving history, researchers have limits and therefore, cannot exclusively and explicitly claim that what they present is the truth. In most instances, people tell tales of the past and regardless of how vivid the details might be, there are questions which are always left unanswered. Conversely, Bronislaw Malinowski (1948), makes it clear that religion, as well as the philosophy of the primeval man, can only be perceived through observations as well as inferences which can as well be wrong. This doubles up as a challenge to most researchers because one’s conclusion or data can only be as good as their imagination. Currently, there is technology that can recreat...