The Myth of Disenchantment

In graduate school, Storm received training in continental philosophy and critical theory, traditions that are cited and discussed in The Myth of Disenchantment.[1] Storm's earlier work, including his 2012 book The Invention of Religion in Japan, extensively discussed questions of theory in religious studies and European intellectual history, especially in the early modern period.

According to the book's preface, Storm decided to write the book partly to challenge Eurocentric accounts of disenchantment that saw Europe as fundamentally different from other cultures because it was uniquely disenchanted.[2]^: xi–xii

Storm published academic articles anticipating some of the main arguments of The Myth of Disenchantment in J19 and History of Religions.[3][4]

The first chapter of the book presents empirical and statistical data arguing that a widespread loss of belief in magic has not occurred in the Western world. Storm notes that disenchantment is not correlated with secularization and belief in some form of magic or the paranormal persists across most religious, educational, and age divisions.[2]^{: ch. 1} Storm argues that these data challenge theoretical attempts to rigidly distinguish the course of European history from the history of other regions.[2]^: 16–18

The subsequent chapters challenge commonplace narratives about disenchantment in intellectual history. Storm argues that formative thinkers of the scientific revolution including Isaac Newton, Francis Bacon, and Giordano Bruno did not see their projects as disenchanted.[2]^{: ch. 2}

In the book's third chapter, Storm examines the roots of the myth of disenchantment in German Romanticism. Storm argues that figures such as Friedrich Schiller described disenchantment in mythic terms and traces the origin of concerns about disenchantment to the Pantheism controversy.[2]^{: ch. 3}[5] Moreover, figures such as Friedrich Hölderlin actually anticipated a form of re-enchantment.[2]^: 87–89

Storm goes on to examine the connections between Spiritualism, the Theosophical Society, and early 20th-century scholarship on religion. He notes the parallels between Max Müller's research and Éliphas Lévi's magical treatment of the history of religions, as well as Müller's interest in Hermeticism.[2]^{: 101–115} He also shows the connections between linguistics, scholarship on religion, and the ideas of Helena Blavatsky.[2]^{: 115–120}

The book explores the relationship between other modern philosophers and contemporary belief in magic, including Kant's Dreams of a Spirit-Seer and Sigmund Freud's interest in telepathy.[2]^{: 185–187}[6] Storm discusses James George Frazer's similarities to Neoplatonism and the influence of Frazer's project upon Aleister Crowley, suggesting Frazer's account of magic was not fully disenchanted.[2]^{: 146–7, ch. 6} In the chapter on Frazer, Storm also notes that narratives of the decline of magic have parallels in folklore that describes the departure of fairies.[5][7]

The final body chapter of the book offers a new interpretation of Max Weber and his theories of rationalization and disenchantment. Storm notes Weber's interest in mysticism and familiarity with modern esoteric movements through his presence at the Monte Verità community.[8][2]^{: 274–276} In light of Weber's familiarity with modern occultism, Storm suggests that his conception of disenchantment in fact refers to magic's sequesterization, rationalization, and professionalization, not its disappearance.[2]^{: 299–300}

In addition to exposing disenchantment as a "myth" in the sense of a false narrative, The Myth of Disenchantment argues that disenchantment has come to function as a "regulative ideal," which leads people to disavow belief in magic and act as though Western society is disenchanted even though disenchantment has not come to pass.[9]

While written primarily for an academic audience, The Myth of Disenchantment has also been discussed in semi-popular, popular, and amateur venues. Storm published web articles summarizing arguments from the book in aeon.co, The Immanent Frame, and The New Atlantis.[10][11][12]

Storm also discussed the book in interviews with magazines, websites, and podcasts, some of which were aimed at a general audience. These included interviews with the magazine Dreamflesh,[9] with the Marginalia podcast for the Los Angeles Review of Books,[13] and with the Oregon Humanities Center at the University of Oregon.[14]