When scholars have compared “African traditional religion” and “Western science,” they have often treated the terms of this comparison as racialized unitary entities, which are either radically different or somewhat similar (even as Western categories of rationality or nature remain the basis for these comparisons). This essay unsettles these assumptions by focusing on practices that are called “science” in the fields of both petroleum geology and Afro-Caribbean religion. Based on long-term ethnographic research in Trinidad, arguably the world’s oldest site of commercial oil extraction, I show how internal differences between those involved in “petroleum science” and “African religion” reveal a spectrum of meanings for the word “science” centered on relations to risk. At one end of this spectrum, science conveyed ideals of stable tradition that de-risked claims to knowledge for energy sector specialists intent on securing foreign investment or for “Yorubacentric” lineages of African religion centering initiation-based authority. At this spectrum’s other end, “science” foregrounded the risks of accessing hard-to-perceive forces in petroleum exploration or “spiritual work.” By focusing on heterogeneous practices rather than cultural essences or ideals of rationality, I show how the ethical implications of “science” depend on differing experiences of the risks of working with subterranean powers. While petroleum surveys at my field site in Trinidad required embodied risks by laborers, geologists backgrounded these contexts of power, representing the risks of their work as a problem of scientific accuracy. Afro-Trinidadian spiritual workers, in contrast, foregrounded the embodied risks of science as the ground of ethical practice.

The practice of obeah, a term used to refer to a variety of African derived spiritual practices, remains proscribed in at least fourteen countries or territories in the Anglophone Caribbean today. This article examines the historical development of these laws and the significance of the continued prohibition of obeah. Although obeah laws were initially modeled on British statutes banning vagrancy and witchcraft, and were passed during a period when it was common for nations in the Western Hemisphere to prohibit the practice of African diaspora faiths, these statutes stand in stark contrast to the religious freedoms guaranteed in other parts of the Atlantic world in the twenty-first century. Obeah laws proscribe the mere performance of certain spiritual rituals, while other countries modified their policies in the mid-twentieth century to require evidence of intentional fraud and financial gain to convict occult practitioners. This article links the continued proscription of obeah to nineteenth century assertions that African peoples were animists and fetishists, as well as to long-standing hierarchies in the Western world placing theistic religions above those centered on spirit conjuring, divination, and the manipulation of supernatural forces.