Stated disbelief in magic is “rational,” yet saying we're rational doesn’t make it so. Research shows that so-called irrational, magical thinking lurks right below the skeptical surface of the minds of Western individuals, ready to pop out under conditions of risk. 1/thread Image
Eugene Subbotsky & Graciela Quinteros (2002) performed two cross-cultural experiments to show how a person’s verbal beliefs come apart from their behavior. If a person says one thing but does another, it shows that their state belief does not deeply penetrate the mind. 2/27
In both experiments, Subbotsky & Quinteros compared British university students with rural Mexican participants, examining what they thought about and how they behaved in the face of unusual, apparently magical phenomena. 3/27
In the first experiment, the researchers first asked participants whether they believed that certain magical creatures exist (a centaur, for the British, and a nahual—a person who can shape shift into an animal—for the Mexican participants), & why they believed what they did 4/27
About half the Mexican participants stated that they believed that nahuals existed or that they had seen one, whereas none of the British participants stated that they believed in centaurs. This was a rough index of pre-experimental magical belief. 5/27
The researchers handed the participants an undamaged, rectangular plastic card, and asked the participants whether it really existed, why they thought it existed, and how they assessed its physical condition. Participants were then randomly assigned to 1 of 2 conditions. 6/27
In the scientific condition, participants were shown a wooden box with an unknown device that could make light and sound connected to the box by a wire. The participants were asked to make sure the box was empty and then to put the card in the box and close the lid. 7/27
The researcher then switched the device on for a few seconds and asked the participants whether the card remained the same or had changed. The box was specially designed to switch out the undamaged card for a card that had been cut into three pieces. 8/27
The participant was shown the cut up card & asked whether it was the same card that was damaged, or a different card. If the participant insisted it was a different card, they were encouraged to search the box & asked again to create the impression it was the same card. 9/27
In the magical condition, a similar box was presented but with no device. The researcher told the participant they were going to put a magic spell on the box, closed their eyes, & intoned what sounded like a magic spell. The box was rigged to replace the card as before. 10/27
In both conditions, the participants were then asked whether they would be willing to put their voting certificate in the box and allow the manipulation to occur (either switching on the device, in the scientific condition, or intoning the spell in the magical condition). 11/27
The researchers compared two outcomes: (1) whether the participants believed the manipulation (device on, intoned spell) caused the change in the card; and (2) whether participants forbade the researcher from performing the manipulation on their voting certificate. 12/27
Believers were classified as people who both (1) said that they thought the researcher’s manipulation caused the damage to the card and (2) forbade the researcher from performing the manipulation that might damage their own voting document. 13/27
Results showed a higher proportion of believers in the Mexican sample in both conditions, and comparable numbers of believers in both conditions. Also, about 85% of Mexican participants believed the spell could cause a change, but only 20% of British participants did. 14/27
The researchers followed this up with a second “high risk” version of the experiment with different groups of participants from the same communities (the ethics and disclosures check out for this experiment, don’t worry!). 15/27
The high risk experiment proceeded much the same as the first experiment, but instead of being asked to put their voting documents in the box, participants were asked whether they were willing to put their hand in the box (no hands or documents were harmed in this study!). 16/27
The results were quite different. For Mexican participants, the numbers were essentially the same. For British participants, while only 20% thought the spell could cause harm as in the 1st study, 50% forbade the researcher from casting the spell with their hand in the box. 17/27
The combined results of the two studies show that under lower risk, more impersonal conditions, British participants’ actions go hand in hand with their skeptical beliefs, yet in high risk situations, magical behavior frequently belies a stated disbelief in magic. 18/27
Taken together, the results suggest that the differences between cultures that are permissive and supportive of magical beliefs compared to cultures that discourage belief in magic may be more superficial and less pervasive than they appear. 19/27
In the context of the magic-permissive culture of the rural Mexican participants, belief and action tended to be more consistent: more belief, and more action in line with those beliefs, in both the cases of the apparently scientific device and the magic spell. 20/27
Among British participants, belief and action came apart. Though the British students were culturally trained to not verbally avow belief in magic, their actions showed otherwise when faced with a potential personal risk. 21/27
The researchers concluded that “at a relatively high cost of not believing in magic, Western and non-Western adult participants are likely to engage in magical practices to an approximately equal extent.” 22/27
This is just one study and line of thinking that implies that the rationality, naturalism, and skepticism that gets labeled as “Western” is not only culture-bound, but also perhaps far more superficial than people generally acknowledge. 23/27
In Western, Euro-centric culture, disenchantment and scientific rationality tend to be seen as the natural outcome of normal developmental processes, and enchantment or magical thinking as the suboptimal intransigence of ignorance or cognitive bias. 24/27
Subbotsky & Quinteros’s data are just one piece of evidence suggesting that this view of rationality and magic is an exemplification of the coloniality of knowledge: one way of thinking that benefits those in power becomes reified as an ahistorical feature of human nature. 25/27
It is not enough if we stop at accepting that “other people” have beliefs and practices that are valid in cultural and historical context. The further lesson is that magical thinking is not an acceptable variation, but a ubiquitous, natural mode of cognition and experience. 26/27
Our minds are polyvalent, complex, contextually bound, and frequently inconsistent. What we call rationality and magic coexist in a dappled interplay, and we do violence to ourselves and others when we pretend otherwise. Embrace the whole spectrum of psyche. 27/27

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Rain Mason, PhD, BLM, ACAB 🦊

Rain Mason, PhD, BLM, ACAB 🦊 Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @500livesasafox

21 Nov
Jung's personality typology uses a few basic concepts and principles to derive 16 personality ways of being in the world. Here, I sketch the conceptual building blocks of Jung’s model, focusing on the psychological functions of sensation, intuition, thinking, & feeling. 1/thread
In a previous thread I described Jung’s notions of extraversion and introversion. Extraverts tend to orient their energy to external objects, whereas introverts tend to orient their energy toward the archetypes those objects constellate. 2/26
To understand any phenomenon in the world, we need to know that it is, what it is, what it is worth to us, and its horizons/possibilities. These are the 4 functions, which Jung further subdivided into 2 categories of irrational and rational functions. 3/26
Read 29 tweets
18 Oct
Unconscious phenomena such as dreams and projective identification have long been seen as uncanny & strange—even paranormal. In this thread I explore the ambivalent ways that psychoanalysts have engaged with the occult and divination. To begin with, two quotations: 1/thread
“Have I given you the impression that I am secretly inclined to support the reality of telepathy in the occult sense? If so, I should very much regret that it is so difficult to avoid giving such an impression. In reality, however, I was anxious to be strictly impartial…” 2/49
“…I have every reason to be so, for I have no opinion; I know nothing about it” (Freud, 1922). “If I had my life to live over again I should devote myself to psychical research rather than to psychoanalysis” (Freud, quoted in Jones, 1957). Early in his career, Freud… 3/49
Read 53 tweets
3 Sep
Myers-Briggs (MBTI) types come under frequent criticism from skeptical rationalists. In this thread, I consider and respond some of those criticisms from the perspective of Jung’s theory of psychological types and try to contextualize the enduring interest in MBTI types. 1/thread
The MBTI is a test developed based on the ideas of Carl Jung, which derive primarily from his book Psychological Types. By returning to Jung’s work, we can enrich our understanding of the MBTI and think with greater nuance about its criticisms and its potential utility. 2/50
MBTI types are, like many personality tests, criticized for stereotyping people and putting humans into little boxes. Psychometrically, it’s been noted that MBTI traits are distributed continuously, with most scores falling into the middle rather than into discrete types. 3/50
Read 50 tweets
25 Jul
The myth of the mentally ill witch in textbooks of abnormal psychology: a thread on history, ideology, the status of the occult within clinical psychology, and why I am skeptical of psychology’s claim to place a premium on multicultural diversity. 1/25
Open any abnormal psychology textbook and a dozen or so pages into Chapter 1 you’re likely to encounter a story about how in the Middle Ages in Europe, superstition and demonology flourished, exorcism equaled treatment, and mentally ill women were persecuted as witches. 2/25
This “just so” story about the history of errors in psychopathology isn’t true, however. In 1984, Thomas Schoeneman tore it apart in a paper titled “The mentally ill witch in textbooks of abnormal psychology: Current status and implications of a fallacy.” 3/25
Read 26 tweets
26 Jun
1/ Although some diviners do tender conclusions purely on the basis of the rational symbolic significations of their divinatory system, any claim that this is the norm, let alone the only possibility, is ahistorical, culturally conditioned rasure the anthropological evidence.
2/ Historically and cross-culturally, divination is foremost a cultural-religious practice that becomes meaningful against a backdrop of cosmological beliefs. It is not, however, an irrational process, but a complex practice of meaning-making, rather than an abdication of reason.
3/ The Syrian philosopher Iamblichus distinguished inspired divination from inductive divination. Inspired divination encompasses dreams, oracles, visions, and mania/enthusiasm: forms of divination seen as direct communications from gods to human beings.
Read 20 tweets
10 May
How academic psychology tries (and fails) to dunk on astrology, a thread. 1/
The root of the problem is a construct called “magical thinking” that developmental psychologists like Piaget used to describe children’s propensity to see relationships between objects in events in non-causal terms, to ascribe mental states to objects, etc. 2/
“Magical thinking” got broadened over time to mean belief in or tendency to ascribe “non-standard” causality to events. The content of beliefs psychologists label as magical roughly centers on the anomalous, paranormal, superstitious, and sometimes the religious. 3/
Read 26 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!