Trond Superstition as Science

8/3/2019 Trond Superstition as Science

1/32

Superstition as Science

Konrad Talmont-KaminskiUMCS & KLI


2/32

First-footing It is lucky when a tall man walks into a

house first in the New Year

Is this a scientific hypothesis?

Why not?

Is it something about the hypothesis?

Is it something aboutour attitudes?

Is it something about

how it was reached?


3/32

Outline Elements of superstitions

Superstition, magic & religion 3 different views of superstition

Superstition as science

What is the difference?

Empirical limits

Conclusions


4/32

Elements of superstitions Superstitious

beliefs

Superstitiouspractices

The link

between them


5/32

Elements of a superstition Superstitious belief

Action Crossing fingers

Can be just an event Friday 13th

Effect

Potentially desirable or undesirable event Connection

Causation/conjuration orprediction/divination

Explanation Luck

No natural explanation

Supernatural explanation


6/32

Elements of a superstition Superstitious practice

Taking or avoiding the action Avoiding black cats

Success uncertain

Function

Manifest

To avoid or bringabout the effect

Latent

Can be very different

First-footing again

Predicting or causing?


7/32

Elements of a superstition The link between beliefs and

practices Generally problematic

Focussing on practices

Skinners behaviourism

Beliefs secondary

Focussing on beliefs

Superstition satisfying internal needs

Practices secondary


8/32

Superstition, magic & religion

Magic & religionMagic &superstition

Religion &

superstition


9/32

Superstition, magic & religion Magic & religion

E. Durkheim 1912 Sacred vs. profane

Religion

Social function

Magic Individual function

D. S. Wilson 2002

Evolutionary explanation of

religion

Social function as group-selection


10/32

Superstition, magic & religion Magic & superstition

Magic Traditional societies

Superstition

Modern society

Relation?

Different phenomena

Same phenomenon / different contexts

Education and superstition (Jahoda 1969) Jumper example


11/32

Superstition, magic & religion Religion & superstition

Deisidaimonia Misplaced fear of daimons

Theophrastus, circa 300 BC

Superstition is false religion

Worship of demons Aquinas, circa 1250 AD

Atheist generalisation All religion is false

Therefore, superstition is all religion Can differentiate religion & superstition

Some religious practices superstitious Intercessory prayer


12/32

3 views of superstition

Superstition asfantasy

Superstition asrhetoric

Superstition asscience


13/32

3 views of superstition Superstition as fantasy

Attempted retreat from threatening/uncontrollable reality

Anxiety-reduction (Malinowski 1925)

Retaining feeling of control (Case et all2004)

The man under the sway of impotent

fury or dominated by thwarted hate

spontaneously clenches his fists andcarries out imaginary thrusts at hisenemy, muttering imprecations, casting

words of hatred and anger against him.

Malinowski Magic, Science, and


14/32

3 views of superstition Superstition as rhetoric

Attempted communication Use of language to induce motion in

things (Burke 1969)

Costly signalling (Tambiah 1990)

Accepting authority (Palmer 1989)

By communicating acceptance of a

supernatural claim one is

communicating a willingness to acceptthe speakers influence unskeptically. -Palmer The ritual taboos of fishermen


15/32

3 views of superstition Superstition as science

Attempt to understand/controlthe world

Primitive science (Frazer 1890)

Adventitious reinforcement(Skinner 1947)

Biased cognitive heuristics(Rozin & Nemeroff 1980)

Magic is a spurious system of naturallaw as well as a fallacious guide ofconduct; it is a false science as well as

an abortive art. - Frazer, Golden Bough


16/32

Superstition as science?

Question of focusPrimitive science

Adventitiousreinforcement

Biased cognitiveheuristics


17/32

Superstition as science? Question of focus

Superstitious beliefs vs. scientificbeliefs

Superstitious methods vs. scientificmethods

Both options incomplete Would superstitious beliefs be

scientific if arrived at scientifically?

Could they be arrived at scientifically?

Is there such a thing as magicalthinking?

Or is it that thinking sometimes leads tomagical beliefs?


18/32

Superstition as science? Primitive science

Tylor 1871, Frazer 1890, Levy-Bruhl1910

Superstition identified with primitivesocieties/minds

Science identified with modernsocieties/minds

Progress seen as directed

evolution Enlightenment / Intellectualist

position

Rationality expels superstition


19/32

Superstition as science? Adventitious reinforcement

B.F. Skinner 1947, S. Vyse 1997 Superstition in a pigeon

Skinner box

Operant conditioning

Independent reinforcement schedule

Superstitious behaviour

Operant conditioning isnot just for rats andpigeons - Vyse


20/32

Superstition as science? Adventitious reinforcement

Matrix task 4 x 4 matrix

Move dot from top left tobottom right

Task: Find out when points are gained Points awarded randomly

Numerous theories put forward

Similar situations

Malfunctioning light switch

Conditioning as basis for understandingscience?


21/32

Superstition as science? Biased cognitive heuristics

Domain-specific Generally effective

Systematically biased

Heuristics and biases (Kahneman &Tversky 1974)

Bounded rationality (H. Simon 1972)

Scientific methods as heuristics

(W. Wimsatt 2007)

Contagion heuristic

Rozin & Nemeroff 1980
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:HerbertSimon.jpghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Daniel_KAHNEMAN.jpg


22/32

What is the difference?

Truth & empiricaladequacy

Natural vs.supernatural

Sacred vs. profane


23/32

What is the difference? Truth & empirical adequacy

Superstitions as false causal beliefs Often used definition

Many false causal beliefs, some scientific

Superstitions not just false but (known

to be) empirically inadequate Scientific beliefs rejected due to empirical

inadequacy

Can not equate Newtons physics with his

astrology

Is onto something

But superstitious beliefs look different


24/32

What is the difference? Natural vs. supernatural

Superstitions as supernatural claims Problems

Vague concept

Circularity?

Distinction much later than category

Correlation between superstitious andpseudoscientific beliefs

Succubi become aliens

Post hoc explanations

Is onto something


25/32

What is the difference? Sacred vs. profane

Durkheim Explaining a cognitive category in terms

of a social phenomenon?

Is onto something

But, again, superstitions look different


26/32

Empirical limits

van FraassenObservability &superstitions

Observability &

functions

Agnosticism aboutexplanations


27/32

Empirical limits B. van Fraassen

The Scientific Image1980

Limits of observability Actual empirical limitations

Ability to discern small objects

Limits change over time Agnosticism about unobservable

claims

Challenging scientific attitudes

Observable/detectable distinction Distinction generally rejected

Is anything unobservable?

Significance of social attitudes


28/32

Empirical limits Observability & superstitions

How observable are superstitiousclaims?

Connections between actions and

events

Observable as correlations

Explanations for the connections

The claims hard to observe

Attitudes object to observation Render superstitious explanations

effectively unobservable

Superempirical rather than supernatural


29/32

Empirical limits Observability and functions

Manifest and latent function Manifest function requires observability

Religious connections unobservable

Latent (social) function more important In superstitions only explanations

unobservable

Scientists aim to make explanations

observable

A vital difference


30/32

Empirical limits Agnosticism about explanations

Scientific explanations? Scientists take realist view of

explanations

Pursue evidence for their truth

Agnosticism not justified

Superstitious explanations

Explanations in practically untestable

terms

Testing of explanations discouraged

Agnosticism is not enough

A nosticism about ex lanations is


31/32

ConclusionsSimilarities

Methods: Use ofheuristics

Beliefs: Often hardto test explanationsput forward

Differences

Methods:Development of newheuristics

Beliefs: A realistattitude to

explanations leadingto pursuit of testing


32/32

Thank you

[email protected]://deisidaimon.wordpress.com

Trond Superstition as Science

Documents

Transcript of Trond Superstition as Science