1. Superstition as Science
Konrad Talmont-Kaminski
UMCS & KLI

2. 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 about our attitudes?
Is it something about how it was reached?

3. Outline Elements of superstitions Superstition, magic & religion
3 different views of superstition
Superstition as science
What is the difference?
Empirical limits
Conclusions

4. Elements of superstitions
Superstitious beliefs
Superstitious practices
The link between them

5. 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 or prediction/divination
Explanation
Luck
No natural explanation
Supernatural explanation

6. Elements of a superstition
Superstitious practice
Taking or avoiding the ‘action’
Avoiding black cats
Success uncertain
Function
Manifest
To avoid or bring about the ‘effect’
Latent
Can be very different
First-footing again
Predicting or causing?

7. Elements of a superstition
The link between beliefs and practices
Generally problematic
Focussing on practices
Skinner’s behaviourism
Beliefs secondary
Focussing on beliefs
Superstition satisfying internal needs
Practices secondary

8. Superstition, magic & religion
Magic & superstition
Religion & superstition

9. Superstition, 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. 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. 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. 3 views of superstition Superstition as fantasy
Superstition as rhetoric
Superstition as science

13. 3 views of superstition Superstition as fantasy
Attempted retreat from threatening/ uncontrollable reality
Anxiety-reduction (Malinowski 1925)
Retaining feeling of control (Case et all 2004)
“The man under the sway of impotent fury or dominated by thwarted hate spontaneously clenches his fists and carries out imaginary thrusts at his enemy, muttering imprecations, casting words of hatred and anger against him.” – Malinowski “Magic, Science, and Religion”

14. 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 accept the speaker’s influence unskeptically.” - Palmer “The ritual taboos of fishermen”

15. 3 views of superstition Superstition as science
Attempt to understand/control the world
Primitive science (Frazer 1890)
Adventitious reinforcement (Skinner 1947)
Biased cognitive heuristics (Rozin & Nemeroff 1980)
“Magic is a spurious system of natural law as well as a fallacious guide of conduct; it is a false science as well as an abortive art.” - Frazer, Golden Bough

16. Superstition as science?
Question of focus
Primitive science
Adventitious reinforcement
Biased cognitive heuristics

17. Superstition as science?
Question of focus
Superstitious beliefs vs. scientific beliefs
Superstitious methods vs. scientific methods
Both options incomplete
Would ‘superstitious’ beliefs be scientific if arrived at scientifically?
Could they be arrived at scientifically?
Is there such a thing as ‘magical thinking’?
Or is it that thinking sometimes leads to magical beliefs?

18. Superstition as science?
Primitive science
Tylor 1871, Frazer 1890, Levy-Bruhl 1910
Superstition identified with primitive societies/minds
Science identified with modern societies/minds
Progress seen as directed ‘evolution’
Enlightenment / Intellectualist position
Rationality expels superstition

19. 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 is not just for rats and pigeons” - Vyse

20. Superstition as science?
Adventitious reinforcement
Matrix task
4 x 4 matrix
Move dot from top left to bottom right
Task: Find out when points are gained
Points awarded randomly
Numerous theories put forward
Similar situations
Malfunctioning light switch
Conditioning as basis for understanding science?  

21. 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

22. What is the difference? Truth & empirical adequacy
Natural vs. supernatural
Sacred vs. profane

23. 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 Newton’s physics with his astrology
Is ‘onto something’
But superstitious beliefs ‘look different’

24. What is the difference? Natural vs. supernatural
Superstitions as supernatural claims
Problems
Vague concept
Circularity?
Distinction much later than category
Correlation between superstitious and pseudoscientific beliefs
Succubi become aliens
Post hoc explanations
Is ‘onto something’

25. 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. Empirical limits van Fraassen Observability & superstitions
Observability & functions
Agnosticism about explanations

27. Empirical limits B. van Fraassen The Scientific Image 1980
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. Empirical limits Observability & superstitions
How observable are superstitious claims?
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. 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. 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
Agnosticism about explanations is not scientific

31. Conclusions Similarities Differences Methods: Use of heuristics
Beliefs: Often hard to test explanations put forward
Differences
Methods: Development of new heuristics
Beliefs: A realist attitude to explanations leading to pursuit of testing

32. konrad@talmont.com http://deisidaimon.wordpress.com
Thank you