Supernaturalism is Illogical
In earlier posts I wrote about belief in the supernatural. I'm going to show in this post that intuitive people are inclined to be believers while logical people are inclined to be skeptics. This should also explain why it's so difficult for believers and skeptics to understand each other.
Psychologists accept there are "...two different systems operating when it comes to thinking and reasoning. One is believed to be evolutionary more ancient in terms of human development; it has been called intuitive, natural, automatic, heuristic and implicit...The second system is one that is believed to be more recent in human evolution...called conceptual-logical, analytical-rational, deliberative-effortful-intentional-systematic and explicit..."1
Because of this, some people are predisposed to logical thinking while others are predisposed to intuitive thinking. It simply means that each of us has inherited a characteristic way of thinking that leans towards one side or the other. It doesn't mean intuitive people can't think logically or logical people can't think intuitively.
In a scientific study2 at the University of Helsinki, psychology lecturer Dr Marjaana Lindeman asked university students to consider a series of statements like "Old furniture knows things about the past" and "When summer is warm, flowers want to bloom". The study found that some students were inclined to believe in the supernatural. It also found that these students relied more on intuitive thinking than the skeptics, but less on logical and analytical thinking than the skeptics.
The believers would misattribute properties of one conceptual category to another, for example, that old furniture knows something about the past (attributing a mental property to an inanimate object). Or they would confuse cause and effect, for example, if your car's brakes failed and you later married the driver of the car you hit then the brakes must have failed for a purpose (attributing intention to non-intentional events). Or they would believe in paranormal powers, for example, that a person’s thoughts can influence the movement of a physical object (belief in psychokinesis).
1. Bruce Hood, Supersense, Constable UK 2009, with particular reference to the article "In Two Minds: Dual Process Accounts of Reasoning" by JSBT Evans, Trends in Cognitive Science No.7 (2003).
2. Lindeman & Aarnio, Superstitious, magical, and paranormal beliefs: An integrative model, Journal of Research in Personality, No.41 (2007).
Psychologists accept there are "...two different systems operating when it comes to thinking and reasoning. One is believed to be evolutionary more ancient in terms of human development; it has been called intuitive, natural, automatic, heuristic and implicit...The second system is one that is believed to be more recent in human evolution...called conceptual-logical, analytical-rational, deliberative-effortful-intentional-systematic and explicit..."1
Because of this, some people are predisposed to logical thinking while others are predisposed to intuitive thinking. It simply means that each of us has inherited a characteristic way of thinking that leans towards one side or the other. It doesn't mean intuitive people can't think logically or logical people can't think intuitively.
In a scientific study2 at the University of Helsinki, psychology lecturer Dr Marjaana Lindeman asked university students to consider a series of statements like "Old furniture knows things about the past" and "When summer is warm, flowers want to bloom". The study found that some students were inclined to believe in the supernatural. It also found that these students relied more on intuitive thinking than the skeptics, but less on logical and analytical thinking than the skeptics.
The believers would misattribute properties of one conceptual category to another, for example, that old furniture knows something about the past (attributing a mental property to an inanimate object). Or they would confuse cause and effect, for example, if your car's brakes failed and you later married the driver of the car you hit then the brakes must have failed for a purpose (attributing intention to non-intentional events). Or they would believe in paranormal powers, for example, that a person’s thoughts can influence the movement of a physical object (belief in psychokinesis).
1. Bruce Hood, Supersense, Constable UK 2009, with particular reference to the article "In Two Minds: Dual Process Accounts of Reasoning" by JSBT Evans, Trends in Cognitive Science No.7 (2003).
2. Lindeman & Aarnio, Superstitious, magical, and paranormal beliefs: An integrative model, Journal of Research in Personality, No.41 (2007).
posted by Robert Charroux at
1:45 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home