Comments on: Lacking control drives false conclusions, conspiracy theories and superstitions

By: Blog de Astronomia do astroPT » O Fim está próximo

Blog de Astronomia do astroPT » O Fim está próximo — Thu, 04 Nov 2010 09:08:10 +0000

[...] Não ter o controlo (por exemplo, não tendo conhecimento) leva a conclusões erradas, a teorias da …. Ou seja, é tudo uma questão de controlo: ou se controla com conhecimento, ou se tenta controlar com conspirações e superstições, imaginando padrões que não existem. ““Control – you must learn control!” These wise words were uttered by no less a sage than Yoda, and while he was talking about telekinetically hoisting spacecraft, having control has another important benefit. It protects a person from spotting false patterns that aren’t there, from believing in conspiracies and from developing superstitions. Control and security are vital parts of our psychological well-being and it goes without saying that losing them can feel depressing or scary. As such, people have strategies for trying to regain a sense control even if it’s a tenuous one. Jennifer Whitson and Adam Galinsky from the University of Texas have found that one such strategy is to identify coherent and meaningful relationships between things we observe. These patterns can help us to make sense of past events and predict future ones, affording us a degree of control over our fates, albeit an indirect one. We can’t change the weather, for example, but if we can tell when it’s going to rain, we can be prepared. At the more extreme end, conspiracy theories can help the bewildered to make sense of otherwise unconnected events. And explaining random events by invoking superstitions or higher beings can help to bring reality’s many possibilities within one’s understanding, if not under one’s heel. Whitson and Galinsky demonstrated the link between desiring control and seeing patterns through a set of experiments that used a variety of psychological tricks to induce feelings of insecurity among groups of volunteers. With these tricks, they managed to induce a number of different illusions – increasing the risk of seeing false images, making links between unrelated events, creating conspiracy theories and even accepting superstitious rituals. Superficially, all of these behaviours seem quite different but they all involve seeing patterns where none exist. They have a common theme and now, this study suggests that they have a common motive too. (…)” [...]

By: Ulrik

Ulrik — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 06:25:49 +0000

Johnson: Just because something is not hopelessly cultural relativistic does not automatically make it “hopelessly culturally biased”. Alledgedly, the ‘Thai belief system’ would make a better reference because dr. Johnson lives there? I would call that a bias! And what’s this “American belief system”? I think that religious and superstitious illusions thrive ad nauseam in today’s western world. Making false connections abounds, yet people are not the happier for it. Of course it does not reduce stress in itself, rather it’s the feeling that one’s perception of the world is true, making it possible to better predict things and thereby improve the quality of one’s life that does. I think we all have that feeling in common – but obviously you can’t be knee deep in false connections and at the same time preserve a true perception of the world!

By: rj

rj — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 19:50:19 +0000

“Even spotting false patterns could have psychological benefits if it restores a person’s sense of control, increases their confidence or even reduces their risk of depression.” Yes, that’s why religion works for so many people. Further, it points to why pro-atheism arguments cut so little ice with people who are religious. Asking people to give up perceived patterns means they could end up worse psychologically. Better to be functional and believing in false patterns than at risk of depression. Of course, some false-pattern belief can be harmful. Probably, more is helpful. The problem is: unlike in a controlled experiment where the presence/absence of a pattern is established, most people live in worlds they barely understand. Any port in a storm.

By: Donald A. Johnson, Ph.D.

Donald A. Johnson, Ph.D. — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 04:36:23 +0000

This study by Whitson and Galinsky is hopelessly culturally biased towards an American belief sytem. We Americans worship an internalized locus of control, but it isn’t always as healthy as the opposite, the belief in powerful forces controlling our lives, especially when the economy takes a nose dive. I live in Thailand, and people here regularly consult fortune tellers, Buddhist monks, spirit doctors (“mor pee”), and other prognosticators of the future. You would be considered crazy not to. If making false connections reduces stress and increases intuitive decision making, then I’m for it. And having worked as a market research consultant for pharmaceutical companies years ago, including the now discredited but highly profitable Estrogen/Hormone Replacement Therapy, I can tell you first hand that their motives are not so purely scientifically driven.

By: presidentforlife

presidentforlife — Sun, 28 Dec 2008 21:24:55 +0000

This is how we got organized religion.

By: MattK

MattK — Sun, 28 Dec 2008 05:01:23 +0000

There was a crappy anti-atheist editorial in my local paper the other day. It was supposed to be about faith but 3/4 of the article was a petulant rant against ‘the new atheists’ (mostly pathetic ad hominems). The faith part what simply a short (very short) synopsis of something that someone named Rene Gerard said in a book published in ’77. He said that violence causes religion (note that this is the exact opposite causal order espoused by Dawkins, Hitchens, et al. plus most casual observers). The idea is that religion provides a sense of cosmic justice to comfort those faced with violence which is usually unjust. Or something like that. I’m not making it sound very compelling but it didn’t read much better in the article either (there was no suggestion that this makes religion true or that the net effect of illusory justice is positive). Anyway, it may have an aspect of truth to it, and the idea certainly meshes with the topic of this post.

By: Bjorn Ostman

Bjorn Ostman — Sun, 28 Dec 2008 02:44:06 +0000

Since you won’t say it…
So we imagine that superstitious people, religious people, and crackpots of all kinds, are really people who are not in control, and that’s that. That’s perhaps a rough generalization, but I’d be willing to believe in that theory without further proof. Makes me feel I’m in control of things again.

By: Tree

Tree — Sun, 28 Dec 2008 02:22:02 +0000

Huh. Lack of control, and the human need for meaning conspire to create woo.
So if you’re an empire, and you’re creating your own realities, you’d need to build in a sense of control, or create a sense of trust that authorities are in control?
Or something.