A superstition is a belief or practice typically resulting from ignorance, a misunderstanding of science or causality, a belief in fate or magic, perceived supernatural influence, or fear of that which is unknown.[1][2] It is commonly applied to beliefs and practices surrounding luck, prophecy, and certain spiritual beings, particularly the belief that future events can be foretold by specific (apparently) unrelated prior events.[3][4]
Some superstitions consider black cats lucky, while others consider them unlucky.
The number 13 is omitted from this set of elevator buttons. A number of Western superstitions regard the number 13 as unlucky.
Also, the word superstition is often used to refer to a religion not practiced by the majority of a given society regardless of whether the prevailing religion contains alleged superstitions.[3]
The superstitious practice of placing a rusty nail in a lemon is believed to ward off the evil eye and evil in general, as detailed in the folklore text Popular Beliefs and Superstitions from Utah.[5]
Identifying something as superstition is generally pejorative. Items referred to as such in common parlance are commonly referred to as folk belief in folkloristics.[6]
Contents
EtymologyEdit
While the formation of the Latin word is clear, from the verb super-stare, "to stand over, stand upon; survive", its original intended sense is less clear. It can be interpreted as "'standing over a thing in amazement or awe",[7] but other possibilities have been suggested, e.g. the sense of excess, i.e. over scrupulousness or over-ceremoniousness in the performing of religious rites, or else the survival of old, irrational religious habits.[8][9]
The earliest known use as a noun is found in Plautus, Ennius and later by Pliny, with the meaning of art of divination.[10] From its use in the Classical Latin of Livy and Ovid, it is used in the pejorative sense that it holds today, of an excessive fear of the gods or unreasonable religious belief; as opposed to religio, the proper, reasonable awe of the gods. Cicero derived the term from superstitiosi, lit. those who are "left over", i.e. "survivors", "descendants", connecting it with excessive anxiety of parents in hoping that their children would survive them to perform their necessary funerary rites.[11]
According to Michael David Bailey, it was with Pliny's usage word Magic came close to superstition; and charge of being superstitious were first leveled by Roman authorities on its Christian subjects, in turn early Christian writers pronounced all Roman and Pagan cults to be superstitious worshiping false Gods, fallen angels and demons and it is with Christian usage almost all forms of magic started being described as forms of superstition.[12]
DefinitionsEdit
According to Richard Webster's The Encyclopedia of Superstitions, sums up dictionary definitions saying that, superstitions are irrational fears of the unknown; or blindly accepted irrational beliefs or practices, which are not based on knowledge or facts but ignorance.[13] The Oxford English Dictionary (OED) defines superstition as "unreasonable or irrational or groundless awe, fear, notion or belief about something unknown, mysterious, or imaginary, especially in regard of religion; religious belief or practice based upon fear or ignorance; in specific meaning: An irrational religious belief or practice; a tenet, scruple, habit, etc. based on fear or ignorance".[14][4] According to OED excessively credulous or a widely held but irrational belief in or reverence for the supernatural belief or supernatural influences, especially as leading to good or bad luck, or a practices based on such beliefs also constitutes superstition.[15] Oxford learners Dictionaries defines superstition as, 'the belief in view that particular events happen in ways that cannot be explained by reason or science; or that the belief that particular events brings good or bad luck for example breaking a mirror brings bad luck.'[16] According to Merriam Webster, a false conception about causation or belief or practice emanating from ignorance, fear of the unknown, trust in magic or chance amounts to superstition.[17] Merriam Webster also defines, those notions which are maintained despite evidence to the contrary as superstitions,[17] Merriam Webster also says that abject attitudes of mind, resulting from superstition towards supernatural, nature or God are also called superstition.[17] Cambridge Dictionary denotes superstition as "belief that is connected with old ideas about magic etc., sans grounding in human reason or scientific knowledge;[18] the dictionary cites Cambridge English Corpus contextually the term superstition might define controversial beliefs, the practice of confessional opponents or the beliefs of the ignorant masses as superstitious.[18] The Cambridge Dictionary further cites American dictionary defining superstition as, a belief that explains the causes for events in ways that are connected to magic which are not based on reason or scientific thinking.[18]
According to Dale Martin, superstitions may represent long standing popular beliefs and practices which presuppose an erroneous understanding about cause and effect, that have been rejected by modern science.[19] Dale says, in modern times, definition of 'superstition' is dependent on whatever is considered 'science' and hence 'superstition' is the 'other' to 'science' and that modern people accepting certain beliefs even may be aware that those are rejected or marginalized by scientific culture;[19] hence superstitions are often considered as out of place in modern times influenced by modern science and its notions of what is rational or irrational, some how surviving as remnants of older popular beliefs and practices.[19]
Consumer behavior analyst John C. Mowen et. al. finds dictionary definitions in adequate and define 'superstition' as a belief, or set of beliefs and/or practice which believe that specific actions can directly influence the avoidance of undesirable outcomes and/or influence the occurrence of desirable outcomes factually such beliefs are inconsistent with the scientific knowledge available within a culture, and the actions are not causally related to the outcomes.[20]
ClassificationsEdit
Dieter Harmening's book Superstitio categorizes superstitions in three categories of magic, divination and observances, he further divides observances category in 'signs' and 'time'. [4] Time sub category constitutes temporal prognostics like observances of various days related like Dog days, Egyptian days, year prognosis and lunaries, where as signs category constitutes signs like particular animal behaviors, like the call of birds or neighing of horses or sighting of comets, or dreams.[4] According to László Sándor Chardonnens the signs subcategory usually needs an observer who might help in interpreting the signs and such observer does not need necessarily to be an active participant of the observation.[4] According to Chardonnens , category of Divination participant need to go beyond mere observation and need to be active participant in given action.[4] Examples of Divination superstitions are judicial astrology, necromancy, haruspex , lot-casting, geomancy, aeromancy and prophecy.[4] Chardonnens says superstions belonging to magic category are exceedingly hermetical and ritualistic and its examples are witchcraft, potions, incantations, amulets etc. [4] Chardonnens says Observation category needs an observer, divination category needs participant to tell what is to be observed, where as magic requires a participant who must follow a protocol to influence the future, and that these three types of superstition need increasing stages of participation and knowledge.[4]
Chardonnens defines "prognostication" as that component of superstition which, expects knowledge of the future on systematic application of given ritual and order,[4] and moves to classify saying, Prognostication appear to occupy a place somewhere between observation and divination, of which due to the primacy of temporal prognostics, the observation of times is represented most frequently.[4]
Chardonnens classifies prophecy under topic of divination; examples being the prophets of the Old Testament, biblical typological allegory, the fifteen signs before Judgement Day, and the many prophecies expressed by saints.; Chardonnens further points out that since many aspects of religious experience are tied up with prophecy, church condones the same.[4] Chardonnens says, one could differentiate between those kinds of prophecy which are (1) inspired by God or Satan and their minions; (2) "gecyndelic"; and (3) "wiglung" examples —lacking divine or infernal inspiration and not "gecyndelic" either. But practically, however, most, if not all, words relating to prophecy ought to be interpreted as inspired.[4]
Criticism of definitionsEdit
According to László Sándor Chardonnens, OED definitions pass value judgement and attribution to "fear and ignorance", do not do enough justice to elaborate systems of superstitions.[4] Chardonnens says the religious element in OED denotations are not understood as system of observance and testifies to a belief in higher power on part of the compiler of the dictionary.[4]
Subjective perceptionsEdit
Webster's The Encyclopedia of Superstitions points out that, many superstitions are related with religion, people have been carrying individual subjective perceptions vis a vis superstitions against one another, people of one belief are likely to call people of another belief superstitious ; Constantine regarded paganism as a superstition; Tacitus on other hand regarded Christianity as pernicious superstition; Saul of Tarsus and Martin Luther perceived any thing that was not centered on Christ to be superstitious.[13] According to Dale, difference of opinion on what constitutes 'superstition' get apparent when one moves form one culture to another culture.[19]
Superstition and religionEdit
See also: Superstitions in Muslim societies, Evolutionary origin of religions, and Evolutionary psychology of religion
Greek and Roman polytheists, who modeled their relations with the gods on political and social terms, scorned the man who constantly trembled with fear at the thought of the gods, as a slave feared a cruel and capricious master. Such fear of the gods was what the Romans meant by "superstition" (Veyne 1987, p. 211).
Diderot's Encyclopédie defines superstition as "any excess of religion in general", and links it specifically with paganism.[21]
In his Prelude on the Babylonian Captivity of the Church, Martin Luther (who called the papacy "that fountain and source of all superstitions") accuses the popes of superstition:
For there was scarce another of the celebrated bishoprics that had so few learned pontiffs; only in violence, intrigue, and superstition has it hitherto surpassed the rest. For the men who occupied the Roman See a thousand years ago differ so vastly from those who have since come into power, that one is compelled to refuse the name of Roman pontiff either to the former or to the latter.[22]
The current Catechism of the Catholic Church considers superstition sinful in the sense that it denotes "a perverse excess of religion", as a demonstrated lack of trust in divine providence (¶ 2110), and a violation of the first of the Ten Commandments. The Catechism is a defense against the accusation that Catholic doctrine is superstitious:
Superstition is a deviation of religious feeling and of the practices this feeling imposes. It can even affect the worship we offer the true God, e.g., when one attributes an importance in some way magical to certain practices otherwise lawful or necessary. To attribute the efficacy of prayers or of sacramental signs to their mere external performance, apart from the interior dispositions that they demand is to fall into superstition. Cf.
OriginsEdit
Behaviorism perspectiveEdit
In 1948, behavioral psychologist B.F. Skinner published an article in the Journal of Experimental Psychology, in which he described his pigeons exhibiting what appeared to be superstitious behaviour. One pigeon was making turns in its cage, another would swing its head in a pendulum motion, while others also displayed a variety of other behaviours. Because these behaviors were all done ritualistically in an attempt to receive food from a dispenser, even though the dispenser had already been programmed to release food at set time intervals regardless of the pigeons' actions, Skinner believed that the pigeons were trying to influence their feeding schedule by performing these actions. He then extended this as a proposition regarding the nature of superstitious behavior in humans.[23]
Skinner's theory regarding superstition being the nature of the pigeons' behaviour has been challenged by other psychologists such as Staddon and Simmelhag, who theorised an alternative explanation for the pigeons' behaviour.[24]
Despite challenges to Skinner's interpretation of the root of his pigeons' superstitious behaviour, his conception of the reinforcement schedule has been used to explain superstitious behaviour in humans. Originally, in Skinner's animal research, "some pigeons responded up to 10,000 times without reinforcement when they had originally been conditioned on an intermittent reinforcement basis."[25] Compared to the other reinforcement schedules (e.g., fixed ratio, fixed interval), these behaviours were also the most resistant to extinction.[25] This is called the partial reinforcement effect, and this has been used to explain superstitious behaviour in humans. To be more precise, this effect means that, whenever an individual performs an action expecting a reinforcement, and none seems forthcoming, it actually creates a sense of persistence within the individual.[26]
Evolutionary/cognitive perspectiveEdit
From a simpler perspective, natural selection will tend to reinforce a tendency to generate weak associations or heuristics that are overgeneralized. If there is a strong survival advantage to making correct associations, then this will outweigh the negatives of making many incorrect, "superstitious" associations.[27] It has also been argued that there may be connections between OCD and superstition.[28]
A recent theory by Jane Risen proposes that superstitions are intuitions that people acknowledge to be wrong, but acquiesce to rather than correct when they arise as the intuitive assessment of a situation. Her theory draws on dual-process models of reasoning. In this view, superstitions are the output of "System 1" reasoning that are not corrected even when caught by "System 2".[29]
MechanismsEdit
People seem to believe that superstitions influence events by changing the likelihood of currently possible outcomes rather than by creating new possible outcomes. In sporting events, for example, a lucky ritual or object is thought to increase the chance that an athlete will perform at the peak of their ability, rather than increasing their overall ability at that sport.[30]
Psychologist Stuart Vyse has pointed out that until about 2010, "[m]ost researchers assumed superstitions were irrational and focused their attentions on discovering why people were superstitious." Vyse went on to describe studies that looked at the relationship between performance and superstitious rituals. Preliminary work has indicated that such rituals can reduce stress and thereby improve performance, but, Vyse has said, "...not because they are superstitious but because they are rituals.... So there is no real magic, but there is a bit of calming magic in performing a ritualistic sequence before attempting a high-pressure activity.... Any old ritual will do."[31][32]
OccurrenceEdit
People tend to attribute events to supernatural causes (in psychological jargon, "external causes") most often under two circumstances.
People are more likely to attribute an event to a superstitious cause if it is unlikely than if it is likely. In other words, the more surprising the event, the more likely it is to evoke a supernatural explanation. This is believed to stem from an effectance motivation - a basic desire to exert control over one's environment. When no natural cause can explain a situation, attributing an event to a superstitious cause may give people some sense of control and ability to predict what will happen in their environment.[33]
People are more likely to attribute an event to a superstitious cause if it is negative than positive. This is called negative agency bias.[34] Boston Red Sox fans, for instance, attributed the failure of their team to win the world series for 86 years to the curse of the bambino: a curse placed on the team for trading Babe Ruth to the New York Yankees so that the team owner could fund a Broadway musical. When the Red Sox finally won the world series in 2004, however, the team's success was attributed to the team's skill and the rebuilding effort of the new owner and general manager. More commonly, people are more likely to perceive their computer to act according to its own intentions when it malfunctions than functions properly.