The Love For Simple Logic, And Why Highly Educated People Still Believe In Superstition? [Part 1]

Statistics show that pseudosciences are not as popular as people say, and the reason behind their rising in the recent decades.

Divination, horoscopes, numerals, astrology, numerology, fingerprint biometrics, tarot divination … are not scientific, even scientifically proven not to work [1] . But after all, they were trusted by a very large group of people for a very long time.

In the debates surrounding the validity of these practices, a few arguments often arise:

“If it’s not true, why does it last for thousands of years?”

“If it’s not true, why do so many people believe it?”

“If it’s not true, why isn’t it banned?”

…

But most importantly, and most notably, that is:

“If it’s not true, why do the highly educated, the rich, the politicians … still believe in?”

Why is that?

1. What statistics really tell.

First, the data doesn’t really side with the abovementioned anti-science (or non-science) disciplines. They don’t receive support from either the majority of the population, or the formal systems for everyone, or even less from the smart minds in society.

In terms of formalism, the above disciplines are not used in education, not promoted in principal mainstream media, not backed by any legitimate organizations and some of them are not even protected by law or not allowed to register their business. Be mindful of this, and always be skeptical of the correctness of these common but not officially recognized practices. Because it is such a pity that schools don’t teach subjects that are supposed to help people “understand themselves” and “understand the nature of life” that has existed for thousands of years.

While science appears in every aspect of life that you may encounter on a daily basis, like schools have to teach science scientifically, hospitals must always follow scientific processes, politicians have to use reports scientifically and have to be organized and managed in a scientific way, mass media must deliver reliable and scientific information, traffic must be scientifically designed, work, eat, and sleep also need to be scientific … The abovementioned anti-science “disciplines” are just wandering around in public conversations. They also sometimes appear in the forms of books and newspapers, or in a few magazine pages — always attractive to readers.

But why are the disciplines “rejected” by the formal world so popular to mass population?

The glorious history of some of the aforementioned disciplines is most likely only painted in recent times, from around the 20th century. That is, although some have appeared thousands of years ago, the enjoyment and liveliness are not as intense as the internal literature describes it [2] .

Astrology, for example, is the oldest subject, but has gradually been disbelieved and considered pseudoscience since the 17th century [3] . Tarot divination only originated in France around the 1780s [4] . Thus, most of the time they are not really as influential as modern believers envision.

Their widespread impact today is related to events occurring around the 70s of the last century. In 1970, the astronomer David Spangler began to plant the fundamental ideas for the New Age movement and attracted the participation of many leaders of paranormal and metaphysical organizations. The New Age widely spread the views on spiritual awakening, enlightenment, using spiritual change to improve oneself and to save the world… This movement also used tarot, astrology, meditation, yoga… to increase its influence on the public, while also having a close relationship with hallucinogenic substances [5] . After approximately 10 years of vigorous activity, the New Age began to lose momentum, partly due to the world’s savior, Maitreya, not having appeared in 1982 as the leaders of this movement predicted.

Although taunted and gradually declined in the 1980s, this movement still left behind many legacies and created the “Post-New Age” period, creating a large number of people of Western countries that believed in astrology, began to practice meditation and so on. Other countries, such as Vietnam, were affected by this movement with a delay, when books and papers began to be imported and translated into the local language. The rise of concepts like “awakening”, “enlightenment”, “mindfulness”… can be closely related to the number of publications of books like “Journey to the East”. The movement of tarot divination, astrology…, which are popular among young people (Z generation and millennials) recently was influenced by the New Age, although their parents are barely aware of.

Although the New Age movement did not last long, it successfully trained a large number of followers to then have enough force to spread its ideas around the world thanks to the emergence of Internet and social networks. And even if it’s not so widely accepted, it still exists as a dull “meme”, affecting a certain number of followers. However, its influence has never been the “majority”, meaning, even when the argument “why so many people believe in it” is a fallacy, the fallacy itself is also false.

According to a 2009 survey by The Harris Poll, only about 26% of respondents believe in astrology, or about 74% do not believe in it [6] . The National Science Foundation (NSF) survey from 1999 also found that only 12% of Americans read the horoscope every day, and 32% read at an “occasional” frequency [7] . At this point, about 7% consider astrology “very scientific” and 29% consider it “kind of science”.

But according to the NSF survey published in 2014, the number of people who said that “astrology is not science” has decreased significantly, reaching the lowest point since 1983 (the time that marked the end of the New Age), with only 55% of people saying that astrology is “completely nonscience”. Two years before that, the number of people who believed that astrology was completely non-science accounted for ⅔ of the respondents [8] .

Why is that? Has the Internet really pushed astrology to a new height?

It turns out that the NSF survey had some technical problems. For example, too brief question design can cause many participants to not fully understand the content of the questions and the choices they make, leading to subjective answers [9] .

For example, the suffix “-logy” in “astrology” has made many people think that it is related to academia. Besides, many people confuse “astrology” with “astronomy”, so they devote their trust to mainstream science, which turns out to be a pseudo-science.

Indeed, this problem has been recognized by investigators in Europe in earlier years. The 1992 eurobarometer survey also received similar unusual results. But in 2004, they split into two surveys, one used the word “astrology”, the other used the word “horoscope” (a branch of astrology) and got clearly discrepant results. The belief that “astrology” is scientific was around 76%, while that of “horoscopes” was only 43%. And 26% of the respondents said that “astrology” is extremely scientific, while only 7% had similar beliefs with “horoscopes” [10] .

In general, although these disciplines have long been labeled “unscientific”, “anti-science”, “pseudoscience” and appear in surveys as a form of “false beliefs” [11] , they are still not forbidden. Of course they are not forbidden, since their theoretical basis does not violate any law, it is also protected by the “freedom of religion and belief” specified in the constitution of most countries in the world. Therefore, the “why are they not banned” argument has no logical relation to whether the disciplines are accurate or not.

However, while not prohibited, the US National Science Foundation has also expressed doubts about the increased public confidence in the occult disciplines, as they may lead to [12] :

- Decline in scientific ability and critical thinking skills;

- Certain effects in the ability to make informed decisions;

- Money loss; at the same time creates a loss of opportunity cost as that money can be used more effectively;

- Encouraging the search for simple, easy answers to serious and complex problems;

- False hopes and unrealistic expectations;

Therefore, although river water does not violate well water, the expansion of the metaphysical spiritual disciplines seems to go against the purpose of civilization, and this somewhat disturbs scientists who study day and night to contribute to building the world.

2. Do highly educated people really believe in the mystery?

This condemnation of astrology was frankly mentioned on mass television, even though it caused a lot of controversy. One of the highlights is the physicist Brian Cox’s statement on a BBC science program: “Although in reality, astrology is a load of rubbish*, it is true that Jupiter does have an influence on our planet. And it is through a force called… gravity” [13] . This “dirty mock” annoyed the astrological community so they had to send complaints, as well as requested BBC to come up with a stream of “alternative viewpoint” to create “objectivity” and “multidimensional”.

[* translates from “load of rubbish”, in case you suspect I was overdoing it].

In response to the reaction from the astrological audience, BBC asked Brian Cox to make a statement, and he said: “I apologize to the astrological community for not making my point clear. I should have said that New Age nonsense is destroying our civilization”. BBC apparently did not broadcast it later. But in another program, he mentioned the old story: “for the sake of the” objectivity “of BBC, in short, astrology is meaningless” [14] .

The aforementioned “balance” and “alternative viewpoint” is a common requirement in mass conversations, to make counterbalances to ensure criticality, especially. in the mainstream media. However, this “balance” has sometimes been used as a kind of fallacy to distort the truth.

According to interview details from the essay “When balance is bias” published on BMJ, University of London Genetics Professor Steve Jones defended Brian Cox and denounced the requirement to “balance opinion. “Absurd in scientific debates (he was authorized by the BBC Trust to determine the accuracy of the BBC’s general transmission of scientific information). Jones argues that ensuring a “balance of opinion” can sometimes be misleading. Because in clearly defined right and wrong issues, conveying the opposition’s views not only does not create any “balance”, it even grants privileges to groups that have weak views. poor [15] .

So, while diversity of opinion should be utilized in political or artistic coverage, it has many potential risks in science. Placing a contradictory flow of views against the prevailing scientific opinion has indirectly raked up the value of their views, elevating their unscientific views and treating the scientific side unfairly. Therefore, assuring diversity in these conversations is actually a type of distortion. For example, the opinion on vaccines or climate change does not really exist “the opposite flow” as the press often leads. Because the above opposing views are not at all counterbalanced to popular scientific works, to be called “opposing views”.

Hence, the fact that astrologers were offended by Brian Cox’s statements and asking the BBC to create “diversity of opinion” and “counterbalance opinions” was a wise trick. help them win a portion of the truth, win the title of powerful “counterbalance to science” title that they did not have in the first place.

Another famous scientist, Richard Dawkins, frankly wrote: “Astrology does not just sell astronomy cheaply, humiliating the magic of the universe with bountiful pre-Copernican knowledge. It is also an insult to psychological science and to the rich diversity of human personality “ [16] .

[* Richard Dawkins wants to delve deeply into the fact that astrologers rely on pre-Copernican astronomical knowledge that the Earth is not the center of the universe — extremely outdated knowledge. He even used the word “dabbling”, which means that astrologers are not merely using obsolete knowledge, but rather wildly and superficially gathered knowledge.]

It seems that scholars do not really “trust” the mysterious forces like the sophistry mentioned at the beginning of the article. Besides, the fact that some famous people believe in astrology are reported to be an indicator of how rare this belief is, novel and shocking enough to be exploited by the media.

The most common one, for example, is the story of former President Ronald Reagan who frequently used an astrological advisor while he was in the White House. However, it is important to pay attention to a few facts that are still evident, but deliberately ignored by many people. For example, Reagan was a politician, previously a Hollywood star, so he indulged his wife’s wishes (former lady Nancy Reagan began to worry about her husband since his assassination failed. ) and keeping an astrological advisor with you is nothing special. It would be more special if it was news of the form of “astrology applied in social management” or “astrology to be applied by the psychologists.

computer science used in personality classification “. The Reagan period as Commander-in-Chief was also neatly included in the 1980s, at a time when astrology was still spreading in America thanks to the Post-New Age. And finally, most of the other American presidents who didn’t believe in astrology, Reagan was only a minority of the few, so can you use this logic to conclude that astrology is not reliable?

Perhaps the reliability of astrology did not depend on the choice of the 40th president of the United States, nor even on whether it was scientific or not. For neither science is completely reliable, nor is it just non-scientific just worth throwing away.

Besides, although never had a majority, astrology (and other similar disciplines) still won the trust of a fairly large population. And while there are not many presidents or scientists who believe in astrology, it is undeniable that the existence of such a few members is of interest. Like not being recognized by the official, but why don’t they fade away or disappear like other obsolete things?

Is astrology really a stream of “opposing views” that is sufficiently counterbalanced by mainstream science?

[Continue…]

— — — — — —

References:

[1] Hansson, Sven Ove, “Science and Pseudo-Science (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy),” Stanford.edu, 2017. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pseudo-science/ (accessed Feb. 02, 2021).‌

https://en.wikipedia.org/.../List_of_topics_characterized...

[2] Just visit their sites.

[3] P. Zarka, “Astronomy and astrology,” Proceedings of the International Astronomical Union, vol. 5, no. S260, pp. 420–425, Jan. 2009, doi: 10.1017/s1743921311002602.

[4] “Tarot | playing card | Britannica,” Encyclopædia Britannica. 2021, Accessed: Feb. 01, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.britannica.com/topic/tarot.

[5] “New Age movement — Realizing the New Age | Britannica,” Encyclopædia Britannica. 2021, Accessed: Feb. 01, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.britannica.com/.../New.../Realizing-the-New-Age.

[6] A. Hall and N. York, “What People Do and Do Not Believe in Many more people believe in miracles, angels, hell and the devil than in Darwin’s theory of evolution; almost a quarter of adults believe in witches,.” Accessed: Feb. 01, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://theharrispoll.com/.../12/Harris_Poll_2009_12_15.pdf.

[7], [12] https://www.nsf.gov/.../science-and-technology-public...

[8] “nsf.gov — S&E Indicators 2014 — Chapter 7. Science and Technology: Public Attitudes and Understanding — Highlights — US National Science Foundation (NSF),” Nsf.gov, 2014. https://www.nsf.gov/.../seind14/index.cfm/chapter-7/c7h.htm (accessed Feb. 01, 2021).

[9] “NSF Report Flawed; Americans Do Not Believe Astrology is Scientific,” NeoAcademic, Feb. 14, 2014. https://neoacademic.com/.../nsf-report-flawed-americans.../ (accessed Feb. 01, 2021).

[10] N. Allum, “What Makes Some People Think Astrology Is Scientific?,” Science Communication, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 341–366, Dec. 2010, doi: 10.1177/1075547010389819.

[11] Hansson, Sven Ove, “Science and Pseudo-Science (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy),” Stanford.edu, 2017. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pseudo-science/ (accessed Feb. 01, 2021).

[13], [15] T. Jackson, “When balance is bias,” BMJ, vol. 343, no. dec19 2, pp. d8006–d8006, Dec. 2011, doi: 10.1136/bmj.d8006.

[14] M. Robbins, “Astrologers angered by stars,” the Guardian, Jan. 24, 2011. https://www.theguardian.com/.../the-lay.../2011/jan/24/1 (accessed Feb. 02, 2021).

[16] “The real romance in the stars,” The Independent, Oct. 23, 2011‌

[17] “White House Confirms Reagans Follow Astrology, Up to a Point (Published 1988),” The New York Times, 2021.