Are you afraid of the dark? Notes on the psychology of belief in histories of science and the occult.
European Journal of Psychotherapy & Counselling April 15, 2016 DOI: 10.1080/13642537.2016.1170062 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Theoretical or philosophical paper Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Keywords | Parapsychology Historiography History of science Psychical research Pragmatisme Psychology of belief Erforschung von übersinnlichem Historiografie Parapsychologie Pragmatismus Psychologie des glaubens Wissenschaftsgeschichte Histoire des sciences Historiografía Historiographie Investigación psíquica Parapsicologia Parapsicología Pragmatismo Psicologia delle credenze Recherche psychique Ricerca psicologica Storia della scienza Storiografia Ιστορία των επιστημών Ιστοριογραφία Παραψυχολογία Πραγματισμός Ψυχική έρευνα Ψυχολογία της πίστης |
| Key points | Argues that recent historiography has rendered the science-versus-occult conflict narrative obsolete, and that reconstructions of psychology's links to psychical research undermine the standard view of psychical research as motivated by metaphysical bias. Contends that a presumably widespread 'will to disbelieve' in the occult should be weighed against claims of a 'need to believe,' and that generalized psychological explanations are helpful in history only when applied symmetrically. |
Abstract
The popular view of the inherent conflict between science and the occult has been rendered obsolete by recent advances in the history of science. Yet, these historiographical revisions have gone unnoticed in the public understanding of science and public education at large. Particularly, reconstructions of the formation of modern psychology and its links to psychical research can show that the standard view of the latter as motivated by metaphysical bias fails to stand up to scrutiny. After highlighting certain basic methodological maxims shared by psychotherapists and historians, I will try to counterbalance simplistic claims of a 'need to believe' as a precondition of scientific open-mindedness regarding the occurrence of parapsychological phenomena by discussing instances revealing a presumably widespread 'will to disbelieve' in the occult. I shall argue that generalized psychological explanations are only helpful in our understanding of history if we apply them in a symmetrical manner.
Citations in the library
Cites 3
- Varieties of anomalous experience: Examining the scientific evidence. American Psychological Association eBooks 2000
- Normalizing the Supernormal: The Formation of the “Gesellschaft Für Psychologische Forschung” (“Society for Psychological Research”), c. 1886–1890 Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences November 20, 2012
- Psychical research and the origins of American psychology: Hugo Münsterberg, William James and Eusapia Palladino. History of the Human Sciences April 1, 2012