Some of the Ways Belief in the Paranormal May be Shaped and Influenced by One’s Cultural Context
Parapsychology may be defined as the study of apparently anomalous organism-environment interaction. This is a negative definition as it situates parapsychology in opposition to orthodox science. In consequence, it loses research topic whenever they become understandable within the framework of orthodox science. Therefore, some critics have recommended an alternative approach that parapsychology be redefined as an interdisciplinary science that would study paranormal beliefs and experiences from historical, experimental, clinical and socio-cultural perspectives (Hess 1993). It would appear stating the obvious to claim that paranormal beliefs are to an extent a product of the sociocultural environment of the believer. For instance, a child in a given culture is unlikely to hold a belief from some different culture. Some people also believe in phenomena they have not personally experienced (Patry and Pelletier 2001). Paranormal beliefs and perhaps also disbelief may therefore be acquired partly through a process of socialization.
Irwin (2009) observed that an unjustified and anomalous belief held by just one person is delusion that may be called pathological. Irwin’s contention is that a paranormal phenomena or event must be shared by a sizeable community in order to be considered a belief rather than delusion. For instance, if someone believes that one can make their car run faster by talking soothingly and playing music to it, it is delusion because this belief is held by one individual alone. However, if someone believes that they can make their plant grow faster by talking soothingly and playing music to it is a paranormal belief because it is held by many people (French and Stone 2013).
According to Irwin (2009) while culture and society is responsible for the formation of paranormal belief, it is highly likely that culture is not responsible for paranormal belief per se but the specific forms that belief might take place. Therefore, memberships in various cultural groups and subgroups will govern the characteristics of the paranormal belief held by the person. The operation of cultural and sub-cultural factors would however depend on some correlates of the individual dimension of paranormal belief. However, some theorist like Krippner and Winkler (1997) and Schumaker (1990) have argued that the individual must be intrinsically susceptible to the belief for cultural influences to be effective.
The question, then, is why are people susceptible to paranormal beliefs? According to Irwin (2009), some paranormal researchers have advanced the hypothesis that paranormal belief represents the creation of an illusion of control, as a psychological response to the strong underlying need for control, although the illusion of control is a transitory and situation-specific phenomenon as the believers do not function under a habitual delusion. Further, in people with a strong sense of control, the activation of paranormal beliefs can bolster their temporary belief that one can influence events. Therefore, the need for control needs to be studied in depth as a factor for the development of paranormal belief. Irwin (2009) further holds that paranormal beliefs are especially activated in a society when people with a need for control are in a stressful situation. “More generally, paranormal beliefs may serve to enhance feelings of security in the face of capricious and threatening world. Although people may realize they have little capacity for actual control over many life events, paranormal belief may engender some vague sense of optimism or hope that these events could be controlled, if only by supernatural or magical means” (Irwin 2009:4).
It is fairly well recognized that beliefs spread in an environment that is fairly conducive to its spread because of shared meaning. If sources are esteemed, targets are curious and arguments are well tailored and cogent, the belief will spread rapidly especially if the media is engaging (Pratkanis and Aronson 1992). Yet, it needs empirical verification to claim that paranormal beliefs can be transmitted to a person just through an exposure to credulous source. It may be asked, if there is a mechanism grounded in basic social influence processes for dissemination of highly contagious, widespread and socially patterned beliefs in paranormal.
For paranormal beliefs to spread through mere exposure, a passive social influence process must be seen at work. This would a kind of process that is patterned by pre-existing social network. In addition, the popular media including radio, television, books, magazines, newspapers and movies must be highly supportive of paranormal claims to support their dissemination without seriously questioning their authenticity (Sparks 1998).
In other words, for social and cultural context to impact paranormal belief, it must be held that the acceptance or rejection of the claim is held by social factors rather than internal logic, the nature and strength of evidence, the explanations and whether or not they are ruled out and the personality characteristics as well belief system held by the subject.
Therefore, we might legitimately ask, why does an average American believe in UFOs but not in transmigration of souls and why does a Hindu believe in transmigration of souls but not in UFOs given that the arguments or logic to explain these two paranormal phenomena are equally weak or strong.
In other words, we are trying to find the role of psychodynamic factors in the origin of paranormal beliefs. Is it possible that these beliefs could be serving psychological functions? A large number of sceptics have conducted research in this area, and all of them have advocated the importance in the above context of a basic human psychological need for a sense of understanding of life events. In order to fulfill the need of emotional security and psychological adjustment, a reassurance on order and meaning in physical and social world is considered critical (Irwin 2009).
Social impact theory (Latane 1981) may probably also provide us with the answer we are trying to find. Social impact theory is “any of the great variety of changes in physiological states and subjective feelings, motives and emotions, cognitions and beliefs, values and behavior that occur in an individual, human or animal, as a result of the real, implied, or imagined presence or actions of other individuals” (Latané 1981:34). Thus the quality of message source makes a great social impact on a person. The quality and strength of impact depends on factors like the numbers constituting the source, its strength and immediacy, that is, absence of barriers intervening and proximity in time and space. The effects, on the other hand are diminished if the source is not legitimate or/and the target is incredulous. This theory has been applied in a large number of areas including obedience, imitation, conformity, compliance and persuasion.
In addition, more recently the dynamic social impact theory comes with greater explanatory value to explain the dynamics of the diffusion of beliefs in social systems (Latané and L’Herrou 1996). According to this theory once a subject’s belief is altered by others, the same belief will lead to change in belief among others, especially those with whom the subject has strong and close ties. Thus a pattern in the transmission of belief is identified.
Therefore, it is observed that beliefs travel through a social system through the medium of communication networks. These communication networks range from verbal communication to mass media. Eventually the belief becomes self-sustaining with the development of a critical mass of believers reinforcing one another’s common belief.
Next, Dawkin’s (1989) “meme theory” also endorses the theory described above. According to this theory, certain ideas can successfully propagate through carriers by virtue of a set of properties that happen to resonate with the population. Thus, a large number of members of the social system not only readily believe but there are also pockets of strong believers that resist change. This is the condition that explains the patterns of paranormal beliefs.
The researchers have found contrary evidences in context of paranormal beliefs and cultural and religious contexts. The divergent findings have been sought to be explained in different ways. However, what is important to acknowledge is that science and religion are two distinct and fundamentally different enterprises, while their relationships to paranormal would determine the paranormal beliefs acceptable to populations.
Paranormal beliefs and religious beliefs may not essentially differ but their level of acceptance into conventional social institutions differs. Their acceptance may be determined to a great extent by the development of science in a society. For instance, the phenomenon of aura emitted by human beings was in the realm of paranormal. However, the development of Kirlian photography established the truth of aura as an essential element in living creatures. Similarly, reincarnation was largely in the realm of paranormal and religion but the acceptability of the phenomenon rose remarkably across cultures after the work of Ian Stevenson. These studies also highlighted the fact that culture mediates powerfully in paranormal beliefs. Stevenson found the cases of reincarnation preponderant in cultures with the belief in reincarnation that cultures that does not believe in reincarnation.
According to Stevenson, “Children who claim to remember a previous life have been found in most countries where they have been sought. Reports of such children occur frequently in countries and cultures in which the belief in reincarnation is strong: the Hindu and Buddhist countries of South Asia, the Shiite population of Lebanon and Turkey, the tribes of West Africa and the tribes of northwestern North America” (Stevenson 1997:1). In other words, culture plays a predominant role in acceptance and dissemination of a paranormal belief.
According to Irwin (2009) the society and culture especially the media in a society plays a significant role in holding on to paranormal belief. They may indirectly encourage people to endorse paranormal belief.
For various reasons, media appears to be especially persuasive in exposition of paranormal concepts. For instance, only a small number of people have claimed to have actually witnessed the Loch Ness monster. Therefore, the prevalence of the belief in this creature is largely due to the dissemination of the accounts of this creature by media. Therefore, many researchers hold media responsible for people’s paranormal gullibility. However, the media hypothesis does not yet answer whether media influences paranormal belief or whether people with paranormal inclinations seek media messages on paranormal issues.
Nevertheless, it is evident in conclusion that people across cultures have in common what theorists have identified as need for control or emotional security. Human beings are not and cannot be absolutely rational. In seeking mysteries and attempting to address curiosities, they are actually looking to fill the void within them like they would want to believe in paranormal or something mysterious so as to derive more meaning out of the life they have been trying to understand. Therefore, it is not surprising that paranormal phenomenon have continued to exist from the pre-historic times to the modern, while the science has made no significant impact on them. Each society, from the most primitive societies to the most modern ones today, have some form of paranormal beliefs that are like the myths of the ancient societies. In other words, myths and paranormal beliefs have an important role to fulfill in a social system. This also explains why some paranormal beliefs so readily take deep roots in social systems without rigorous subjection to scientific tests and why there are pockets of believers that resist change in the belief system. There are critical mass of believers in every social system that help propagate an idea or paranormal belief as well as help reinforce the belief.
Bibliography
Dawkins, Richard. 1989. The Selfish Gene. New York: Oxford University Press.
French, Christopher C & Stone Anna. 2013. Anomalistic Psychology: Exploring Paranormal Belief and Experience, Palgrave Macmillan.
Hess, David J. 1993. Science in the New Age: The Paranormal, Its Defenders and Debunkers, and American Culture, University of Wisconsin Press.
Irwin, H. J. 2009. Psychology of paranormal belief: a researcher's handbook, Hatfield (Hertfordshire, England): University of Hertfordshire Press, 2009.
Krippner, S., & Winkler, M. 1997. The “need to believe.” In G. Stein (Ed.), The Encyclopedia of the Paranormal. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books, 441-453
Latané, Bibb.1981. “The Psychology of Social Impact.” American Psychologist 36:343
Latané, Bibb and Todd L’ Herrou.1996. “Spatial Clustering in the Conformity Game: Dynamic Social Impact in Electronic Groups.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 70(6):1218
Patry, A. , Pelletier, L. 2001. Extraterrestrial beliefs and experiences: An application of the theory of reasoned action. Journal of Social Psychology, 141, 199-201.
Pratkanis, Anthony and Elliot Aronson. 1992. Age of Propaganda: The Everyday Use and Abuse of Persuasion. New York: W. H. Freeman.
Schumaker, J.F. 1990. Wings of Illusion: The Origin, Nature and Future of Paranormal Belief. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books
Sparks, Glenn G. 1998. “Paranormal Depictions in the Media: How Do They Affect What People Believe?” Skeptical Inquirer 22(4):35
Stevenson, Ian. 1997. Where Reincarnation and Biology Intersect. Greenwood Publishing Group.
