Matthew Hutson (2)

In this world of science, evolution and cold hard facts, people still cling to rituals, and habits and the belief in luck.

In this book Hutson looks at seven different ways in which people still do this in everyday life. From the wearing of lucky socks to football games as your team seems to do better when you're wearing them, to the habit of touching wood for luck and the way that people still believe in destiny and fate, Hutson covers them all. But by using science and he shows just how what seems to be a coincidence isn't.

Generally it was worth a read, and he has some interesting examples and theories to outline his hypothesis, but it really doesn't conclude with any revelations or recommendations. Well written though and an easy read.




… (más)

There are two kinds of magic:
1) the imagined, fantasies of mythology and the "super"natural (I prefer the term "unnatural", for there is nothing "super" to "natural")
2) the deceptive redirective arts practiced by entertainers and con-men
Hutson would have you believe there is a third type, self-generated solely in the mind, but for much of his book I think he falls into the second category...deceiving the reader with logical fallacies left and right: false dichotomies, cherry-picking, biased confirmations of pre-chosen conclusions...

Reserving rating and full review as I mull over my notes...and I need to let some time pass, as my initial reaction was two-stars at most, yet Hutson's Epilogue (the most salient section of the entire book) gives me pause...perhaps it deserves more than one-star? perhaps I'm too critical?

Update (6/22/13) - settling on two stars... among so many other errors, I think the sealer came early and persisted throughout - in postulating that objects "have essences", Hutson says that Richard Dawkins "falls prey" because he held in awe a pigeon specimen owned by Charles Darwin... Hutson embellishes the anecdote by implying that awe that Dawkins displays is magical because Dawkins apparently believes objects have essences. Poppycock. Awe is awe and no rational person thinks there are essences in objects or nature or the universe or...jeez, Hutson, give MIT back your MS in Science Writing. You should have gotten one in creative writing.… (más)

Argues that no one escapes magical thinking -- defined as attributing mental properties to inanimate objects, and treating them as having consciousness -- but also that this is not necessarily a bad thing: "It's a set of illusions, sure, but in many cases they're positive illusions. They primarily emerge from functions that have evolved for other reasons, but they have functionality of their own. First, magical thinking provides a sense of control. The value of an illusory sense of control is that it reduces anxiety and increases a feeling of agency, which can spur you to seize real control. Second, magical thinking provides meaning. There's meaning as in comprehension--understanding how things happen or how to do things--which allows for control. But there's also meaning as in a sense of purpose--grasping why things happen or why anything is worth doing. This is the stuff that gets you out of bed in the morning and legs you sleep at night."

The discussion is a mix of informal anecdote, personal biography, and competent literature review. A helpful overview of the major arguments on these interesting questions.… (más)