I have stated here within this blog that I am against fundamentalism. I have also found myself defending fundamentalism in terms of indigenous rights and evolutionary social theory. Considering that I have mixed feelings on the matter, I have decided to work it out with a new blog post.
The term, fundamentalism, generally refers to literalist interpretation of religious narratives. In the past, when I have said, “I am against fundamentalism,” what I most likely meant is that I am against the more evangelical and militant brands of religious fundamentalism. But what fundamentalism really is, and I mean what underlies the common understanding of the word, is a psychological need for solid footing and significance.
On this broad conceptualization of the term, I suppose we must all be fundamentalist of one sort or another.
You will find in certain social evolutionary theories of religion the proposition that societies require fixed truths in order to function. The evolution of language and the ability to imagine counterfactuals, while advantageous on one end, threaten to throw social order into disarray. With an evolved ability to lie, it makes sense that a need for sacrality arose. Sacred beliefs facilitate much more than supernatural imaginings; for instance, vows and oaths upon sacred beliefs discourage lies and encourage obligations at all levels of society, from marriage to commerce.
Sacrality not only maintains truths, it is the fundamental truth and thus we have fundamentalism. Nevertheless, religion is not the only thing that can be fundamental. Political orientations rest on fundamental beliefs, atheism is fundamental, and science too must stand on fundamental assumptions.
Beliefs filter our perception and therefore the stronger the belief, the stronger the need to believe, the stronger the bias. Because we internalize our beliefs, we feel them with the force of our personal being. The god loving Christian is personally disgusted by the desecration of the cross. The patriotic American is personally affronted by the burning of the American flag. The Jihadist Muslim will not tolerate insults to the prophet. The emotions that such symbolic desecrations can incite are a testament to their psychological internalization.
The problem with sacrality is that it is a cultural construct—what is holy to one population might be sacrilegious to another. Because fundamental beliefs are internalized, opposing fundamental views threaten the very essence of one’s being.
Not all religious extremist feel the need to retaliate against those who are different. The Amish, for instance, are complete pacifist, except perhaps in their harsh shunning of their own. They impose absolutely nothing on the non-Amish. Yet, a modernist cannot help but feel that Amish children are somehow at a disadvantage; such belief is a testament to the modernist’s own fundamentalism.
Throughout the world, there remain handfuls of virtually uncontacted tribes. Attempts to make contact with remote tribes of Papua New Guinea and Amazonia have been met with skin clad men, spears, and arrows. There is a movement to protect these people from external influences such as forced assimilation or from logging and mining upon their lands. I personally would like to see these tribes survive because they offer a window into the remote cultural past. My own view is not so much a matter of sympathy as it is selfish curiosity. Primitive people provide a comparative perspective on human cultural development.
If tribal people can be allowed to retain their myths, legends, and customs unhindered from modernity then should not all people have the right to self-determination? But then again, is it really self-determination to be born into such situations? If people are forced to abandon old beliefs for modernity then does that not testify to another form of fundamentalism?
My conclusion is that fundamentalism is inescapable from both the functioning individual and society. We maintain those beliefs that serve our own interest and self-concept as both individuals and cultural populations. While fundamentalism is often a label applied to others, perhaps we should come to terms with our own absolutist beliefs.
Bizarre Psychology is a monthly column that analyzes the peculiar, the uncanny, and the extraordinary. Author Kevin Goodman offers commentary that combines original thought with social psychological theory and perspective from the social sciences. If you’re curious about the psychological dimensions of conspiracy theories, alien abductions, mass hysteria, tattoos, fame, power, the supernatural, or hypnosis then Kevin Goodman’s Bizarre Psychology is a must read.
First Feature: The Psychology of the Tattoo: Modern Badasses and Ancient Puberty Rites
Stay tuned…
I have been experimenting with the design of this website over the last couple of days in anticipation of changes. I have a few plans. Among those plans, I intend to redesign this site into a portal of resources. In short, don’t be surprised to see changes (and temporary glitches) in the coming months.
So what can you expect? This site will aggregate headlines from worthy psychology blogs, peer reviewed journals, and news sites that cover psychology. I will still maintain the blog; blogging is, after all, something of a compulsion. That said; I hope to blog less so that I can spend more time writing polished features.
Anyhow, don’t expect permanent changes to occur unannounced. It will be approximately two or three months before these changes occur—any changes before then are just experimentation.
Links for today…
Game creates psychopaths
My nephews were telling me about a video game called Grand Theft Auto where there is apparently no objective to the game other than to run around, steal cars, shoot at people, and pick up prostitutes (whom you can also choose to murder afterwards). That’s probably not breaking news to most of you but I’m not much of a video game enthusiast (I prefer No-Limit Hold’em). Anyhow, it’s mind blowing to me. My first thoughts were “I wonder what these gamers’ minds look like under an MRI?” Well, I’m not the first to ask that. In short, this game desensitizes players to violence, atrophying the neural circuitry of the amygdala…Can you say psychopath?
Christmas Coke cans induce psychosomatic and mass psychogenic delusions.
If you drink Coca Cola you probably noticed the new white Christmas themed cans. I am a Coke drinker and was surprised last week when I tore into a red case of coke and found white cans. For a split second, I thought Coke had accidently packaged diet coke in the case as the cans look very similar to diet coke but then I realized it was a Christmas theme. A little later that day my wife opens the fridge and says “DIET?”
Turns out, we’re not the only ones taken by surprise. Coke is pulling the new white cans after numerous complaints. The problem isn’t the white cans per se (well it really is) but that people think regular coke in white cans taste a little like diet coke. I actually liked the white cans but I hate diet Coke…oh well.
Now that is the power of suggestion!
Revised psychopath test
The psychopath test I devised a few months ago accounts for half the traffic to this website! I designed it for fun, that said, If you respond to the questions in manner that confirms you as a psychopath—based on those questions—I’m fairly convinced that you are a psychopath. Seriously, take it for fun but if you’re disturbed by the results don’t curse me—get some real help! That said, there was glitch in the test, which I fixed yesterday. I also made a few minor improvements to the test so if you read this blog because you think you’re a psychopath, you might want to retake the test.
Loves and hates of blogging
I love the spontaneity of blogging. Spontaneity is also the curse of blogging. About a month or two ago, I updated my about page, I reread what I wrote for the first time yesterday; afterwards, I considered retiring from blogging! How on Earth could I have such sloppy writing? I am having second thoughts about spontaneity—maybe it’s overrated.
Nancy Dubuc abducted by aliens
Nancy is general manager of the History Channel. I don’t know what else to say…
Ian Brackenbury Channell graduated with double honors in psychology and sociology from the University of Leeds. After a brief time as a sociology lecturer and graduate student, Channell’s department supervisor at the University of New South Whales dismissed him, believing he was crazy. Channell, with the help of the student union, persuaded the vice chancellor of the university to allow him to stay on campus and continue his experiments in alternate reality (with pay). He officially changed his name to the Wizard of New Zealand.
The Wizard of New Zealand looks like a wizard, dresses like a wizard, behaves as a wizard, and regularly gives public speeches.
More bizarre is that the University of Melbourne gave him the official position of “Wizard” and chair of his own Department of Cosmology.
The New Zealand Art Director’s Council recognized him as a living work of art.
Christchurch City Council officially recognized him as the Wizard of Christchurch.
Prime Minister Mike Moore recognized him as the official Wizard of New Zealand (1990).
In 2009, the Wizard of New Zealand was awarded the Queen’s Service Medal.
I first read about the Wizard of New Zealand in Art Today by Edward Lucie-Smith. He’s covered under the performance art section of the book. Performance art often falls within the domain of conceptual art and I love conceptual art. The best conceptual art challenges all intuitive sense of what art really is. Forget the artist who paints a single line across the canvass, Marcel Duchamp signed his nom de plume to a urinal and Piero Manzoni canned his own feces and sold them with the label Artist’s Shit. Manzoni produced 90 cans in 1961 but what really makes this interesting is that in recent years his cans are auctioning for over $150,000.00! Does that make sense?
Anyhow, I was talking to an artist friend of mine about Lucie-Smith’s inclusion of the Wizard of New Zealand in Art Today and was utterly surprised when my friend hastily declared, “Lucie-Smith is over reaching.” Evidently my friend—an abstract assemblage artist—either didn’t know a whole lot about the state of contemporary art or, more likely, had a very strong biased reaction. Nonetheless, we generally consider performance to be an art form and it’s hard to deny that the Wizard of New Zealand is anything other than a living performance. In fact, I believe the Wizard of New Zealand is the ultimate statement in self-determination.
Despite very impressive recognitions here and there, the Wizard hasn’t shared the wild financial success that many high profile conceptual artists have enjoyed. Despite occasional recognition as an artist, the Wizard appears to give primacy to his role as Wizard. Conceptual artists often make tangible products such as photographs of their performance or products of some kind (for commerce), and I am not sure the Wizard does this. I have read that the Wizard lives on modest stipends and by the support of friends. This is an indication that he has not cracked the contemporary art superstar scene where a few hundred thousand dollars is pocket change.
Unfortunately, in recent years, the Wizard’s property has been subject to vandalism and his house burned in arson. Some people evidently hate non-conformist!
What makes the Wizard of New Zealand interesting is that an individual case like this can lead to some serious philosophical, sociological, and psychological enquiry. For example, I’m compelled to ask why such trivial cases incite extreme emotional reactions from love to hate. Is the Wizard just another eccentric or something more than that? What are the sociological borders between eccentricity, insanity, and art? What are the sociological statuses of eccentricity, insanity, and art? What are the psychological consequences of disregarding an organic identity for an alter ego? But what really interests me about this case (and about contemporary art in general) is the issue of legitimacy and its relationship to authority and capital.
All that said, I’m seriously considering commissioning some work by the Wizard of New Zealand and the Baron of Caux (for diversification) after which I will launch an advertising campaign in Art News to increase my chances for inclusion in Art Basil where I will triple my investors’ money. But don’t get too excited guys! First, I need a couple hundred thousand dollars
Any takers?
In the mean time, the Wizard stars in a documentary film…Check it out!
Do groups have non-reducible beliefs? That is to say, do groups have their own beliefs, irreducible to the beliefs of individual members?
Here is an account of group belief according to Margaret Gilbert…
“The members of G jointly accept that p if and only if it is common knowledge in G that the members of G individually have intentionally and openly* expressed their willingness jointly to accept that p with the other members of G.”
According to this view, it is not necessary for the majority to personally believe as the group believes or for that matter, that any group member personally believes as the group believes.
Gilbert contrasts her view against summative accounts of group belief. The most basic description of the summative account is that a group belief p entails the majority of the members of that group believing p (Pg. 241). Gilbert considers the summative account to be a form of correlativism, which is the proposition that a group believes G because a subset of its members believe G (Pg. 243). Gilbert argues against this and thus according to her, we have the possibility of group beliefs wherein no individual in the group personally believes as the group believes. Gilbert describes her account of group beliefs as being “radically different” from the summative account (Pg. 288).
This is a clip from a presentation I’m giving this Wednesday. Do groups believe?
It’s getting busy around here! I have several remote presentations to make, a live presentation the week after next, and a couple of papers to write—all to be finished within the next four weeks. For that reason, I’m not going to be writing any significant blog posts. Nevertheless, I keep coming onto inspiring stuff that I wish I could write lengthy commentary on; so what I am going to do is share a few things that have caught my eye with a note or two, and leave it up to you to investigate further.
1. I came across an article published in January in the Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology called The Accuracy of Inferences about Criminality based on Facial Appearance. The authors conducted experiments to see whether participants could correctly select the criminal in pictures of roles of three. There findings are that most people can! The experimenters tried to control for age, expression, etc. What I find interesting about this is that there is considerable research in communication studies that suggests we’re bad lie detectors. Evidently the experimenters in this study are building on prior research that indicates an ability to discern information by looks alone. What strikes me here is that there are two conflicting bodies of research and a detailed analysis should be undertaken to discern why. The article is open-access meaning anybody can download it.
2. I became a fan of onepeoplesproject.com after reading this article about a former neo-Nazi skinhead that had extensive hate tattoos removed with the financial help of an anonymous donor negotiated by the Southern Poverty Law Center. If you guys ever need a volunteer, let me know!
3. My friend Rich Becker wrote an inspiring post about calling out bullies. I agree with it but I encourage caution as there are always a few that simply lack remorse.
Social Science
- Bias and Belief
- Blind Taste
- Carl Ratner/Cultural Psychology
- Cognition and Culture
- Communication Studies
- Decision Science News
- Evolutionary Psychiatry
- Evolutionary Psychology
- Evolutionary Psychology Blog
- Gene Expression
- Hypnosis and Suggestion
- In Mind (popular social psychology)
- Inside Influence Report
- Less Wrong
- Life as Art
- Mind Readers Dictionary
- Social Psychology Eye
- The Situationist
- Top documentary films
Map of Visitors
Tags
aesthetics anthropology bias Book Review cognition consciousness conspiracy theories contemporary art creativity cultural psychology Culture evolution evolutionary psychology existential existential anxiety gossip How to hypnosis influence material culture narrative personality persuasion Psychology psychopathy Rumor science self-concept self-esteem self-stereotype self catagorization semiotics situationism skepticism social cognition social identity social norms social psychology sociology sociopath stereotype threat Stories Terror Management theory terror manamement theory updateIs it slow around here?
Sorry my site loads so slowly sometimes. I host with Godaddy (for now), just so you know.






