h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

'Only' 10% believe in this nonsense? What percentage of people put down Christian as their religion on the last census? ~70%...therefore most of the UK is willing to believe in some sort of supernatural being. Just a 'less' silly-sounding one than wizards etc. And that 70% did not include Jews, Muslims, Buddhists(reincarnation...same difference!)...people who put down Jedi do not count...the people who wrote that believe in humour.

More loony genitalia related censorship in the US.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/6375501.stm

Susan Patron's award-winning The Higher Power of Lucky has run into trouble because it contains the word "scrotum".

Some librarians posting on message boards said the book "misjudged its audience" and used "shock treatment".

It is the librarians themselves who decide on whether or not to stock a certain book NOT the school or even the governers or parents.

Also,

"The globally successful Harry Potter series has also run into trouble in the US, with some schools restricting access because of fears that it could promote witchcraft."

and back to the last few posts.

Well its interesting when you're out and about to look for how many people believe in "luck" as a force of nature like gravity or electricity. Ive seen eople I thought were rational smart grown-ups side stepping cracked slabs and saluting magpies because to do otherwise would bring bad luck.

The librarians' reaction is interesting. In Kurt Vonnegut's (A3724823 ) 'A Man Without A Country', he says that the country he once knew has been taken away from him and its values are nowadays represented only by librarians and In These Times (leftwing Chicago newspaper: http://www.inthesetimes.com/.) He's refering to a word-of-mouth campaign amongst US librarians against the banning of various books, including his own.

Actually, reading the BBC story...what does it actually say? I don't think it says that librarians *specifically* are leading a ban.

I have to take issue with the Blickster here:
>>I've seen people I thought were rational smart grown-ups side stepping cracked slabs and saluting magpies because to do otherwise would bring bad luck.

What you've actually *seen* is behaviour. But you've only *infered* the motive. I'll admit to saluting lone Magpies "Hello, Mr Magpie, and how's your lady wife / civilly-partnered gentleman?" But I don't believe it affects my luck. It's simply something I do whenever I see a magpie.

But isn't that even worse? Doing something unthinkingly like that?

It is how superstitions become the accepted norm and why when people reasonably challenge the logic and reality behind these 'traditions'/superstitions they are scorned about trying to challenge such things. The beginnings of and actual reasons behind these superstitions are lost. They become un-questioned realities.

Unacceptable things can become acceptable just by repetition. Say an untruth for long enough at it will become the truth...or at least accepted truth.

Hmm. But in saying "Hello" to a magpie I'm not expressing an opinion about anything. Similarly, when I'm told that by participating in Christmas, I'm "...celebrating the birth of Jesus Christ." Actually, objectively speaking all I'm doing is giving out pressies and eating lots.

And I wonder...If I shout "Jesus!" when I drop something, does this suggest that I'm a Christian? If I were an Egyptian-born Atheist, I don't doubt I'd say "Allah!" And what abou when I say "Goodbye"? Or last Friday when I said "Allaha aismarlaidik" as I left a kebab shop?

It's quite a big question, the extent to which we can infer thought from behaviour.

Well I used the magpie example alongside the paving stone example to exhibit that I *know* that some peopls actions are firmly linked to thoughts, but I can see how that wouldnt be clear to everyone and that it isnt the case for everyone.

I say stuff like "Oh God" or "Christ on a bike" when things surprise me it doesnt mean that I regard either of them as being real beings. I dont stop to car why more women want to kiss me under misteltoe than do under clumps of other vegetation, I just pucker up.

I was merely trying to point out that there are many people who whilst not evangelical about the bigG or claiming to be mediums for the spirit realm there are still lots more people than you might expect who hold vestiges of supernatural mindsets within otherwise rational material world views. Hi Math!

"Christ on a bike"?

That's a new one on me.

TRiG.

The concept of Luck is an interesting one. It's possible that there are factors in our evolutionary makeup which predispose us to believing in the concept, eg:
- We are very bad at making probability vs utility trade-offs.
- We are hardwired to try to see patterns - and sometimes do so even when they don't exist (eg I put my left boot on first last time and we won, therefore...)
- We are overly rewarded by an endorphin rush when succeed at something. Hence, positive reinforcement works better than negative. Hence the thrill which some (but not me) get from gambling.

So we shouldn't be too scathing about Math. He's just a walking bag of chemicals biologically programmed for various notions.

Hi BB

How did I know I was going to get a mention after all that stuf about supernatural mumbo-jumbo?

Our everyday superstitions are fascinating and many derive from real practices whose meaning has long been lost. Personally I take a lot of them with a picnh of salt (over the left shoulder naturally).

The ones I do take seriously are ones where you are required to show respect to another person or other being. For instance in Wales we have a tradition of greeting Magpies - "Good Morning Captain, how's your partner". I would love to know the source of that one, but I still do it, even though it makes no sense.

Our adherence to nonsense is part of what makes us human. We should cherish it, where it does no harm.

It might behoove you gentlemen to google the poem "The Calf Path", a near perfect description of the development of a tradition.

Blessings,
Matholwch .

Hi Eddie

I don't believe in Luck as a force, but it does exist as a useful adjective to describe fortuitous serendipity.

As a person who has worked in health & safety in many organisations a dependance on 'luck' is an invitation to disaster. Murphy's Law will apply, regardless of how lucky someone thinks they are.

Strange though it may seem, I also do not believe in divine providence. The gods do not watch my back or grant me luck. What I have I must strive for myself. As a druid I believe I can learn from my gods, but they will not stop a single drop of rain from falling upon my life no matter how much I attempt to appease them.

This is why you will not see me praying or worshipping. It amuses me when a Christian tells me that their God answers their prayers. The almighty creator of the universe takes an active interest in their bunions (but won't stop Tsunami) - yeah, right. However, I rarely try to disabuse them as it seems to give them some solace, and I have no need to be so cruel.

On another tack. I'd be interested to know why you think pattern recognition is an instinctive ability as opposed to a learnt one. And by pattern recognition I don't mean shapes and colours, but social and mathematical patterns. I have always thought that wisdom was the ability to run patterns forward and accurately predict outcomes.

Blessings,
Craig .

Probably apocryphal, but kinda relevant.


A group of sociologists put 4 chimps in a bare room. In the room was a stepladder positioned directly below a banana suspended from the ceiling. Once the chimps had a chance to settle down, one of them spotted the banana and started to climb the ladder. When he was almost in reach of the banana, the sociologists turned on a sprinkler system, drenching all 4 chimps. Startled, the first chimp leapt off the ladder. As soon as he hit the ground, the sprinkler system was switched off. A little while later, another chimp got curious about the banana and started to climb the ladder. Again the sprinkler system was switched on, the chimp jumped off the ladder and all the chimps got soaked. The third time a chimp tried to climb the ladder, the other 3 attacked him. This pattern was allowed to establish itself.

Presently, the sociologists took one of the chimps out of the room and replaced him with another chimp. This chimp saw the banana and started to climb the ladder. Of course, he was attacked before the sprinklers came on.

The sociologists now replaced one of the original 3 chimps with a fresh chimp. When he in turn tried to climb the ladder, the other 3 *including* the one who had never been soaked, attacked him.

Gradually, the sociologists replaced all of the original chimps and the pattern was repeated. In the end, there were 4 chimps in the room who knew they had to attack any chimp climbing the ladder - *without any of them ever having been soaked themselves*.

This is an example of group behaviour being perpetrated through practice. This is perhaps an explanation for humans continuing practices where the original reason has been forgotten.

Thanks, SWL. It is something I have heard before(but keep forgetting so thanks for the reminder) and is *very* relevant.

A lot of 'traditions' which 'forebode' bad luck are simply common sense things i.e. It is unlucky to walk under a ladder or cross on the stairs or put new shoes on a table or open an umberella in the house...why? Well, you could be injured by something falling off the ladder; get untangled and fall down stairs; mark the table or knock ornaments down.

BUT, they are not inherently or superstitiously unlucky there is a reason. You can safely do all of these things if you check that there is no potential for any of the 'unlucky' things to happen.

>>On another tack. I'd be interested to know why you think pattern recognition is an instinctive ability as opposed to a learnt one.

I'm not saying that. We undoubtedly *do* have an inherent pattern-recognition ability - although we have to learn some (but perhaps not all) of the patterns we're looking for. This innate characteristic is illustrated by any of the 'gestalt' illusions, eg when we recognise a triangle where there isn't one. http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~cfs/305_html/Gestalt/TriComplete.html

But, yes, many of the patterns we learn by education or experience - eg that when my wife's grumpy it's because her blood sugar's low; that certain teasing digs can set a Druid off...etc.

(Wasn't implying that you believe in luck, btw. Obviously you'll be well versed in probability, distributions, Signal Detection Theory, etc.)

Clawing this all back to religion, spirits, etc. One theory of the origin of religion is that we are pre-programmed to sit up and take notice of peculiar night time rustlings. When they turn out not to be a sabre-tooth, they are attributed to Grandma's restless spirit. (There's absolutely no evidence to support this speculation, of course. I merely throw it in by-the-by.)

btw - bonobos, unlike their larger cousins, don't resolve their differences by fighting. They do it by shagging.

Oo. I love superstitions

"Whoever meets a single pie,
His fortune's sure to go awry;
He may be sick or even die;
But if he meets with two or more,
Good luck will greet him at his door."

And:

"One magpie means misfortune,
Two magpies mean good luck"

Possibly the origin of the greeting is as an incantation, or charm, invoking the benevolent symbolic presence of the second bird, thus transforming evil into good

Additionally, Magpies are believed to house the souls of scolds -- evil, gossiping women -- in which case the male honorific, 'Captain' at once flatters and counters the malevolent female spirit

As for the origin of superstitions regarding magpies, and other corvids, I can only offer speculation:

Magpies will give voice when they spy a human, and can mimic calls of other birds and may even learn to imitate some human words. Spooky!

Magpies have adapted to living in close proximity to humans. They are opportunistic scavengers, but are notorious for their predatory behaviour:

They will pick at open wounds and scabs on the backs of livestock, often creating a much larger wound. Sometimes an animal so beset will die from secondary infection. Like other corvids, magpies may attack the eyes of newborn or sick animals. Magpies attack and kill other birds, (including poultry), and their eggs and hatchlings, .

Medieval MRSA and Clostridium difficile then?

That's why you have to pass on your best wishes to Mrs Magpie. It stops a single magpie being unlucky.

Another thing I do...when I open a bottle of champagne, I make a slit in the top of the cork with a penknife, insert a silver coin and give it to someone for good luck.

Oh...and I make people origami good luck cranes. (I do inflatable origami frogs, too - but they're not a luck thing).

Hi Eddie

"Clawing this all back to religion, spirits, etc. One theory of the origin of religion is that we are pre-programmed to sit up and take notice of peculiar night time rustlings. When they turn out not to be a sabre-tooth, they are attributed to Grandma's restless spirit. (There's absolutely no evidence to support this speculation, of course. I merely throw it in by-the-by.)"

And I think we can put that one back in the cabinet of busted theories then can't we?

One of the great dumb assumptions of all time is to think that anyone who lived before the age of reason was stupid. Ask a Kalahari bushman what rustlings in the bushes are and he will cock his head and reply that either it is a sand-mouse, the breeze or perhaps David Attenborough's film crew.

Our ancestors were intelligent, sophisticated and imaginative. It is true they didn't have access to all the scientific knowledge we have today, but they knew a lot more that we often give them credit for.

Take, for instance, the Gold Hats. Three of these bronze age marvels have surfaced in Europe in the last few years and there are reports of others being found in Ireland and elsewhere in the last century (but were probably melted down for the metal).

These 3,500 year old devices had a lunar/solar calender encoded onto them that defined the entire 18.6 year lunar cycle. They are at least 500 years older than the 'discovery' of this natural phenomenon by the Greeks.

These artifacts show that our ancestors were capable of rational and consistent observations of the cosmos, that relied on a Heliocentric model of the solar system. They also reproduced this knowledge and passed it around Europe showing communication links and cooperation.

What makes me laugh is that we nowadays imagine Wizards to have conical hats with moons and stars on them...

Spiritual belief may have come not from rustlings, but from an intelligent and rational yearning for more understanding, filling in the gaps so to speak.

Blessings,
Matholwch .

I haven't said anywhere that the ancients where dumb. Or at least no dumber than their identical, modern counterparts. But there's no reason whatsoever to suppose that they were any less prone to hearing nonexistent spooks than we are.

(I'll admit - I do have a certain sympathy with the trashing of the worst excesses of evolutionary psychology).