[Warning: here be monsters. And a really long and sort of rambling post.]

Few things irk me more than superstition (and its practitioners). Astrology, tarot cards and that damned John Edwards all drive me batty. I don't entirely understand why things that are demonstrably false are still believed in modern society.

Take, for instance, astrology. Here is a practice that makes specific, verifiable claims about nature. We can find no actual statistical corellation between when people were born and their personalities, careers, etc. It would seem, in the light of considerable statistical evidence, that there is the no factual basis for a belief in astrology. So why does it persist?

Any "psychic" lends himself to similar tests. If you were really able to talk to the dead (like that hack with a syndicated TV show), then you should be able to have some sort of proof of this. It would stand to reason that if you were capable of talking to somebody's dead mother, you could tell that person all sorts of intimate details about him or her without said person's constant feedback (unless the dead really like playing 20 questions). Still, these psychics seem to be undergoing a current wave of popularity. I saw a rip-off of Edwards' show on daytime TV the other day and it made me fear for society.

I talk to a lot of people who seem to have more vague beliefs in magic or psychic powers. What's interesting is that these people seem rather uninterested in pinpointing the exact nature of these powers. If I believed that people existed with the ability to communicate telepathy, I would certainly be trying to figure out how it worked! It would be among the most important discoveries in human history. Why do so many believers treat it as such a mundane thing? I'm not religious, but I have to give those that are credit for (by and large) understanding the importance of what they believe in. If a higher power exists, it's logical to assume that understanding it would be the most important task you could devote your life to.

What ultimately gets me, though, is the detriment I perceive superstitions to have on society as a whole. A lot of people seem to think a little belief in astrology is a bit of harmless fun. I don't agree. Believing in notions that are demonstrably false dulls our critical thinking abilities. In its own way, though, belief in astrology or psychics is worse than believing in something a flat-Earth. While the flat-Earthers may be loopy, a belief in a flat-Earth doesn't suggest anything about our behavior. The person who believes in astrology, however, is in some small way admitting that he has limited control over his actions and decisions. The stars are in control, and who can be blamed for anything they do?

Combine this with the fact that there is no feasible way the stars could influence us. This has deep psychological implications for believers. It means that our lives are controlled by mysterious influences that seem completely contrary to all we know about reality. If you believed this, how comfortable would you feel about making any claims about our ability to know anything? If science can't explain how our very fates are controlled by the stars, how can science hope to explain anything of importance?

If you accept the premises of astrology or psychics despite the evidence to the contrary, and you surrender your life (even subconsciously) to non-understandable forces, how can you really think critically about any other important matters? You now hold a belief about the fundamental nature of reality that is completely contrary to the proven reality I see all around me. How much more vulnerable are you to holding other irrational beliefs, that might be potentially dangerous? The way I see it, believing vaguely in a psychic is likely to lead to stronger levels of belief in more and more superstition.

A lot of people I've discussed this with maintain that there is some other level of reality not measurable by science. Some sort of "energy" (an aside: the word energy, a well defined scientific concept, seems to be pretty much misunderstood by the population-at-large) or equally nebulous mechanism is at work that somehow renders all of these claims untestable by science. I propose that a rejection of understanding nature via any means other than verifiable observations is the path to relativism. If there are all sorts of thinsg happening out there that don't obey the laws of physics, that don't display any sort of repeatibility, then we can't ever hope to come to any sort of real understanding about them. If you simply admit that nobody can pinpoint exactly what's going on in the universe, you've essentially admitted that you can trust no judgment other than your own with regards to anything. And even your own judgment is likely to be suspect.

The implications of this belief being widespread scare me. It seems completely contrary to everyday experience. Religions, which tend to claim that all of reality is not knowable to humans, also tend to claim that reality does follow a specific set of rules. Order in reality is an important tenant in almost all the religions I know of; whether it's order created by an intelligent, rational divine being or simply a product of the great cosmic soup, I'm not aware of many religions that assert reality is constantly changing. This seems to be in line with what we see everyday. Sure, it's possible that the universe disappears when I close my eyes, but there is substantial circumstantial evidence to suggest it does not. In other words, everything I experience suggests that things have a logical explanation and that for every event there is some sort of logical cause.

What really frightens me is the idea that modern civilization is replacing structured religious beliefs for superstitions that assert there isn't necessarily a rational reality. I would almost always rather live in a religious society that says we can understand some of the universe because there physical laws created by an intelligent being than in a society that believes stars are somehow magically affecting our auras (and it only happens sometimes, and, oh yeah, nothing is really knowable anyway). If we assume that the former society embraces a religion that was false, at least it provides us with methods for evaluating reality. If we start with the belief that things are in some way logical, we can begin to learn things. In the superstitious society, though, science and rational thought are crippled; we can't ever hope to understand the energies that control our destinies so why bother?

Anyway, that was roughly six million more words than I had intended it to be. If you read this far, I'd like to know what you think about any of my points. Oh, and all of this was started by a fascinating article, which is linked below.

Stephen