Is there a physiological basis for magical thinking?

  • Thread starter Thread starter OAQfirst
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Basis Thinking
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the physiological basis of magical thinking, exploring how the human mind tends to fill gaps in understanding with explanations rooted in magic, witchcraft, or religion. It highlights a natural inclination, especially in children, to create imaginative explanations for the unknown, suggesting a biological connection to this behavior. As individuals mature, they often accept established explanations, which can stifle creativity. The conversation also touches on personality types and their influence on skepticism, noting that some individuals are more gullible or prone to belief in the supernatural, while others are more scientific and skeptical. This variation in belief systems may be influenced by genetics, environmental factors, and stress, affecting how individuals interpret and respond to the mysteries of life. Overall, the thread emphasizes the interplay between cognitive processes, creativity, and the human tendency to seek understanding through non-scientific means.
OAQfirst
Messages
23
Reaction score
3
I know that there is argument over whether behavior developed in tandem with physique. But is there a known physiological basis or impetus for magical thinking? Where the mind fails to account for things it does not understand, there is a natural inclination to explain the mysteries of life with magic or witchcraft or religion. Is there is a part of the brain that handles this area of thought? Are there any studies or books I could look for to help me understand this?
 
Biology news on Phys.org
Are you asking about creativity? Children quite naturally invent their own explanations for the world around them to try to come to grips with it as well. People stop being creative when they accept an explanation for something as true (as adults in the past have even believed in "magic" and "myth" as fact when they stopped considering alternatives as they got older). Seeing as how all children seem to show this tendency to be creative when they are young regardless of culture certainly suggests that there is some fundamental biological connection associated with such behavior, but this is outside of my area of study so I can't really say too much more than that.
 
OAQfirst said:
is there a known physiological basis or impetus for magical thinking? Where the mind fails to account for things it does not understand, there is a natural inclination to explain the mysteries of life with magic or witchcraft or religion.

like explaining consciousness with freewill?

it seems to me to be the result of fuzzy logic.
 
Renge Ishyo said:
Are you asking about creativity? Children quite naturally invent their own explanations for the world around them to try to come to grips with it as well. People stop being creative when they accept an explanation for something as true (as adults in the past have even believed in "magic" and "myth" as fact when they stopped considering alternatives as they got older). Seeing as how all children seem to show this tendency to be creative when they are young regardless of culture certainly suggests that there is some fundamental biological connection associated with such behavior, but this is outside of my area of study so I can't really say too much more than that.

I don't think it's so much about creativity. Maybe. But rather the explanations humans had for what they couldn't understand in ancient times or prehistory. But that biological connection is fascinating.
 
It kind of seems like the difference in personality types would account for how skeptical people are to a degree (ie whether or not they would believe in gods, witchcraft, etc) and I guess genetics and environmental influences would affect someone's personality type and also I think stress could cause someone whose normally sane to lose it/start being delusional or something. I'm not sure if "personality type" is the right word to use here..

I mean, I know some people who are really really gullible, they seem to believe stuff in a really unscientific, careless way without much thought, like I had a friend once whom we told there were spider-wasps (an insect that was part spider/part wasp) made/discovered on the planet (This was just something from the tv show sliders) and she believed us right away and I know other people who are really really skeptical. Both her and her mom seem like really gullible, unscientific etc people but her brother seems incredibly smart, skeptical and scientific, he was actually the one who told her about the spider-wasps lol I mean, she (the girl we told about the spider-wasps) believes she's seen ghosts in the past, and believes humans were dropped off by aliens as an experiment...I could go on but both her and her mom seem to believe a wide variety of stuff in a very unscientific way...I don't know how much genetics affects that. Her brother's completely different and very scientific and skeptical, so, I don't know, but her brother's definitely related to them
 
Last edited:
But I also know some really talented/creative people who are really really creative and talented in that regard but don't think scientifically
 
Deadly cattle screwworm parasite found in US patient. What to know. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2025/08/25/new-world-screwworm-human-case/85813010007/ Exclusive: U.S. confirms nation's first travel-associated human screwworm case connected to Central American outbreak https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/us-confirms-nations-first-travel-associated-human-screwworm-case-connected-2025-08-25/...
Chagas disease, long considered only a threat abroad, is established in California and the Southern U.S. According to articles in the Los Angeles Times, "Chagas disease, long considered only a threat abroad, is established in California and the Southern U.S.", and "Kissing bugs bring deadly disease to California". LA Times requires a subscription. Related article -...
I am reading Nicholas Wade's book A Troublesome Inheritance. Please let's not make this thread a critique about the merits or demerits of the book. This thread is my attempt to understanding the evidence that Natural Selection in the human genome was recent and regional. On Page 103 of A Troublesome Inheritance, Wade writes the following: "The regional nature of selection was first made evident in a genomewide scan undertaken by Jonathan Pritchard, a population geneticist at the...

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
553
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
7K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Back
Top