On Mon, 01 Nov 1999 18:39:27 -0600 "Paul C. Smith"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I'm not sure that I see the change over time, in light of everything from
> Casper to Clarence to Samantha to Jeannie. However, I have long wondered
> about the role that matter-of-fact magic in the movies and tv plays in
> making the paranormal believable (the "encourages them" side of your
> speculation). People apparently find it very easy to believe in all sorts of
> magical powers, universal cures (ever really look at the lists of claims for
> those herbal supplements?), and religious miracles. Surely the belief is not
> the product of the very meager real-world evidence. One would expect these
> to be the kind of exceptional claims that require exceptional evidence, but
> they're treated almost as though the burden of evidence is in the other
> direction (as though _natural_ explanation is the odd route to take, the
> last resort).
Paul brings up a point that I have wondered about, surely there
is little real-world experience supporting the belief in magical
powers and outcomes. So is TV to blame? I have a second
culprit--intellectual laziness.
I have noticed that often students tire quickly in dealing with
thorny issues, like specifying the operational definition of
"cigarette smoking." They want me to tell them "the answer"
rather than working out a solution for themselves.
Ken
----------------------
Kenneth M. Steele [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dept. of Psychology
Appalachian State University
Boone, NC 28608
USA
