Bhakti and the True Believer Syndrome.

May 9, 2003

Namaste All,

The mind of the Bhakta must be one pointed but at the same time

flexible. For an inflexible mind is an unsurrendered

mind...ONS...Tony.

The need to believe in phony wonders sometimes exceeds not only logic

but, seemingly, even sanity. --The Rev. Canon William V. Rauscher

The true-believer syndrome merits study by science. What is it that

compels a person, past all reason, to believe the unbelievable. How

can an otherwise sane individual become so enamored of a fantasy, an

imposture, that even after it's exposed in the bright light of day he

still clings to it--indeed, clings to it all the harder? --M. Lamar

Keene

True-believer syndrome is an expression coined by M. Lamar Keene to

describe an apparent cognitive disorder characterized by believing in

the reality of paranormal or supernatural events after one has been

presented overwhelming evidence that the event was fraudulently

staged. Keene is a reformed phony psychic who exposed religious

racketeering--to little effect, apparently. Phony faith healers,

psychics, channelers, televangelist miracle workers, etc., are as

abundant as ever.

Keene believes that "the true-believer syndrome is the greatest thing

phony mediums have going for them" because "no amount of logic can

shatter a faith consciously based on a lie." That those suffering

from true-believer syndrome are consciously lying to themselves

hardly seems likely, however. Perhaps from the viewpoint of a fraud

and hoaxer, the mark who is told the truth but who continues to have

faith in you must seem to believe what he knows is a lie. Yet, this

type of self-deception need not involve lying to oneself. To lie to

oneself would require admission that one believes what one knows is

false. This does not seem logically possible. One can't believe or

disbelieve what one knows. (Belief is distinct from belief in, which

is a matter of trust rather than belief.) Belief and disbelief entail

the possibility of error; knowledge implies that error is beyond

reasonable probability. I may have overwhelming evidence that

a "psychic" is a phony, yet still believe that paranormal events

occur. I may be deceiving myself in such a case, but I don't think it

is correct to say I am lying to myself. It is possible that those

suffering from true-believer syndrome simply do not believe that the

weight of the evidence before them revealing fraud is sufficient to

overpower the weight of all those many cases of supportive evidence

from the past. The fact that the supportive evidence was largely

supplied by the same person exposed as a fraud is suppressed. There

is always the hope that no matter how many frauds are exposed, at

least one of the experiences might have been genuine. No one can

prove that all psychic "miracles" have been frauds; therefore, the

true believer may well reason that he or she is justified in keeping

hope alive. Such thinking is not completely illogical, though it may

seem pathological to the one admitting the fraud.

It does not seem as easy to explain why the true-believer continues

to believe in, that is, trust the psychic once he has admitted his

deception. Trusting someone who reveals he is a liar and a fraud is

irrational and such a person must appear crazy to the hoaxer. Some of

them may well be mad, but some may be deceiving themselves by

assuming that it is possible that a person can have psychic powers

without knowing it. Thus, one could disbelieve in one's psychic

ability, yet still actually possess paranormal powers. Just as there

are people who think they have psychic powers but don't really have

any such powers, there are people who have psychic powers but think

they don't.

In any case, there are two types of true believers, though they are

clearly related. One is the kind Keene was referring to, namely, the

type of person who believes in paranormal or supernatural things

contrary to the evidence. Their faith is unshakeable even in the face

of overwhelming evidence against them, e.g., those who refused to

disbelieve in "Carlos" once the hoax was revealed. Keene's examples

are mostly of people who are so desperate to communicate with the

dead, that no exposé of fraudulent mediums (or channelers) can shake

their faith in spiritualism (or channeling). The other is the type

described by Eric Hoffer in his book The True Believer. This type of

person is irrationally committed to a cause like murdering doctors

who perform abortions or to a guru like Jim Jones.

True-believer syndrome may account for the popularity of Uri Geller,

Sai Baba or James Van Praagh, but the term does not help us

understand why people believe in the psychic or supernatural

abilities of such characters, despite the overwhelming evidence that

they are frauds and make their living by bilking people of great sums

of cash. Since by definition those suffering from true-believer

syndrome are irrationally committed to their beliefs, there is no

point in arguing with them. Evidence and logical argument mean

nothing to them. Such people are by definition deluded in the

psychiatric sense of the term: they believe what is false and are

incapable of being persuaded by evidence and argument that their

notions are in error.

Clearly, if there is any explanation for true-believer syndrome, it

must be in terms of the satisfaction of emotional needs. But why some

people have such a strong emotional need to believe in immortality,

racial or moral superiority, or even that the latest fad in

management must be pursued with evangelical zeal, is perhaps

unanswerable. It may have to do with insecurity. Eric Hoffer seemed

to think so. He said

The less justified a man is in claiming excellence for his own self,

the more ready he is to claim all excellence for his nation, his

religion, his race or his holy cause....

A man is likely to mind his own business when it is worth minding.

When it is not, he takes his mind off his own meaningless affairs by

minding other people's business....

The fanatic is perpetually incomplete and insecure. He cannot

generate self-assurance out of his individual resources -- out of his

rejected self -- but finds it only by clinging passionately to

whatever support he happens to embrace. This passionate attachment is

the essence of his blind devotion and religiosity, and he sees in it

the source of all virtue and strength.... He easily sees himself as

the supporter and defender of the holy cause to which he clings. And

he is ready to sacrifice his life.

Hoffer also seemed to think that true-believer syndrome has something

to do with the desire to give up all personal responsibility for

one's beliefs and actions: to be free of the burden of freedom.

Perhaps Hoffer is right for many of the more severe cases, but many

of the lesser ones may have to do with little more than wishful

thinking.

A study done by psychologists Barry Singer and Victor Benassi at

California State University at Long Beach illustrates the will to

believe in psychic powers in the face of contrary evidence. They

brought in a performing magician, Craig Reynolds, to do some tricks

for four introductory psychology classes. Two of the classes were not

told that he was a magician who would perform some amateur magic

tricks. They were told that he was a graduate student who claimed to

have psychic powers. In those classes, the psychology instructor

explicitly stated that he didn't believe that the graduate student or

anyone else has psychic abilities. In the other two classes the

students were told that the magician was a magician. Singer and

Benassi reported that about two-thirds of the students in both groups

believed Craig was psychic. The researchers were surprised to find no

significant difference between the "magic" and "psychic" classes.

They then made the same presentation to two more classes who were

explicitly told that Craig had no psychic abilities and that he was

going to do some tricks for them whereby he pretends to read minds

and demonstrate psychic powers. Nevertheless, more than half the

students believed Craig was psychic after seeing his act.

Singer and Benassi then asked the students whether they thought

magicians could do exactly what Craig did. Most of the students

agreed that magicians could. Then they asked the students if they

would like to change their estimate of Craig's psychic abilities in

light of the negative data they themselves had provided. A few did,

reducing the percentage of students believing in Craig's psychic

powers to 55 percent. Then the students were asked to estimate how

many so-called psychics were really fakes using magician's tricks.

The consensus was that most "psychics" are frauds. The students were

again asked if they wished to change their estimate of Craig's

psychic powers. Again, a few did, but the percentage believing in

Craig's psychic powers was still a hefty 52 percent. [benassi and

Singer; Hofstadter]

For many people, the will to believe at times overrides the ability

to think critically about the evidence for and against a belief.

See related entries on ad hoc hypothesis, cold reading, communal

reinforcement, confirmation bias, control study, Occam's razor, the

post hoc fallacy, selective thinking, self-deception, subjective

validation, testimonials, and wishful thinking.

Sign In

Bhakti and the True Believer Syndrome.

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Join the conversation

Support the Ashram

Join Groups

Top Downloads