Magic: A Theoretical Reassessment [and Comments and Replies]

Author(s): Michael Winkelman, Kate Ware Ankenbrandt, Agehananda Bharati, Erika

Bourguignon, Marlene Dobkin de Rios, Alan Dundes, Jule Eisenbud, Felicitas D. Goodman, C.R.
Hallpike, Åke Hultkrantz, I.C. Jarvie, Barbara W. Lex, Joseph K. Long, Leonard W. Moss,
Richard J. Preston, Lola Romanucci-Ross, Hans Sebald, Dean Sheils, Philip Singer, Sheila
Womack
Source: Current Anthropology, Vol. 23, No. 1 (Feb., 1982), pp. 37-66
Published by: The University of Chicago Press on behalf of Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological
Research
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2742551 .
Accessed: 05/08/2011 18:43

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

The University of Chicago Press and Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research are collaborating
with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Current Anthropology.

http://www.jstor.org
CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY Vol. 23, No. 1, February1982
( 1982by The Wenner-Gren Research,all rightsreserved0011-3204/82/2301-0004$02.75
FoundationforAnthropological
Magic:A TheoreticalReassessment'
by Michael Winkelman
ANTHROPOLOGICAL THEORIES about the techniques broadly
labeledmagicand suchrelatedpracticesas sorcery,witchcraft,
divination,and curing(which utilize magic) are in need of
reformulation. Theoreticalconsiderations of thesephenomena
have been distortedby a lack of awarenessand/oracceptance
of the basic assumptionsof magical belief.Furthermore, the
investigationand attemptedexplanationofmagicalphenomena
have been seriouslybiased by Westernculturalassumptions.
Anthropologists have traditionallytaken the position that
beliefsabout magic are empiricallyuntenableand that there
can be no such cause-and-effect relationsas theyimply.Theo-
ries of magichave in generaltendedto be rationalistic,psy-
chological,or social-functional
accountsofmagicalphenomena.
They have rarelyacceptedthesephenomenaas reported;con-
sequently,theyhave failedto considerthepossibilitythatsome
magicalphenomenahave the empiricalbasis claimedby prac-
titioners.
An impetusto the reformulation of theoriesof magicin the
lightof thispossibilitycomesfromexperimental parapsychol-
ogy. Laboratoryresearchhas producedempiricalsupportfor
some of the phenomenaclaimedby magical traditions.Para-
psychologists interprettheirfindings as evidenceforextrasen-
soryperception,or clairvoyanceand telepathy,and forfore-
knowledgeor precognition. Parapsychologicalresearchhas also
demonstrated thathumanscan exercisepsychokinetic influenc-
es affecting,
forexample,radioactivedecay and computerized
random-number generators(see Stanford1977forreview),the
growthratesofplants (Grad 1963, fy64),fungi(Barry 1968),
and bacteria(Tedderand Monty1981),and healingin animals
(Grad, Cadoret,and Paul 1961,Grad 1977,Watkinsand Wat-
kins 1971,Wells and Klein 1972).2Parapsychologistsuse the
1 I wish to thankJoe Long, Duane Metzger,Patric Giesler,David
Hess, Lola Romanucci-Ross, Robert Morris, Stanley Krippner,
BerrylBellman, Dean Sheils, and Jay Lemke for theirinvaluable
commentson earlier drafts of this paper. Unfortunately,I have
been unable to incorporateall of theirsuggestions.Portionsof earlier
draftsof this paper were presentedat the 1979 AmericanAnthro-
pological Association meetings and the 1980 Southwest Anthro-
pologicalAssociationmeetings.A shortpaper on someoftheproblems
exploredhere, "Magic and Parapsychology,"appeared in Phoenix
4:7-14.
2 For additional studies in parapsychology,see the Journal of
MICHAEL WINKELMAN is a doctoral candidate and teaching
assistant in ethnographyin the School of Social Sciences, Uni-
versityof California,Irvine (Irvine, Calif. 92717, U.S.A.). Born
in 1954, he receivedhis B.A. fromRice Universityin 1976. His
researchinterestsare the universalsof magic,indigenoushealing
practices,and cross-culturalstudies of paranormal phenomena.
He has published "Science and Parapsychology:An Ideological
Revolution" (Revision 3:59-64) and, "The Effects of Formal
Education upon Extrasensory Abilities: The Ozolco Study"
(JournalofParapsychology, in press).
The presentpaper was submittedin finalform8 iv 81.
Vol. 23 * No. 1 * February1982
termpsi to referto an assumedunitaryforceunderlyingthe
phenomenatheystudy.Psi is definedin the JournalofPara-
psychology as "a generaltermused to identify personalfactors
or processesin naturewhichtranscendacceptedlaws" (1948:
311) and "whichare non-physical in nature" (1962:310), and
it is used to cover both extrasensoryperception(ESP), an
"awarenessofor responseto an externaleventor influence not
apprehendedby sensorymeans" (1962:309) or inferredfrom
sensoryknowledge,and psychokinesis(PK), "the direct in-
fluenceexertedon a physicalsystemby a subjectwithoutany
knownintermediate energyor instrumentation" (1945:305).
Data collectedby anthropologists and otherssuggestthat
someaspectsofmagicalpracticeinvolvepsi. Lang (1894,1897),
in a cross-cultural reviewof anecdotaland ethnographicevi-
dence,arguedforan interpretation of magicaleventsin a cul-
turalcontextwhichacceptedthepossibilityoftheparanormal.
De Vesme (1931) recountednumerousreportsof paranormal
events by militaryofficers,physicians,clergymen,colonial
officials,and reportersas well as anthropologists. Barnouw
(1942) examinedthesimilarities and differencesbetweenWest-
ern mediumshipand the Siberian shamanistictraditionin a
contextwhich accepted an effectiveparanormalaspect. He
later(1946) exploredtheinfluence ofcultureupontheincidence
and form of paranormalphenomena. Elkin (1977 [1945])
studied AustralianAborigines'reportedparanormalabilities
and suggestedthat theywererelatedto Rhine's experimental
parapsychology.Rose and Rose (1951; Rose 1955, 1956) and
McElroy (1955) experimentally assessed the psi abilities of
AustralianAboriginesand found significantlevels of ESP.
Long (1977a) reviewsnumerousethnographic accountsin which
apparentparanormaleventsare reported.
The problemwithmanyethnographic reportsofsuchevents,
as Singerand Ankenbrandt(1980) point out, is that anthro-
pologistshave failedto make clear whetherthese reportsare
theirinformants' own observationsor beliefs,theirown obser-
vations, scientificallyestablished occurrences,or ad hoc
have recentlybegun
rationalizations.However,anthropologists
to documentparanormalevents directly.Castaneda's (1968,
1971, 1972, 1974, 1977) reportsof paranormalevents have
strainedthe credulityof many (e.g., de Mille 1976, 1980).
Dobkin de Rios (1972) suggeststhat she herselfmay have
demonstrated clairvoyanceorprecognition in theuse ofdivina-
tion cards in fieldwork. Wedenoja (1976) carefullyand thor-
oughlydocumentsa poltergeistcase encounteredin Jamaica.
Long (1977b)reportsapparentparanormaleventsencountered
withthe Cuminacult in Jamaica.Sharon(1978) reportsclair-
voyantand precognitive occurrences associatedwitha Peruvian
Parapsychology,the Journal of the AmericanSocietyfor Psychical
Research,the JournaloftheSocietyfor PsychicalResearch,the Euro-
pean JournalofParapsychology,Researchin Parapsychology,Wolman
(1977), and Krippner(1977-).
37
curer. Romanucci-Ross (1980) reports a large number of
patentlyparanormaleventsencounteredin fieldsituationson
several continents.Other anthropologistsmay also have ob-
servedparanormaleventsin thefieldbut remainedsilenteither
because of thefearof censureby theircolleaguesor because of
the lack of an appropriatetheoreticalframeworkfor their
discussion.
Not onlydo manycontemporary and historicalethnographic
reportssuggesta psi componentto magicalpractices,but the
implicationsofpsi are beingassessedin otherareas of anthro-
pologicalconcern.Emerson(1977,1979),Goodman(1977), and
Jones(1977) have integratedpsychicsinto theirarcheological
research.My ownstudies(Winkelman1979,1981;Winkelman
and Kawanami-Allenn.d.) have suggestedthat schoolexperi-
ence and cognitivedevelopmentaffectextrasensory abilities.
Hallpike's (1979:479) explorationsof the implicationsof
developmentalpsychologyfor theoriesof primitivethought
emphasizethe importanceof recognitionand investigation of
the psi aspects of humancognition:"only whenwe have fully
investigated thepossibilities
ofparanormalphenomenashallwe
be able to claimourtheoriesofprimitivecausalityand spiritual
beliefsare entirelyobjectiveand not distortedby the contem-
poraryorthodoxies ofour own culture."
All of this suggeststhat anthropologistsmight want to
examinemore systematically the idea that magic has a psi-
relatedaspect-that some magical practicesfacilitateor pro-
duce empiricallyverifiableeffectsoutside of the currently
understoodcause-and-effect processesof nature. (This aspect
may or may not extendbeyondthe presentparapsychological
definitionof psi to includeotherphenomenasuch as spirits;
myuse ofthetermpsi hereis restricted to thatdefinition.)
Parapsychologyhas not specificallyaddressed magical
phenomena.Althoughtherelationship betweenparapsychologi-
cal researchand magicalpracticesis not straightforward and
unproblematic,3 certainfindings of parapsychological research
do correspondto magical beliefsand practicesas anthropolo-
gistshave describedthem.
MAGIC-PARAPSYCHOLOGY CORRESPONDENCES
CONDITIONS
Some magicalpracticesand beliefsreportedby anthropologists
share certainof the conditionsfoundthroughresearchto be
conduciveto psi manifestations: alteredstatesofconsciousness,
visualization,positiveexpectation,and belief.
Alteredstatesof consciousness. A central characteristicof
magicalpracticeis thealterationofconsciousness. Mauss (1972
[1950])pointsout thatpossessionis "one ofthemagician'spro-
fessionalqualifications"(p. 39) and that magic "requiresand
producesan alteration,a modification in one's state of mind"
(p. 128). Elkin (1977:56, 61, 62) and de Vesme (1931:205)
also consider altered states of consciousnessbasic to the
exerciseof shamanicpower.Similarly,Norbeck(1961:86) sug-
gests that "fallinginto trance oftenconstitutesthe call to
[magico-]religiousvocation" and that "the ability to enter
3There are profoundmethodologicaland epistemologicaldiffer-
ences between parapsychologyand magic. Magic is apparently a
staticbody ofknowledge,whileparapsychologyis an ongoinginvesti-
gation. Magic assumes the observable influenceof sources outside
of physical control,while parapsychologyemploys a methodology
based on the assumptionof potential controlof relevantvariables.
The paranormalphenomenaof parapsychologyare generallyobserv-
able onlyin statisticaldeviationsfromnormalexpectation,not in the
macroeventsor outstandingindividualperformances characteristicof
magic. Magical phenomena are usually created by trainedpracti-
tioners,whileparapsychologistsusually studyuntrainedindividuals.
Magical phenomenagenerallyrelate to ends desired as a part of
everyday life, while parapsychologicalresearch tends to occur in
laboratoriesisolated fromthe realms of normal social or personal
experience.
38
thisstateis a requirement forthespecialist."Mauss's observa-
tion that an unbrokenfocusof ritualattentionis absolutely
necessaryifmagicis to be effective underscores theimportance
of the state of consciousness. The yoga traditionsuggeststhat
psi abilitiesare by-productsof spiritualdevelopmentwhich
involve direct and profoundalterations of consciousness
(Evans-Wentz1978 [1935]).
Honorton's (1977) review of 87 parapsychologicalstudies
indicatesthat a wide range of altered states and procedures
(meditation, hypnosis,inducedrelaxation,sensorydeprivation)
significantly improve ESP and PK performance.Palmer's
(1978) reviewsuggeststhat the depth of the alteredstate of
consciousnesssignificantly influencesthe extent of the per-
formance,other experimentalfactors determiningwhether
scoresare significantly above or belowchanceexpectation.The
optimalstates forESP in experimentalsituationsare thought
to includenondefensive opennessto one's selfand looseningof
self boundaries(Osis and Bokert 1971), relaxationin which
attentionis directedtowardinternalprocesses,feelings,and
images (Braud 1975), decreased musculartension(Honorton
1977),an abruptincreasein alpha activity(Stanford1971),and
a meditation-like state (Schmeidler1970).All thissuggeststhat
the states of trance and possessionwidely associated with
magical traditionsmightbe conduciveto extrasensory aware-
ness.
Visualization.Frazer (1929) suggestedthat one of the basic
principlesof magicis the law of similarity, the beliefthat the
magiciancan producethedesiredeffectby imitating it. The law
ofsimilarity is exemplifiedin suchbeliefsas that"likeproduces
like" and that the treatmentof the representation(image)
affectsthe thingrepresented. Malinowskiidentified the imita-
tion and enactmentof desired ends as universalaspects of
magic; one practicingmagic "sees in his imagination.., the
imagesofthewished-for results"(1954 [1927]:80); "theritualof
magic contains usually some referenceto the resultsto be
achieved;it foreshadows them,anticipatesthe desiredevents"
(1972 [1931]:68). Skorupski(1976:149) points out that the
"characteristic kernel"of magic"seemsto be eitheran imper-
sonal present-tense description ofthe consequencesofthemag-
ical actions,ora first-personpresent-tense descriptionofwhatis
beingdone in termsof the consequences."Elkin (1977 [1945]:
43) suggeststhat the sorceror"concentrateshis minduntilhe
sees a pictureof his victim. .. and thenwithall the emotions
and energyhe can summon,he whispers'Die!'. . . He realizes
that he must 'see' the victim,visualizingthe desiredresult."
Evans-Wentz(1978 [1935]:172-209,329-30) arguesthat com-
plex visualizationis one of the two fundamentalprocesses
centralto the developmentofpsychicpowers.
The enactmentin one's mindof the desiredstate of affairs
has been identified as a goal-oriented
experimentally strategy.
Morris,Nanko, and Phillips's(1979).work,replicatedby Levi
(1979), compared cognitivestrategiesfor psychokinetically
affectinga light display determinedby a random-number
generatorand foundthat "vividlyvisualizingthe lightbeing
lit,e.g.,thegoal forthetrial,"was statisticallymoresuccessful
thantheprocess-oriented strategyofvisualizingenergyflowing
intothecircleoflightsin thedesireddirection.Goal-orientation
is well establishedas underlying psychokinesis in experimental
studies (Stanford1977, Kennedy 1979). Morris(1980a) com-
pared visualizationand concentrationas strategiesfor ESP
performance and foundvisualizationsignificantly better.
Positiveexpectation. Malinowski'sdiscussionof the magical
practitioner'santicipationof the desiredresultdemonstrates
theimportanceofpositiveexpectationin themagicaltradition.
The trickery and sleight-of-hand used to createtheappearance
of psi events are also widelyreportedin magical practices,
especiallyhealing.This deceptionis oftenperpetratedby the
magicalpractitioner becauseit is knownto producea successful
outcome at another level (Rose 1956, Levi-Strauss 1963a,
Reichbart1978). The ethnographic materialon magicalprac-
CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY
 tices reviewedby Reichbart illustratesthat showmanship,
trickery,and other elementsare directed toward creating
positiveexpectationand are apparentlybelievedto create or
facilitatethe occurrenceof paranormalphenomena.
Rhine et al. (1940) pointed out the value of enthusiasm,
motivation, interest,and positivemotivationon thepart ofthe
experimenterfor successfulparapsychologicalexperiments.
Experimentalstudieshave shownthatpositivemood,attitude,
and expectationare importantin the manifestationof psi
phenomena (see Carpenter 1977, White 1977 for reviews).
Kennedyand Taddonio's (1976) reviewofexperimenter effects
in parapsychological researchsuggestedthat not onlydid the
experimenter's personalityand behavior have direct conse-
quences,but expectationsofsuccessand friendly, highlymoti-
vating,and confidence-inspiring withthesubjects
relationships
werevital to the successof the parapsychological experiment.
Taddonio (1976) found that the subjects of college-student
ESP experimenters conformed to the inducedexpectationsof
success or failureat statisticallysignificantlevels. It would
appear thatmagicalpractitioners knowingly manipulatea wide
rangeofsupportswhichfacilitatepsi as wellas othereffects.
Belief.Mauss (1972 [1950])notedthecentralroleofbeliefin
magical practice,pointingto the widelyheld view that the
presenceof nonbelieversrendersmagical activitiesnull and
void. Barnouw (1942) noted that shamansbreak offa seance
when doubt is expressed.Opler (1936) reportedthat Apache
shamansconsiderit impossibleto curesomeonewhois skeptical.
Shah (1968:18) recordedthe cabbalist view that "even the
teachingsthemselveswereactuallyweakenedby beingtold to
incredulouspeople."
Schmeidlerand Murphy(1946) foundthat individualswho
believedtheywouldbe able to manifestESP abilitiesin thetest
situationdid so to a significantly
greaterdegreethanthosewho
did not. Palmer's (1971, 1978) reviewsof experimentalstudies
indicatethat the relationshipbetweenbeliefin ESP and ESP
performance is well established.Althoughthe initial studies
occasionallysuggesteda significantrelationshipbetweendis-
beliefand negativelysignificantperformanceon ESP tasks,
subsequentstudies generallydemonstratea neutral perfor-
mance fornonbelievers. The suggestionherethat beliefin the
impendingoccurrenceof a paranormalevent increases the
likelihoodof its occurrenceprovidesa basis for speculation
upon the relativeinfrequency of personalexperienceof para-
normaleventsin societiesand cultureswhichgenerallydeny
thepossibilityofsuch occurrences.
THEORY
Theoreticalsimilaritiesbetweenmagic and parapsychological
researchmay be observedin (1) the conceptsofpsi and mana,
(2) the typesof phenomenawhichmagicalpractitioners typi-
cally attemptto influenceand thosemostlikelyinfluenced by
psychokinesisin experimental and (3) divinationand
situations,
the types of activitiesresearchhas identifiedas potentially
revealingpsi-mediatedinformationor the operation of psi
processes.
Mana and psi. Mana, a word borrowedfromthe Melane-
sians,refersto supernaturalpower.Mauss (1972 [1950]),along
with other early anthropologists(e.g., Marett, Preuss, and
Hubert),suggestedthat mana is the basis of magic.4Many, if
notmost,anthropologists (e.g.,Mauss 1972[1950],Radin 1957,
Lowie 1952,Norbeck1961)considerthemana conceptuniversal
or nearlyso. Codrington(1969 [1891]) said that mana was a
"forcealtogetherdistinctfromphysicalpower" (p. 118) that
I Malinowskioriginallyobjected that mana
cannot be at the basis
of magic fortwo reasons: (1) magic is a purelyhuman activity,while
mana is in inanimatethings;(2) mana cannot be a universalconcept
and the basis of magic because of its wide variation.He later sug-
gested,however,thepointofviewheldhere:"everymagical ceremony
is, in its essence,a handlingof mana" (1935, vol. 2:68).
Vol. 23 * No. 1 * February1982
Winkelman:
MAGIC, A REASSESSMENT
was "believedby the nativesto cause all such effects as tran-
scendtheirconceptionof theregularcourseofnature"(p. 191).
Accordingto Mauss, mana "is a spiritualforcein so faras it
does not workmechanicallyand can produceits effectsfroma
distance" (p. 110); "it is spreadthroughout the tangibleworld
... and [is]everimmanent"(p. 111); "mana is also a milieu,or
moreexactlyfunctions as a milieu"(p. 112). Radin (1957) cites
a Maori religiousthinker'sdescriptionoftheimpersonalaspect
of mana as the sourceof all thingsthat possessform,growth,
life,and strength. Handy (1927) suggestedthatmana underlies
both physicaland supernaturalorders.Handy (1927), Radin
(1957), and James(1961 [1938])have suggesteddichotomiesof
themanaconceptthatattemptto capturea mysticalimpersonal
naturalforceor vital essenceas opposedto a magicalpersonal
spiritor soul essence,eitherofwhich,however,maybe used by
humansand acquirepersonalor impersonalqualities.
Parapsychologists generallyconsiderpsi nonphysicaland in-
explicablewithinthe currently knownlaws ofphysicalscience
or theirextension(Broad 1962,Braude 1980). Palmer's (1978)
reviewofthebasicexperimental findingsinparapsychology and
recentresearchby physicists(Puthoff,Targ, and May 1980)
suggestthatneithertimenordistanceinhibitspsi performance
independentof the expectationsof the participants.'Rao
(1978:283) argues that theoriesofpsi,both physicaland non-
physical,"findit necessaryto postulatean agencythat is en-
dowedwiththe abilityto make directcontactwiththe target
transcendingthe inhibitoryeffectsof space and time, or a
mediumthatmakesthe necessarylink ofcontact."Rao (1979)
speculatesthat psi is a fundamentalprocessin nature,both
involvedin naturalprocessesand mediatedby theintentionality
ofnature'sconstituents (e.g.,humans).
The conceptsofmana and psi are farfrombeinghighlycon-
gruent.Psi lacks spirit,god,and personalizedconceptions;it is
characterized almostexclusively as an impersonalforce,akin to
electromagnetic energy.Nonetheless,thetwoconceptsdo share
a numberof characteristics. Both are used to referto a non-
physicalpoweroperatingoutsideoftheknownphysicallaws or
normalcoursesof nature and outside of normal space-time
constraints.Both are at once means of action and milieuxas
wellas fundamental processesin nature.Rao's viewofpsi as a
basic naturalprocessmirrors the conceptionof mana as botha
paranormalpower and the basis of the physical order. Rao
(1979) and Radin (1957) offerconceptualizationsof psi and
mana, respectively,which exhibitcomplex congruences,in-
cludingidenticalmetaphors,thatdo notappear to be merelya
consequenceofapproachingunknowndomains.
Magic and psychokinesis. Malinowski(1954 [1927]:139-40)
describesmagicas a techniqueused to influencedomainsthat
are incalculable,unknown, uncertain,or unaccountableand not
used wherethereis certainty,whereskill or knowledgewill
suffice,orto replacelabor.Mauss (1972 [1950]:61)characterizes
magicalacts as placingobjectsor beings"in a stateso thatcer-
tainmovements, accidents,orphenomenawillinevitablyoccur"
or bringingthemout of a dangerousstate; he emphasizesthe
roleof chanceand the necessarilyindeterminate natureof the
outcome(pp. 81-82). Evans-Pritchard(1972 [1958]:476) says
that "magicis onlymade to produceeventswhichare likelyto
happen in any case." Elsewherehe reportsthat "the Azande
do not ask questionsto whichanswersare easily tested by
experience.... they only ask questions that embrace con-
tingencies"(p. 340). Thus the commoncharacterizationof
magicoffered by anthropologists seemsto be that it is used to
influence indeterminate events,not determinate ones,and that
ofspace and time,it has
5 Since psi seemsto operateindependently
been assumed to be nonphysical.However, the range and charac-
teristicsofphenomenaaffectedexperimentally throughpsychokinesis
suggest physical limitationson psi and perhaps a quasi-physical
nature (see Stanford1977).
39
 notionsof chance,contingency, and indeterminacy are central
to its nature.
One of the principalearlyfindings of PK researchwas that
systemswitha greaterdegreeof randomnessweremoreeasily
influenced (Forwald1954,Cox et al. 1966).Kennedy(1979:291)
suggeststhat "psi can operatewhenthereis . . . a situationin
whichan elementofrandomness or indeterminacy is involved."
Stanford(1977:369) pointsout that "PK can readilyinfluence
systemsina transitional orindeterminate phasebetweenstates"
and that "changesin the state of the physicalsystemmay in
somesensebe opportunities forPK influenceto occur." Braud
(1980:301) reportson a seriesofexperimental studiessupport-
ing the notionthat the labilityof a system,"the ease with
whicha systemcan changefromone state to anotherand the
amountof'freevariability'in thesystem,"is positivelyrelated
to theabilityto influence it psychokinetically.
In both parapsychologyand magic, then, the domains of
effectiveintervention are those in which chance has a wide
rangeofpossibilitiesforaffecting the outcome.
Divinationand psi-mediated information gathering. Divination
entailsacquiringinformation about eventsbeyondthat which
is available throughinferenceor ordinarysensorymeans.
Divinationis probablypresentin everyhumansociety(Wallace
1966). Wallace suggeststhatdivinationfunctions as a mechan-
ical device forchoosingamong equally preferablealternative
solutionswhenavailable information does notpermitinformed
decisionor forexecutinginoffensive groupdecisionswhenthere
is disagreement amongmembers.He also pointsout, however,
that divinationservesas a randomizingdevice and speculates
(in agreementwith Malinowski) that divinationis used "in
preciselythoseareas or on thoseoccasionsof humanendeavor
whereempiricalor scientificknowledgeis least adequate and
whereuncertainty mostprevails" (p. 173).
There appear to be two main typesof divination.One type
primarily involvesan alteredstateofconsciousness(possession,
trance,mediumship, drug[hallucinogenic] intoxication, dreams)
inwhichan individual(usuallygifted)interprets hisexperiences
in the lightof the questionbeingasked. In the othertype,an
indeterminateand random event (e.g., object arrangement
[fromthe throwingof bones or otherobjects],bone cracking
[scapulimancy],animal life or death [benge],entrailarrange-
ment,card placementand order[tarot],numberof objects in
randomlyarrangedgroups[sikidy, I Ching],orrituallyobserved
naturalevent[e.g.,animalmovement], etc.) is interpreted in a
symbolicframework to yieldinformation relevantto a problem-
atic state of affairs.The indeterminacy involvedin the out-
comes of theseeventswouldseem to make themamenableto
psychokinetic influences.PK may be the means by whichthe
interestedpartiesinduce in the divinationmediumthe struc-
ture of relationshipswhich reveals the information desired.
Experiments suggesttheconcomitant operationofESP and PK
in a goal-orientedmanner(see Stanford1977, Kennedy 1978
forreview),as wouldbe necessaryforpsi intervention in such
situations.6
Some investigation ofdivinationhas been undertakenwithin
parapsychology.Rubin and Honorton (1972) have demon-
stratedthatindividuals'abilityto choosetheI Chinghexagram
thathas been generatedforthemvariessignificantly withtheir
beliefin ESP. Stanford(1972) has founda significant interac-
tion betweensuggestibility and success at a divinationtask.
The potentialefficacy oftheproceduresunderlying randomiza-
tionofmaterialsis supportedby experimental researchon what
has been called the"psychicshuffle." Rhine,Smith,and Wood-
6 It would appear that an immenseamount of information, avail-
able only extrasensorily,would be necessary to direct PK effects
into the divinationmediumin such a way as to reveal the desired
information.However,the goal-orientednature of psi events makes
this irrelevant;ESP "guides" the PK efficientlyregardlessof task
complexity(see Stanford1977; Kennedy 1978, 1979).
40
ruff(1938) demonstratedthatindividualscould blindlyshuffle
a deck of cards and stop at points wherethe then blindly
orderedsequencematchedthat ofa randomtargetdeck. Such
researchsuggeststhathumanscan use psi to orderan indeter-
minateaspect ofnature.
DISCUSSION
This comparisonof parapsychologicalresearchfindingswith
aspects of magical belief and practice suggestssubstantial
parallelsbetweenthe two systems.Parapsychologicalresearch
is oflittleuse in determining theempiricalbasis,ifany,ofsuch
elementsof magicalsystemsas spirits,malevolentparanormal
effects,or paranormalinfluenceon humanbehavioror natural
systems.We may,however,be able to establish,on thebasis of
their similaritiesto principlesestablished in experimental
parapsychology, whichaspectsofmagicalpracticesmayinvolve
psi.
The anthropological tendencyto combinemagicaland reli-
giousphenomena(see, e.g., Norbeck1961) has led to the inte-
grationof a numberof magico-religious beliefsand practices
whichresembleeach otherstructurally but not functionallyor
ontologically. To establishwhichaspects of magicmay poten-
tially involve psi, it will be necessaryto distinguishthese
phenomena. Malinowski (1954 [1927]:81; 1972 [1931]:69)
distinguishesbetween (1) the spontaneousemotionalforms,
overflowing withpassion and desire,whichformthe basis of
magic and (2) the institutionalized traditionalmythological
formsembodyingsocial valuesand customsintowhichsystems
ofmagicdevelop.Norbeck(1961:47) emphasizesthesame dis-
tinction,pointingout that"the foundations ofmagicalpractice
are ... due to experiencesactuallylivedthrough.... thesefor-
mulasbecomestrippedof the emotionwhichsurroundedthem
at theirbirthand are transformed into the prosaicand essen-
tially emotionlessacts which characterizemost of magic."
Parapsychologicalfieldstudiesand experimental researchsug-
gest that it is the spontaneousemotionalformsof magic that
are psi-related.The parapsychologicaltraditionin surveyre-
search(see Rogo 1975forreview)has implicatedemotionalties
as a key to understanding the structureof spontaneouspara-
normalevents.Spontaneousparanormalexperiencesgenerally
occurduringdreams,in responseto strongemotionalexperienc-
es of others,particularly accidentor death,and betweenmem-
bersofthesame familyor closefriends.Parapsychological field
studies of recurrentspontaneouspsychokinesis(commonly
referredto as poltergeistphenomena)suggestthat a strong
psychodynamicof repressionunderliessuch phenomenaand
that the focal individual(assumed to be responsiblefor the
phenomena)invariablyhas strongphysicalor emotionaldys-
functions(Roll 1972,1978). Parapsychologicalresearchwithin
the psychiatrictraditionalso implicatesemotionaltensionas
central to psi; Ullman (1977) points out that as people near
psychoticbreaks or crises they manifestmuch strongerpsi
eventsin the courseof therapy.Experiments(e.g., Dean and
Nash 1967 and othersreviewedby Palmer 1978) suggestthat
the functioning of psi is closelyrelated to emotionalfactors
relevantto the individual'spsychodynamics.
Malinowski suggeststhat magic arises fromspontaneous
ideas and reactions (1954 [1927]:78-79) when the rational
processesand knownmeans of resolvingproblemshave been
exhausted;this implicatesunconscious(or primary)thought
processesas basic to magic.Experimental researchsuggeststhat
psi processesare closelyrelatedto primarythoughtprocesses.
Accordingto Rhine (1977), psi processesare among the least
consciousof all mental processes.Research has consistently
suggestedthatpsi information mainlyinvolvesprimary process-
ing capacities,revealinginformation suchas shape,form,and
color, as opposed to secondaryprocessesinvolvinganalytical
concepts,functions, and names (Targ and Puthoff1977,Put-
CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY
 hoff,Targ, and May 1980). My own research(1979, 1981;
Winkelman and Kawanami-Allen n.d.) and research on
alteredstates of consciousnessin generalsuggestthat higher-
order analytical processes inhibit extrasensoryawareness.
Stanford's(1973, 1974)and Kreitlerand Kreitler's(1972, 1973)
researchhas suggestedthatpsi processesintegrateinformation
intobehaviorwithoutconsciousawareness.
The congruenceof thesecharacteristics of experimental and
spontaneouspsi with Malinowski's characterizationof the
ontologicalbasis ofmagicsuggeststhatthisaspectinvolvespsi.
In contrast,the institutionalized mythologicalformsdo not
have any readilyidentifiablecorrespondences to psi processes.
This wouldsuggestthatwe can considernonparanormal magi-
cal practicesthat embodyclear social or organizedreligious
elements,ritualsthat serve to reinforcethe social hierarchy
(Skorupski1976) such as interactionceremonies,commemora-
tiveacts,or operativeceremoniesthatinitiatenewsocial status
or obligations,and sacramentalor otheracts involvingnon-
observablechangesof state such as baptism,consecration, and
ritualcleansings.7
Norbeck(1961) subdividesmagico-religious phenomenathree
ways,in termsof a personified supernaturalpower,an imper-
sonal power (mana) manipulatedby humans,and "a concep-
tion of supernaturalefficacyor power inherentin certain
mechanicalcause-and-effect sequences" (p. 49). He suggests
thatthesemechanicalproceduresbear no directrelationto the
emotionsor otheraspects of humans.Pointingout that some
magicalformulasare characterizedby meticulousperformance
ofcertainstepsleadingto a guaranteedresult,he suggeststhat
althoughthesemechanicalcause-and-effect sequencesare con-
struedas supernaturalmeans of accomplishinghighlyspecific
ends theyhave no readilyobservableconnectionwithconcep-
tionsof the supernaturalas a personified or impersonalpower;
rather,theyhave much in commonwiththe cause-and-effect
sequencesassociatedwithnaturalismand scienceand withthe
ideas whichflowfromthe basic mentalprocesses.The finding
that psychokinesis morelikelyaffectsrandom,indeterminate,
variable,and labile systemssuggeststhatalthoughthesekinds
ofeventsare similarto and wellintegratedwithotherkindsof
magical phenomenathey probably tend not to involve psi
effects.(However,some magic so characterizedmay facilitate
psi effectsthroughvisualizationor throughplacebo effects.)
Titiev (1972) distinguished
betweencalendricaland critical
rites.Calendricalritesare thosewhichtake place recurrently
and are tied to natural cycles,particulardates, and socially
definedoccasions; they"are designedprimarilyto strengthen
the bondsof cohesionthat hold togetherall of societies'mem-
bers" (p. 433). These appear to correspondto Malinowski's
traditional,standardizedformsof magic and probablydo not
involvepsi. Criticalritesare those celebratedintermittently
and generallyonlywhena personalcrisishas occurred.These
servicestend to be renderedby seers,diviners,fortune-tellers,
shamans,and medicinemen; theyneed not be performedby
sociallysanctionedpriests.These appear morelikelyto involve
psi.
Wallace (1966) suggeststhat fivecategoriesof transforma-
tion of state partitionthe aims of ritual:technology,therapy
and antitherapy,social control,salvation,and revitalization.
As a firstapproximation,the latter threecategoriesmay be
considered,because oftheirsocial functions, not to involvepsi.
Technologicalrituals,accordingto Wallace, can be sub-
dividedinto threemain kinds:divination,designedto extract
fromnatureinformation vital to importantconcerns;hunting
and agriculturalritesof intensification;
and protectiverituals,
intendedto preventor avoid illnessor death.Protectiverituals
7 Ritual cleansingsmight,however,induce altered states of con-
sciousnesswhichcould facilitateparanormaloccurrences.
Vol. 23 * No. 1 * February1982
Winketman:
MAGIC, A REASSESSMENT
maybe excludedfromthecategoryofpsi-relatedmagicbecause
of the lack of directlyobservableconsequences.Divination
procedures,thoughtheytend to acquire sociallystandardized
forms,wouldbe includedin psi-relatedmagicbecause of their
involvementwithemotionalconcernsand personalcrises.
Rites ofintensificationmobilize,focus,and intensify natural
processesrelevantto successin hunting, herding, oragriculture.
Some of theseritesexhibitcharacteristics that would classify
themwiththestandard,traditionalformsofmagic(e.g., calen-
drical rites,cause-and-effect sequences,social as opposed to
individualfunctions),whileothersexhibitfeaturesthat would
classifythemwiththe ontologically priorformsof magic (e.g.,
referenceto basic emotionaland physiologicalneeds [food],
techniquesforinfluencing indeterminate statesofaffairs,crises).
It remainsto be seen if controlscan be applied to determine
whetheror notritesofintensification involvepsi.
Therapeuticand antitherapeutic rituals,pertaininglargelyto
thecureand cause ofillness,respectively, undoubtedlyinvolve
basic emotionalstates and relate to the ontologicalformsof
magic.Althoughtheseritualsmayalso involvechangingsocial
relationshipsand communityparticipationand support,they
seem basicallypsi-related.Wallace has observedthat healers
(shamans)findminimalbenefitin standardritualsand instead
dependon dramaticand radical experiencesin additionto the
use ofherbs,physicaltreatment, and psychodynamic manipula-
tions.Althoughwe shouldbe cautiousaboutseeingpsi processes
in curingbecause of the wide range of psychophysiological
mechanismswhichcan cause healingor death (e.g.,see Cannon
1942,Lester1972,Lex 1974,Halifax-Grof 1974,Goodman1974,
Long 1977c),'researchsuggeststhatpsi effectsmay be present
in manycuringrituals,sincehumanpsychokinetic influencecan
operateon a widerangeofbiologicalsystems(Grad 1963,1964,
1977; Barry 1968; Watkins and Watkins 1971; Wells and
Klein 1972;Tedderand Monty 1981).
Whilethedistinctions just reviewedcan indicatea likelihood
thatcertainmagicalpracticeswillinvolvepsi effects, individual
criteriacannot always unambiguouslysuggest the potential
forpsi. For instance,althoughsocial elementsare centralto
the standardtraditionalformsof magic,thepresenceof social
elementscannot be the criterionfor eliminatinga magical
practice fromthe categoryof psi-relatedmagic. Divination
about social eventswould includeprominentsocial elements,
suggestinga non-psiprocess,but psi processescould still be
involvedthroughrandomization techniquesor alteredstatesof
consciousness.Furthermore, some aspects of magicalpractice,
although apparentlynon-psi-related, may create a context
whichfacilitatespsi effects.For example,someinstitutionalized
ritualsundoubtedlyhelp to focusattentionor fosterparticular
cognitiveprocessesthat facilitatepsi effects.Thus, to deter-
minewhethera givenmagicalactivitymay involvepsi it will
be best to apply severalcriteriasimultaneously. For example,
a commemorative rite involvingmechanicalcause-and-effect
proceduresmostlikelywouldnotinvolvepsi, whereasa healing
ceremonyinvolvingalteredstates of consciousnessand strong
emotionmay involvepsi even thoughit is performedon a
specifiedday and involvessocial elementsand mythological
references.
Table 1 providesa weak-ordered featureanalysis that may
distinguish magiclikelyto involvepsi fromthe restof magic.
These descriptorsare not exclusiveattributesof eithercate-
gory,but theyappear to be primarilydescriptiveofone or the
other.Althoughthesedistinctions are not based upon magical
practitioners'differentiationof magicalphenomenaand do not
address all of the basic assumptionsmade by those practi-
tioners,theymaybe usefulin suggesting whichareas ofmagical
practiceto examineforpsi effects.
41
 TABLE 1 sion was actually fromthe otherdirection,that is, fromthe
CHARACTERISTICS OF PSI-RELATED AND NON-PSI-RELATED MAGIC
knownbasis in humanexperiencewithpsi to theunknowncos-
mologicaldomain.Dwyes's (1979) worksuggeststhat the less
PSI-RELATED MAGIC NON-PSI-RELATED MAGIC familiarcosmologicaldomainwouldnot be used to explainthe
morefamiliarone ofpersonalpsi experience.
Individual performance Groupperformance
Optional acts Mandatory acts and taboos
Frazer (1929 [1911]) and Malinowski(1954 [1927]) offered
Activityorientedto individual Activityorientedto group universalpsychologicalmechanismsas an explanationof the
needs needs universalstructureof magic,arguingthat thepracticalrituals
Powers commanded Powers supplicated (Frazer) orthespontaneousbasis (Malinowski)ofmagicexhibit
Powersacquired throughinspira- Powers acquired throughsocial universalstructures becauseofuniversalmentalconstructs and
tion,ordeal,and personal ritesand recognitionor as a processes.Accordingto Frazer (p. 49), magic arose fromthe
experience gift "misapplicationof one or the other of two great laws of
All membersof societyeligibleto Power inheritedor restrictedto thought,"the associationof ideas by similarityand by con-
develop power a particularsocial class
tiguityin space or time,providingthebasisforsympathetic and
Secret and esoteric Public
Critical Calendrical contagiousmagicrespectively. The uniformity of the structure
Randomizingprocedures Cause-and-effect sequence of human mindsis assumed to resultin similarresponsesto
Indeterminateoutcome Highlydeterminateoutcome innateor elementary ideas in all peoples.This notion,however,
Emotional Rational explainsonly a fewof the universalcharacteristics of magic.
Contrastingwithintellectualist theoriesare what Skorupski
(1976) calls symbolistapproaches. These diverse and occa-
sionallycontradictory perspectives, linkedto Durkheimand the
THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES functionalist school,sharea viewofmagicas a symbolicsystem
whichdescribesthepatternof social relationsin the societyin
An adequate theoryofmagicmustexplaintheroleofpsi in the whichit exists.Magical ritualand beliefare seen as operating
developmentof magic and the reasonsforand the processof togetherin themaintenanceofthesocialorder,ritualrepresent-
generalizationof the basic structuresof magic into its social ingan invariantsubstratum ofthesocialorderand beliefsbeing
forms.It shouldaccountforMauss's observationsthatmagicis no more than rationalizationsof this substratum.Skorupski
poorlyorganized,lacks an institutionalized structure,and is suggeststhat a fundamentalassumptionof symbolisttheories
characterizedby commonformsbut withhighlyvariablecon- is thatwhatlies at theheartofmagicis beliefin thecontrolling
tent.It shouldalso addressthe characteristics of magicidenti- power of metaphor,the capacity of symbolicenactmentto
fiedby othertheorybuilders. bringabout the event desired.Swanson (1960) uses societies
Malinowski (1954 [1927]:70-78) suggestedthat magic is selectedfromtheWorldEthnographicSample to testwhether
universallycharacterizedby dramaticemotionalexpression, socialvariablespredictthepresenceofmonotheism, polytheism,
imitationand enactmentof desired ends, the conferralof and beliefsin ancestralspirits,reincarnation, theimmanenceof
powers on material objects, the use of formulasor spells, the soul, the prevalenceof witchcraft, and morallyconcerned
phoneticsymbolism, evocationof statesby words,and myth- gods,and his studyis generallystatistically successful.Similar-
ologicalelements.He held that magicarises out of emotional ly, Bourguignon(1979) shows that tranceand possessionare
tensionand thespontaneousflowofideas and has had numerous significantly associatedwithsimplerand morecomplexsocieties
independentorigins.It is used, he argued,in connectionwith respectively.However,symbolistapproachescannot account
thingsthat are of vital interestto humansbut elude normal foruniversalmagical practicesand beliefsbecause universals
technologicaland rationalefforts. Its efficacydependson un- cannotbe explainedas functions ofhighlyheterogeneous social
modifiedtransmission fromgenerationto generation. variables.8These approachesexplaindifferences in thedistribu-
Magic everywhere appearsto utilizea conceptofenergysuch tionof typesofphenomenarelatedto magicat the level of its
as mana to realize its ends. Souls and/orspiritsplay an im- social ritualforms,notits ontologicalbasis.
portantrolein magicalactivitiesand effects. The beliefthatan Existinganthropological theoriesofmagicseemto be address-
object that has been in contactwitha personcontainssome- ing, fromdifferent perspectives, one mainpoint: thepervasive
thingof thatpersonthat can be used to cause negativeeffects presenceofcertaincommonprinciplesofmagicthroughout the
(exuvialmagic) also has a worldwidedistribution. Also widely cosmologyand social order.The differences betweenintellec-
distributed are beliefsin an associationbetweenanimalspirits tualistand symbolist perspectives suggestthatwe mustexplain
and sorcerers'powers,the possibilityof using supernatural how the processesat the psychologicallevel are relatedto the
powers malevolently,divination,telepathic communication, integration of magicalprinciplesat thesocial and cosmological
and out-of-body experiences,as well as such features,men- levels.The workofanthropologists and otherswhohave focused
tionedearlier,as the use of goal-oriented imageryand altered upon the role of metaphorin culture(Black 1962, Fernandez
statesofconsciousness. Althoughnotall ofthesefactorspertain 1974,Sapir and Crocker1977,Dwyer 1979)providesus witha
to psi-relatedmagic, an adequate theoryshould be able to basis forunderstanding how magic, with its originin spon-
addresstheirdevelopment. taneousemotionalexperience, was generalizedto and integrated
Tylor (1948 [1871])and Frazer (1929 [1911])suggestedthat intosocial and metaphysicaldomains.
magicalbeliefsarose out of a need to understandand control Fernandezsuggeststhat the sign images that link domains
the environment and are supportedentirelyby trickery, self- may come eitherfromthe primaryexperienceof corporeallife
deception,and blocksto falsifiability. One difficulty withthis
perspective,referredto by Skorupski(1976) as the intellec-
8 They may, however,stillbe relatedto universalsocial processes,
tualisttradition,is that it suggestswe assume that magic is
derivedfromcosmology,a domainthat is highlyvariableand as Swanson suggests.He hypothesizesthat mana is the product of
primordiallinks and that spiritsare the externalizationof constitu-
stronglyinfluencedby social factorsand therefore unable to tional structures.One applicationof thesehypothesesto the notions
account forthe universalstructureof magic. A furtherdiffi- developedhereis thatthesocializationofthemindthroughtheeffects
culty is with the assumptionthat the universalstructureof of the primordiallinksand the constitutionalstructuresmay collec-
magic,derivedfromcosmology, was extendedintotheexperien- actiontivelychannelpsi processesunconsciouslyin certainways. The inter-
of social processesand psi may projectpsi abilitiesin such a
tial domainto explainpsi-relatedexperience.The similarity of way as to createtheperceptionofindependententitiesor phenomena,
theprinciplesofpsi and thoseofmagicsuggeststhattheexten- such as spiritsor archetypes.

42 CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY
 or fromthe externalstructuralworld,primarilythe societyof
others.Magic, in arisingin spontaneousemotionalexperience,
wouldhave involvedprimarythoughtprocesses,notelaborated
verbalizations,and lacked means for explicationand social
expression.Based inprimaryexperience, it couldonlyhave been
expressedat the social level by adoptingsocial forms.The
socializationof magicwouldhave been essentiallythe process
Fernandezsuggestsin whichthereligiousmetaphorsrecastthe
inchoateand ineffable wholeofprimaryexperiencein termsof
experiencefrommore manageabledomainsinto whichsome
aspectofthatprimaryexperiencecan be extended.The intimate
relationshipwhich Fernandezpoints out exists betweenthe
principlesofsympathetic magicand theprocessesof metaphor
and similesuggeststhat such a process was involvedin the
development ofthecomplexofmagicalphenomena.(Malinow-
ski [1972(1931):64] also suggeststhat the ontologicalformsof
magicborrowedsocial elementsas a meansof explication,but
he does not developthis idea.) FollowingFernandez'sline of
thought,the metaphoricpredicationof sign imagesfromthe
social domainupon the inchoateexperiencesof magic would
have concretizedand socialized this internalexperienceand
providedit witha mediumforcommunication. Social and reli-
giousdogmaswouldhave been imposedupon it. For example,
many mysticshave commonphenomenologicalexperiences,
such as the perceptionof a dazzling white light,but their
descriptions and explanationsvary (e.g., angels,saints,spirits,
spiritualmasters,etc.).
Fernandezarguesthat the mosteffective metaphorsextend
the social intothe corporealand vice versa; not onlydoes the
predicationofmetaphorexplicatemagic,butitlinksthemagical
and social domainsand incorporatessocial experienceintothe
experientialformsof magic.This two-waymetaphoricprocess,
also noted in Sapir and Crocker(1977), involvesanalogical
modeling.An analoguemodelis an "object, systemor process
designedto reproduceas faithfully as possible in some new
mediumthe structureor web of relationships in the original"
(Black 1962:222). The aim ofanaloguemodelsis to reproduce
the structure;the identityof structureis compatiblewiththe
widestvarietyof content.Dwyer (1979) pointsout that ana-
logue modelsare used to extendculturalmeaningwhen they
conditioncomparableperceptionin fellowhumans.Magic is a
collectiverepresentation (Mauss 1972 [1950]).Hallpike (1979)
pointsout that collectivesymbolicrepresentations derivefrom
commonexperienceswhoseprivatesymbolism can therefore be
used as a basis forcommunication. The universalprinciplesof
magic,arisingoutoftheassociationalstructures ofthemindand
thepsi-relatedontologicalbasis ofmagic,providedtheanalogi-
cal modelthatwas extendedintothe social realmin the devel-
opmentofthecomplexofmagicalphenomena.
This extensionwouldhave been motivatedby an application
ofthelaws ofassociationin everydaylife.As manifested in the
principleofsympathetic magic,themodelwouldprobablyhave
received empirical support frompsi and non-psi successes
realized by the goal-orientedguidance of thoughtprocesses.
These successeswould have supportedthe applicationof the
laws ofassociationin otherdomains,sinceexperienceswiththe
efficacyof these principleswould have been widespreadand
wouldhave evokedcomparableempatheticresponses.All sys-
temsofknowledge, scienceincluded(Leatherdale1974),expand
by theextensionofmetaphorsand analoguemodelsfromknown
to unknowndomains.Examinationof traditionalcultureand
magical beliefsand practices suggeststhat healing was an
importantarea of application of the analogue model. For
example,Frazer (1929 [1911]:15-16)recountsa cure forjaun-
dice (characterizedby yellow skin) in which the person is
rituallycuredby symbolicallytransferring the yellowcolorto
yellow creatures and things throughapplication of thesympa-
laws of
association,
similarity,
and contagion.Healing through
theticmagic undoubtedlyencounteredsome success through
Vol. 23 * No. 1 * February1982
Winkelman: MAGIC, A REASSESSMENT
psychosomaticand placebo responsessupportedby belief,as
Levi-Strauss's(1963b) account of a healing ceremonyillus-
trates.These ceremoniesundoubtedlyevoke responseswhich
inducephysiologicalchangesand cures,althoughnot through
thefunctioning ofpsi as we nowunderstandit.'
The integration of magicwithtraditionalmythologicalele-
ments,social processes,and ideologywould have been moti-
vatedbyseveralfactorsinadditionto thecontiguity established
by the metaphoric/analogic processes.A human tendencyto
orderwithcommon
integrateall aspects of the social/cultural
themeshas been noted by Bateson (1958), Radcliffe-Brown
(1965), Griaule (1965), and Levi-Strauss(1963c). The pres-
ence of cause-and-effect-type sequencesinvolvingsympathetic
magic in.cosmologicalbeliefsmay be the resultof the use
of modelsprovidedby basic experiencewithassociationaland
psi processesto explicatedomainsof whichhumans had no
knowledgeand overwhichtheyexercisedno control.The inte-
grationof the structuresof the ontologicallyprior formsof
magicintothesocial domainwouldhave providedlegitimation
forsocial structure, as Malinowskiand the anthropologists of
the symbolisttraditionpointout. Since theprinciplesof magic
receivedempiricalsupportfromthemorebasic areas ofhuman
experience, theirintegrationintothesocialorderwouldsupport
social institutionsby integratingthe structureof primordial
experiencewithcosmologicalbeliefsand social experience.The
perspectivetaken here suggeststhat the (symbolist)observa-
tions and theoreticalgeneralizationsmade about magic as a
social ritual are generallycorrectforthat aspect of magical
beliefand are concernedwithexplicatingtheintegration of the
analoguemodelsprovidedby theontologicalbase ofmagicinto
social institutions.The problemwiththese theoriesis a mis-
taken ontologywhichassumesthat magical beliefsarose out
ofa needto expresssymbolically thepatternofsocial relations.
The processesof metaphoricalpredicationand analogical
modelingdo not account forall of the actual elements,prac-
tices,and beliefsassociatedwithmagic;however,theydo inte-
gratethemainconcernsofearlieranthropological approachesto
magic and explain how basic psychologicalstructuresand
processesparticipatedin the integrationof the principlesof
magicintootherdomains.The notionofmetaphorical processes
based in a psychologicalmodelwhichincludespsi aspects ac-
counts for Mauss's principalobservationson magic and for
mostof Malinowski's.Apparentlyanomalousmagicaluniver-
sals such as beliefin thepowerof wordsand spellsmay be re-
versalsfromthesocial ritualdomain,wherebeliefin thepower
ofwordsmayderivefromsocialauthority.However,theuse of
mantrasamong the yoga traditionssuggeststhat we should
empiricallyinvestigate theeffect. theprincipleofcon-
Similarly,
tagionshouldreceivefurther since some research
investigation,
suggestsa psi basisforitsreportedeffects(Emerson1977,1979;
Jones1979;Rogo 1975).
The explicationof thedifferent aspectsofsocial ritualmagic
and theirrelationshipto the ontologicalformsis still insuffi-
cient,and theelementsofmagicalbeliefand theprinciplesdis-
coveredin parapsychological researchhave been insufficiently
exploredto suggestexactlywhichaspects of magical practice
involvepsi. Beforewe can postulateuniversalpsychologicalor
social structuresas the basis forany magicalbeliefs,we must
9 As I have suggested,one of the problemsin establishingpsi-
related healing is the eliminationof the possibilityof physiological
changesas a resultofpsychosomaticor placebo effects.The relation-
shipbetweenthepsychosomaticand psi is insufficiently explored.The
Cartesian dualism upon which the definitionof "psychosomatic"is
based assumes that the mindis restrictedto and dependentupon its
body. In underminingthese assumptions,parapsychologyrequiresa
reconciliationwith the psychosomaticdomainwhichmay eventuallv
largelyeliminatethe differences betweenthe two.
experimentally investigatethephenomenain questionto deter-
minewhetheror notpsi or relatedphenomenamayprovidean
empiricalbasis forsuchbeliefs.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The correspondences betweenparapsychological researchfind-
ings and anthropologicalreportsof magical phenomenare-
viewedheresuggestthatmagicis associatedwithan orderofthe
universewhich,althoughinvestigatedempiricallywithinpara-
psychology,is outside of the understandingof the Western
scientificframework. The congruences betweensomeaspectsof
magic and parapsychology, combinedwiththe considerations
discussedabove on the role of metaphoricprocessesin the
developmentof the magico-religious complex,have been used
here to organizea theoreticalperspectiveon the nature of
magicalphenomena.
An integrationof anthropologicalobservationson magical
phenomenawith the findingsand theoreticalperspectivesof
experimentalparapsychologysuggeststhat the complex of
magicalphenomenahad its originsin innateuniversalhuman
potentialscloselyassociatedwithpsi abilities.Malinowskisug-
gestedthat magic is based in laws of associationinherentin
humancognitiveprocessesand exemplified in thelaws of simi-
larity.The close structuralrelationshipof theseprinciplesto
thegoal-oriented principlesofpsi establishedin parapsychology
suggeststhat the basis forthe developmentof magic was not
merelya (mis)applicationof basic laws of thought,but an
applicationand extensionofpsi-relatedprinciples.The charac-
teristicsofpsi phenomenaalso supportMalinowski'ssuggestion
thatmagicaroseout ofspontaneousemotionalexperiencesand
tensions.The modeloffered hereis basicallyan extensionofthe
previous psychologicalmodel which includes psi abilities-
humancapacities,stilllittleunderstood, foraffecting theworld
in a mannerwhichis beyondour currentunderstanding of the
laws ofnature.
Parapsychologicalresearchfindingsthat altered states of
consciousness, belief,goal-oriented
visualization,positiveexpec-
tation,and emotionalfactorsare psi-conducivesuggestthat
magicalritualwas initiallydevelopedto elicitthe experiences
and to createtheemotionalstates,statesofconsciousness, foci
of attention,cognitiveprocessing,and expectationand belief
that facilitatedor werebelievedto facilitatepsi influences on
humanaffairs.Magic adoptssocial formsthroughmetaphorical
predicationand analogicalmodeling.This involvesthe exten-
sion of the structure(form)of the ontologicalbasis of magic,
providingthe basis forthe integrationof a varietyof struc-
turallyisomorphicbut functionally different phenomena.The
integrationof magicalprinciplesinto otheraspects of culture
was motivatedby theperceptionoftheireffectiveness in para-
normal and other psychological,psychosomatic,and social
domainsand the desireto use themto bringcontroland cer-
taintyto cosmologicaldomainsand by the need to legitimate
social relationsby integrating social experiencewithprinciples
basic to emotionalexperience.
The phenomenalabeledmagicmaybe seenas fulfilling differ-
ent functionswithseparate ontologieswhichhave interacted
and degeneratedto theirpresentstructurally similarforms.At
the basis is psi-relatedmagic-techniques used to directpsi
influencesinto human affairs.The otherprimaryaspects of
magicare the social ritualand the metaphysicalor cosmologi-
cal, theconcernsofthesymbolist and intellectualisttheoretical
traditions respectively.Metaphysicalmagicalbeliefscorrespond
to Frazer'scategoryoftheoreticalmagic,ruleswhichdetermine
thesequenceofeventsthroughout theworld.Theyare based on
an extensionofthe analoguemodelprovidedby the structures
of universalhumanthoughtprocesses(association,contagion,
and similarity)and psi-relatedprinciplesthatformthebasis of
magic.This modelwas extendedto unknowndomainsofhuman
concernin an attemptto extendthe possibilityof controland
understanding providedby theseprocessesto domainsin which
humanscouldexerciseno controland had littleunderstanding.
Social-ritualmagicalbeliefsand practicesare inpartan attempt
to legitimatethestructure ofsocial relationships
by integrating
themintothemodelprovidedbymagicinprimordial experience
and throughthe manipulationof symbolicprocessesand sym-
bols basic to consciousness.The integrationof the analogue
model providedby the ontologicalformsof magic into the
metaphysicaldomainand socialrelationswas motivatedby the
human tendencyto integratecommon themes throughall
aspectsof culture.Most oftheobservationsmade about magic
by anthropologists associated with the perspectivesbroadly
labeled symbolistrepresentthe productof the integrationof
magicalprinciplesand beliefsintosocial structures and beliefs
and constitutewhat I have labeled social ritual magic. The
primarylimitationof the symbolistsis in assumingthat the
need forsocial symbolicexpressionprovidesthe basis of magic
and that social ritualmagic constitutesthe extentof magical
practiceand concern.
If magicalpracticesand beliefsseemlargelynon-psi-related
today,it maybe because ofa declinein theeffectiveness ofpsi-
relatedpracticesas a resultofthedisruptionofthesocial insti-
tutionsthatoncetrainedpractitioners to manipulatepsi poten-
tials. Rituals wouldhave continuedto be performed in an at-
temptto affectpersonaland naturalprocessespotentially under
theinfluence ofmagic,butlack ofskilland changein thesocial,
psychological,and physical environmentwould had led to
failureand the degenerationof the psi-relatedformsof magic
toward the social ritual and metaphysicalformswith which
theysharedstructureand commonelements.Our culturaldis-
beliefin thepsi-relatedaspectsofmagiccreatedan inabilityto
differentiate functionally differentformsof magicwitha com-
monstructure.
Currentanthropological theoriesof magicare inadequateto
explainanthropological accountsofmagicand relatedphenom-
ena; perspectivesneed to be developedwhichincorporatethe
basic principlesacceptedby thosewho believein and practice
magic. The correspondences of magical beliefsand practices
withexperimental findings and theoreticalperspectivesin para-
psychologysuggestthat some aspects of magic are relatedto
psi, amongthemalteredstates of consciousness, goal-oriented
visualizationstrategies,divinationprocedures,and influences
upon indeterminatesystems in transitionalstates. These
characteristicshave been used here as criteriain reviewing
previousanthropological discussionsof magicto showthat the
differentiations tend to separate magical practices that are
probablypsi-relatedfromthosethat are probablynot. Earlier
anthropological theoriesofmagichave been briefly reviewedto
illustratethe basic phenomenawithwhichan adequate theory
of magicmustdeal. The processesof metaphoricalpredication
and analogicalmodelinghave been suggestedas underlying the
developmentof an integratedcomplex of magico-religious
phenomena.A theoretical perspectiveon magic,based uponthe
psi-relatedprinciplesof magic (as revealedthroughthe corre-
spondencesof magic and parapsychologicalresearch)and the
processesof metaphoricmovementand the universallaws of
human thought,has been outlined. Furtherprogressin the
explanationof magical beliefsand practiceswill requirethat
anthropologists closelyexaminetheaspectsofmagicalsystems
which may involvepsi. The destructionof traditionalsocial
systemswiththe worldwideadvance of industrialsocietyhas
destroyedmanymagicalsystems,but numerouspracticessur-
vive and requireinvestigation to determinetheirpossibleem-
pirical and experientialbases. As an adjunct to traditional
ethnographic method,thisworkshouldutilizescientific meth-
odologyand experimental controls.
CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY

Comments
by AGEHANANDA BHARATI
Departmentof Anthropology, SyracuseUniversity, Syracuse,
N.Y. 13210, U.S.A. 29 vi 81
Winkelman'svaliantefforts are vitiatedby whatI will call the
miseen scene-the desirethatmagicalacts,empiricalbases of
magicalacts, etc.,shouldbe true.WhatevereruditionWinkel-
man and, prototypically, Mircea Eliade possess tends to be-
come ancillaryto that wish. Many anthropologists
working
withthe religiousand magicalspherehave,Winkelman'sclaim
notwithstanding, accepted magical phenomena"as reported";
what theydeny is the causal concatenationthe practitioners
and their clientelebelieve to be at the base of these acts.
Whena pilgrimat Kataragamahas his cheeksand tonguepen-
etratedby a metal skewer,when he swingsfroma scaffold
suspendedby hooks dug into his flesh,and whenhe firewalks,
withoutpain or bleeding,the reasons he and otherpilgrims
give-that he has taken a vow, that he has eschewedmeat,
fish,and sex,and thatLord Kataragamahas blessedhim-are
good for the anthropologist
to thinkand note, but very bad
to accept. If emic statementsare to be eticallytrue as well,
theymustbe subjectedto the whole line of Popperianstric-
tures.Thus, whenI saw a yogi walk on water I would have
listeda numberof possible causes forthe eventincludingmy
fatigueand excitement, but not his claimthata particulargod-
dess had givenhimsiddhi (magical power).
In the volumeWinkelmanquotes and relies on in extenso,
I have statedmyreasonsforexcludingparapsychology and psi
stantepede fromanthropological research,especiallyon reli-
gious performance (Bharati 1977). Winkelman'sdoctrinethat
magichas an ontologicalbase and thatthisbase is psi-related
is a prop of the mise en scene. Rhine's card-packand other
ratherboring,rathertrivialperformances supposedlygenerated
by a psi factorbelongto one set of events; magicalacts, as
Winkelmanwould no doubt admit,belong to another,since
magicalacts are intendedforan audience,whetheror not that
intentionis admittedby the practitioner.That audienceis not
the believerin psi, but the culturalgroupthat generatesand
witnessesmagicalacts. I thereforedo not believe thatan an-
thropologist can observemagicalacts in the mannerin which
he observesbifurcatecollateralkinshipor even ritualperfor-
mances with no emic magical connotations, unless of course
theanthropologist also happensto be partof the societytrans-
actingthe magicalacts and not alienatedfromit by his train-
ing,vocation,etc.
What are "magical universals"?And grantedthat a list
could be produced,why make any ontologicalclaims for its
members?Winkelmanseemsto thinkthatcross-cultural occur-
rencesof magicalacts musthave an ontologicalbase because
theyoccur cross-culturally.This is a non sequitur.Cross-cul-
turallypresenttemplatesmay or may not have an ontological
base. The questionis not whetheror not theydo, but whether
an ontologicalbase is requiredat all. I do not like phenom-
enology,but I thinkHusserlwas rightwhenhe said you have
to "bracketout" (ausklammern)existencefromany reportof
phenomena.Since long beforehim,the Buddhistshave done
very well indeed, philosophicallyand intellectually, without
any ontologicalclaims.
by ERIKA BOURGUIGNON
Departmentof Anthropology, Ohio State University,
124 W.
17thAve., Columbus,Ohio 43210, U.S.A. 22 vii 81
Giventhe currentwide appeal of parapsychology and the pub-
lic discussionsurroundingit, Winkelman'spaper providesa
welcomeopportunity foran exchangeof viewsamonganthro-
pologistson thistopic.
Vol. 23 * No. 1 * February1982
Winkelman: MAGIC,
A REASSESSMENT
1. Winkelmanargues that "anthropologicaltheoriesabout
the techniquesbroadlylabeled magic . . . have been distorted
by lack of awarenessand/oracceptanceof the basic assump-
tionsof magicalbelief" (italics added). If one wereto accept
the basic assumptionsof magicalbeliefa priori,littlefurther
explanationof the beliefswouldbe required;theywould sim-
ply be seen as appropriatestatementsabout the natureof the
world.With regardto whathe terms"psi-related"magic this
is, in effect,whatWinkelmanis askingus to do, at least pro-
visionally.He himselfnotes that the evidenceto demonstrate
"whetheror not psi-relatedphenomenamay providean em-
piricalbasis forsuch belief"is not now available.
2. Winkelmanspeaks of "the universalprinciplesof magic,
arisingout of the associationalstructuresof the mind,"and
"theapplicationof thelaws of association."This is reminiscent
of Frazer's theoriesof magic,whichincorporatedan associ-
ationistpsychologythat is now outdated.
3. We may ask to what extentthe "universalprinciplesof
magic"presentedby Frazermaynotbe theproductof his com-
parativemethodand of the traditionhe establishedforgenera-
tionsof textbookwriters.Individualethnographies do notshow
us the operationof a fullpanoplyof the "principlesof magic"
in individualcultures.Indeed,as Honigmannhas remindedus
(1976:219), Radin longago pointedout thatthe roleof magic
in "primitive" societieshas beenexaggeratedbyanthropologists.
4. Winkelmanclaimsthat"a centralcharacteristic of magic
practicesis the alterationof consciousness."In this context,
he appears to make "shamanicpower" and "magic" synon-
ymous,which is surelyunwarranted.The altered state that
signalsthe shaman'scall may be psychotic,drug-induced, or
the resultof a varietyof otherfactors;is thismagic?Or psi?
It is truethatritualizedalteredstatesof consciousnessare vir-
tuallyuniversalamonghumansocieties,but thisin and of itself
is not evidence for psi. Magic, to the contrary,is a highly
sober,oftenpurelymechanicalprocedure.
5. Winkelmansuggests"that some magical practicesfacil-
itate or produce empiricallyverifiableeffectsoutside of the
currently understoodcause-and-effect processesof nature."A
good many items of ritualbehaviorpresentedin the ethno-
graphicliteratureas "magical" and "irrational"have turned
out to produce "empiricallyverifiableeffects"whenthe pro-
cesses and substancesused were adequatelyinvestigated. The
clearestinstanceconcernspharmacologically activesubstances,
wherea distinction betweenthe ritualelementsand the active
principlesis not made by the traditionalhealer (e.g., the Yor-
uba priestshownin RaymondPrince'sfilm,WereNi, speaking
to the Rauwolfiatreewhilegatheringthe plantmaterials;see
satisfied
also Prince 1964). One would need to be thoroughly
thatall aspects of a givensituationhad been investigated and
fully accounted for before looking "outside the cause-and-
effectprocessesof nature."
by MARLENE DOBKINDE Rios
Departmentof Anthropology, CaliforniaState University,
Fullerton,Calif. 92634, U.S.A. 20 vii 81
Winkelmanis to be commendedforhis excellentexamination
of psi-relatedaspects of magicnot generallydiscussedin the
anthropologicalliterature.With notableexceptions,anthropol-
ogy has beggedthe questionof psi phenomenathroughout its
historyof analyzingnon-Western cultures,in whichsuch phe-
nomena have been amply recorded,generallycodifiedunder
termslike magico-religious behavior.Recently,both in publi-
cationsand in symposia,psi phenomenahave been the focus
of numerousanthropological reports(see esp. Long 1977d,nu-
merousarticlesin Phoenix,and my own extensioncourseson
45
paranormalphenomenaat the Universityof California,Berke-
ley,Los Angeles,and Irvine).
Winkelmanis correctthatmanyanthropologists are fearful
of publishingtheirdata on any psi eventstheymightwitness
or recordfromtheirinformants in the field.My graduatean-
thropological trainingdid not prepareme to code the paranor-
mal eventsthatmyAmazonianinformants continuallytoldme
about in the wake of theirayahuascadrugexperiencesduring
healingritualsor as an explanationfor the misfortunes they
sufferedbecause of theirfearsof bewitchment. Whilemy per-
sonal responseas an outsiderwas that my informants were
slightlyconfusedas a groupand had bizarreand unexplainable
experiences,I had no way to accommodatethe information I century,he makes no referencewhatsoeverto any of the nu-
was given or observedinto any taxon I carriedabout in my
head. Thus, I may have lost a valuable sourceof data about
urbanAmazonianresidents'worldview or psi experiences.By
the same token,experimental parapsychology, withits preten-
sions to scientificexpertise,is no help to the anthropologist
facingthis existentialdilemmain the field.Measurementde-
void of a theoreticalschemais quite withoutmeaning.Winkel-
man's call for a reformulation of anthropological theoriesto
includepsi deservesto be heeded.Whileit maybe outsidethe
immediatescope of his paper,he mightalso have pointedto
the literatureon theoreticalphysics and subatomic-particle
theory.As Capra has argued (Miller 1981), fundamental
changesare occurringin our view of the physicaluniverse.
The Cartesianworldview is a mechanisticone; it envisionsa
multitudeof separate objects workingtogetherlike a huge
machine.There is a strictseparationof mindand matter.This
observedmachine-likeuniverseoperatesaccordingto causal
laws; everything that happenshas a definitecause and gives
riseto a definiteeffect.The validityof theobserveras separate
fromthe worldhe is describingis a basic tenetof the scien-
tificmethod.Capra and othershave shownthat in the last
decade in physicsa totallynew paradigmhas emerged,one
whichhas importantimplicationsforanthropology in general
and psi phenomenain particular.The mainlessonof subatomic
physicsis that thereare no things,but only interconnections
betweenthings.The physicalworldis a web of relationships.
Further,the scientistis not an observer,but a participantin
what he observes.Most of the methodologyused in experi-
mentalparapsychology is of the Newtoniangenreand is mech-
anistic. New techniquesand ways to measure the observer
effectare necessaryin the social and behavioralsciences,as
well as in physics.Certainly,Castaneda's work (1968, 1971,
1972, 1974, 1977) leaves us withthisnotion(despite the con-
troversyabout the truthfulness of the materialpresented).
Anthropological topics like witchcraft, sorcery,divination,
and curing,referredto by Winkelman,have been studiedan-
thropologically withold paradigms.It is onlyby attendingto
the shiftin the natureof "reality"that we can benefitfrom
our anthropological data bank to make sense out of psi phe-
nomena.My own researchesin planthallucinogens have shown
thatmostof the world'speoplesuse LSD-like plantsfortheir
divinatory propertiesto permitthemaccess to information not
normallyaccessibleto themin ordinaryconsciousness(Dob-
kin de Rios 1976). This information may be about future
events,but in many cases it is retrocognitive knowledgeof
past eventswhichis used to make decisionsabout futureac-
tions(1978). Froma mechanistic perspective,thiskindof data
would at best be relegatedto a grocerylist of beliefsystems,
examinedforits symbolicvalue or else correlatedwithsome
other "thing"in culture.Bell's theoremin physicssuggests
thatprotonscan travelbackwardin time.Drug-relatedaltered
states of consciousnessused to divine the futureor to give
insightinto past events may not have to be viewed merely
in termsof Amazoniannatives' magical beliefs or folklore.
Rather,positiveexpectationsheld by membersof thatsociety
46
that past and futuretimeis accessibleunderpharmacological
interventionmay in fact make such informationavailable
to them.
by ALANDUNDES
Department of Anthropology,Universityof California,
Berkeley,Calif. 94720, U.S.A. 3 viii 81
Anyone who calls for a theoreticalreassessmentof magic
should have consultedpreviousscholarlydiscussionsof the
subject.AlthoughWinkelmancitesTylorand Frazer fromthe
19thcenturyand Mauss and Malinowskifromthe early 20th
merousanthropological debates over the difficultquestionof
of magic (and its inevitablyfruitlessattemptto
the definition
it fromreligion). While one mightexcuse the
differentiate
failureto considerearly surveys(Thomas 1904, Leuba 1912,
Goldenweiser1919, Clemen 1921, Evans-Pritchard1933, and
Webster1948), it seemsodd thatWinkelmanhas ignoredcon-
temporary theoreticalreassessments of magic (e.g., Wax 1963,
Clausen 1969,Hammond1970, Sarga 1974,Rosengren1976),
sinceseveraloftheseappeared
especially in CURRENT ANTHRO-
POLOGY. The parochialnatureof his knowledge is furthersug-
gested by the lack of referenceto any non-Englishlanguage
sources.From thisone mightwronglyinferthatno significant
theoreticalwork on eithermagic or parapsychology had ap-
pearedin any languageotherthanEnglish.In parapsychology,
for example,some of the most interesting researchhas been
carriedout in the Soviet Union (see Ostranderand Schroeder
1970).
Winkelmanclaimsthatanthropologists "have rarelyaccepted
magicalphenomenaas reported,"but folklorists have collected
such data, includingparapsychological materials,for decades.
Winkelmandoes quote folklorist AndrewLang fromthe 1890s,
but he seemstotallyunawareof any of the recentfolkloristic
scholarship.One thinksof the fieldresearchof Finnishfolk-
loristVirtanen(1976), Grober-Gliuck's (1974) investigation of
secondsightin northernGermany,and St. Clair's (1972) sur-
vey of Irish data, amongothers(see Sannwald1965; Harkort
1968; Wimmer1972, 1975; and othersourcescitedin Assion
1975). Anthropologists too have studied the intersectionof
magic and parapsychology, e.g., Stumpfe's(1976) considera-
tionof magicallyinduceddeathand Brown's(1978) compari-
son of "foresight"in Mexico and Ghana.
The major difficulty in Winkelman'sessay,however,comes
not frombibliographical lacunae, but fromthe very attempt
to make a detailed comparisonof two such fuzzy,ill-defined
analyticconstructs as "magic"and "psi." Bothare rubricterms
whose constituent elementsare far fromclear. Even so, it is
possibleto showthat the bulk of "psi" phenomenasimplydo
not fall intothe area of magic.
There seems to be general consensusabout the principal
allegedmanifestations of "psi" (Heywood 1978:17; cf.Murphy
1961). They includetelepathy(directawarenessof themental
state of anotherperson), clairvoyance(directawarenessof a
physicalevent), precognition(foreknowledge of the future),
and retrocognition (knowledgeof the past). Magic, in con-
trast,involvessome kindof instrumental or causal processor
procedureby means of which events are producedor con-
trolled.Many writerson magichave specifically drawnatten-
tion to the "coercive" nature of magic (Leuba 1912:350;
Clausen 1969:141; Hammond 1970:1352; Rosengren1976:
671). Leaving aside the thornyquestionof the rationalityof
magic (Evans-Pritchard1933, Preuss 1938, Settle 1971)
thoughpresumablyall magical acts conformto one or more
culturallyrelativelogics-it can legitimately be argued that
magicin the morerigorous,narrowsense of the analyticterm
does implythe influencing or manipulating of naturein some
CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY
causal way. The point is, then,that whereas"psi" involves
knowledgeof events,magic involvescausingevents.Knowing
somethingis not the same thingas makingit happen.Predic-
tion is not production.For this reason,it seems unlikelythat
mostof the traditional"psi" phenomena(telepathy,clairvoy-
ance, precognition,and retrocognition) have muchto do with
pure magic. (Psychokinesismightbe an exception,but does
Winkelmanthinkthat ritualsintendedto producerainfallor
to ensurea sufficient game or fishsupplyare trulyanalogous
to the claimof a possessorof "psi" in Westerncultureto bend
metal throughmentalconcentration?)
Parapsychologicalphenomenahave been and shouldcontinue
to be investigated but theyare morelikelyto
cross-culturally,
be germaneto studiesof divinationthanto magic.The growing
interestin parapsychology
among scholarsis itselfpart of a
discernibleculturalpatternin Western culture (see Truzzi
1972), a patternno doubt related to the surges of popular
fascination withreportsof poltergeists,
UFO sightings, and the
like. The continuedscientificinvestigations of the Shroudof
Turin,Bigfoot,and the Loch Ness monsterdemonstrate both
thatsupernaturalism is not dead and thatscientistshave been
unable to resistthe appeal of studyingsuch phenomena.It
mightalso be observedthatthe increasedinterestin parapsy-
chologyhas made some conventionalacademics uneasy, so
muchso thata prestigiousCommitteeforthe Scientific Inves-
tigationof Claims of the Paranormalhas publishedThe Skep-
tical Inquirer(The Zetetic) since 1976.
by JULEEISENBUD
4634 E. 6th Ave., Denver, Colo. 80220, U.S.A. 22 vii 81
Winkelman'spaper is richin ideas, but I wouldhave liked to
see some attentiongiven to the historicaland developmental
aspectsof thesubject.Even thoughthiswouldnecessarilyhave
to remainspeculative,it could add to the coherenceof what
has been presented.
What has to be filledin conjecturally is the periodbetween
a presumptive initialphase of man's historyin which,froma
numberof indications, the role of psi was takenforgrantedin
the way thingsworked(and hereparapsychology can contrib-
ute to the empiricalbase of such a presumption)and the late
historicalphase in whichthe individual'sinfluenceon outer
eventsis seen as limitedto sensory-motor contactwithother
organismsand things.A reasonablesuppositionis that mana
and its equivalents (orenda, wakanda) was an intermediate
stagein theexteriorization, or projectionoutward,of psi-imple-
mentedintentin causality (Eisenbud 1967, 1981). (Such a
transformation mightaccount in part for the seemingconfu-
sion as to exactlywhat mana actually is.) Psychology,par-
ticularlypsychoanalysis, can providea reasonablehypothesis
as to whysuch a projectivetrenddeveloped,namely,increas-
inglyintolerableguiltabout thedestructive aspectsof psi. This
mighthave followedupon the change from small hunter-
gathererpopulationsto dense agrarianones. Magic, in this
view,would be seen not onlyas a technologyorientedtoward
augmenting the efficacy and reliabilityof suchpsi as mayhave
beenirregularly manifest, butalso as themeansof manipulating
mana ( as Malinowskihad presumed)and thevarietyof spir-
itual entitiesalso arisingas projectionsof psi and the (mostly
malevolent)humanwill.
It is a good presumption, thus,that earliestman did not
experiencepsi as something apart fromnature,to be comman-
deeredforindividual(or particulargroup) advantage.Accord-
ingto some (Cornford1957,Kelsen 1943),social structure and
nature,as experienced in earliesttimes,wereintimately related
and were in fact seen as imagesof each other.Psi, in such a
context,wouldhave been experiencedas inseparablya partof
both and no more to be withdrawnfromits imbeddednessin
Vol. 23 * No. 1 * February1982
Winkelman:
MAGIC, A REASSESSMENT
the total picturethan consciousnessitself.Accordingto this
view,it is onlywhentheidea of usingpsi forindividualadvan-
tage took shape that magicand mana could have eventuated.
And thisis whereWinkelmanbegins.
by FELICITAs D. GOODMAN
CuyamungueInstitute,114 E. DuncattSt., Columbus,Ohio
43202, U.S.A. 22 vii 81
Winkelmanis to be commendedforhis effortto pointup the
largerculturaland psychologicalcontextfor psi phenomena.
I shouldlike to suggest,however,that a morepowerfulgen-
eralizationcan be applied than the one he offers.He enumer-
ates alteredstatesof consciousness, goal-oriented visualization
strategies,divinationprocedures,and influencesupon indeter-
minatesystemsas those aspects of magic that are relatedto
psi. On the basis of the relevantethnographic literature,field-
work observation(Goodman 1972; Goodman,Henney,and
Pressel 1974), and experimentation (Goodman 1977), I would
proposethatthesefouraspectsare in factrelatedin a system-
atic manner:Goal-orientedvisualizationstrategiesare among
the manymethodsforenteringthe (religious)alteredstate of
consciousness.This is the biologicalsubstratumwhichmakes
possible the perceptionof an other-than-ordinary dimension
of reality,in whichthe so-calledlaws of nature,discoveredby
Westernscienceforordinaryreality,do not obtain.Especially
the limitsof timeand space are invalid.The absenceof these
makes divinationpossible.Switchinginto the religiousaltered
statealso endowsthe subjectwiththe abilityto affectindeter-
minatesystems,as well as a numberof determinate ones,in a
mannersome Westernobservershave termedmagical. The
problemwithpsi researchis not onlythatit has to workwith
subjects whose access to the religiousaltered state of con-
sciousnessis oftenfortuitous because theyare notprivyto the
traditionswhichpermiteasy and reliableentranceinto it, but
also thatit mustdeal withdata thathave been subjectedto a
double distortion-first transposedfromthe alternateplane of
existenceto the ordinaryone and then translatedinto the
Westernculturalmedium.In addition,Westernpsi researchers
are constrainedto use for theirtestsmethodsdevelopednot
in the alternatereality,but forthose
forprocessesoriginating
takingplace in the ordinaryone.
by C. R. HALLPIKE
Departmentof Anthropology, McMaster University, Hamil-
ton,Ont.,Canada L8S 4L9. 5 viii 81
Culturalrelativists,Durkheimians, and complacentmaterialists
are all likely to be dismayedby Winkelman'spaper, which
presentsa well-documented argumentthatmagicis not simply
an illusion,or false reasoning,or a functionaldevice to sup-
portthe social order,but in parta manifestationof a universal
and genuinehumanability,psi. The siftingout of thoseaspects
of magic most probablyrelatedto psi factorsfromthose of
purelysocial originseemsto have been particularly well done,
and theresemblances of psi and magic
notedin the functioning
shouldprovidefertilehypothesesfortestingin the field.
Establishingjust how psi has been incorporatedinto culture
seems likely to presentgreaterdifficulties,however.Winkel-
man considersthat,apart frompsi, "the otherprimaryaspects
of magicare the social ritualand the metaphysicalor cosmo-
logical."This omitscognition, and in myFoundationsof Prim-
itive Thought (1979:474) I pointed out that preoperatory
thoughtis a favourablebasis forthe developmentof magical
thought.If cognitivefactorsare added to those discussedby
47
 Winkelmanin thegenesisof culturalsystemsof magic,thepro-
cesses involvedare likelyto be especiallyhardto disentangle.
One suspectsthat,as Winkelmansays,moreanthropologists
have encounteredparanormalphenomenain the fieldthan is
apparentfromthe ethnographic literature.Perhapstheymay
nowbe emboldenedby his paperto comeforwardin printwith
theseexperiences-ina futuresymposiumin CA?
by AxKEHULTKRANTZ
Seglarvdgen7, 181 62 Lidingo,Sweden.8 vii 81
Paranormaldata have largely been silentlypassed over in
seriousanthropological works,includingthis journal. This is
deplorable,for whetheryou accept theirrealityor not they
should be discussedand evaluatedby studentswho so often
confrontseeminglyunexplainableeventsin theirfieldwork. It
is to Winkelman'sgreat creditthathe dares to deal withthis
kindof phenomenon in his theoreticalresearch.
For my own part,I considerit legitimateto workwiththe
hypothesisthatsome so-calledmagicalphenomenamay be re-
ferredto the operationsof psi factors.A close follow-upof
parapsychological researchand incontestablepersonalexperi-
ences, some of themin the field(cf. Hultkrantz1981), have
convincedme of the possibilitythatwe mustreckonwithdi-
mensionsof realitybeyondthose we usuallydistinguish. Un-
fortunately, sucha statementis stillto mostcolleaguesa state-
mentof belief,whenin factit shouldbe understoodas a per-
ceptionof what Kuhn has called a new paradigm.Certainly,
the consequencesof such a realizationwould be most drastic
foranthropological theory,and I imaginethatthe conventional
mouldof anthropological thinkingwouldinspirea vigorousde-
fenceagainstwhatone colleaguecalls "the moralauthorityof
obscurantists and mystics"(Harris 1980:75). Withthisdecla-
rationI do not say that I subscribepromiscuously to the au-
thenticity of all supposedparanormalphenomena.I thinkthat
Winkelmansharesmy view here; it would have been helpful
if he had statedhis positionmoreclearly.
Unlike Winkelman,however,I do not see any reason to
postulate that magic as such originatedin psi phenomena.
There is, forexample,no doubtthatmanymagicalbeliefsand
devices proceed fromneuroticobsessionalideas: I have to
reachmydoor beforethatcar is in line withit or myluckwill
run out; I have to pray with my rightthumbover the left
one,not the otherway round,forthenI invokethe devil; and
so on. The authorpoints out that emotionallyloaded magic
may involvepsi, and that could certainlybe correct(just as
emotionalreligiousacts may revealthe actionof a psi factor).
The characteristics of psi-relatedmagic listed in table 1 can
be narrowedeven moreby sayingthatit is primarilyin con-
nectionwithalteredstatesof consciousnessthatthepsi factor
becomesevident.These states,whetherwe call themmagical
or religious,shouldsomehowbe able to releasepsi. Shamanism,
divinationin certainforms,possession,mysticism, and similar
ecstaticor unconsciousconditionsare thus interpreted to in-
vite psi, to constituteprerequisitesforits operation.I do not
findthat the referenceto magic as such makes much sense
here.Therefore,I wouldpreferto see Winkelman'spaper as a
proposal of investigation of the relationbetweenpsi and al-
teredstatesof consciousness, magicalor not.
The author'sexpositionof magic is very interesting, and
his distinctions of thelevels of interpretationand theirmutual
connectionsare well developed.His strictures on symbolistin-
terpretations of magic are to the point and need to be re-
peated: these interpretations do not reveal the ontological
basis of magic,but demonstrateits sociallyintegratedritual
forms.I miss,however,the European discussionof whether
we can separatea particularcategoryof magic (Americanau-
48
thorstend to confinethemselvesto Americansourcesand de-
bates, unfortunately).Finally,the interrelationof magicwith
mana-a highly doubtful constellation-leads us astray, I
think,in our understanding of magic,and it definitely
does not
point in the directionof psi experiences.
I repeat what I have said before: the great meritof this
paper is that it focusseson problemswhichhave long been
bypassedby anthropological journals.
by I. C. JARVIE
1044 19thSt., Santa Monica, Calif. 90403, U.S.A. 8 vii 81
Anthropologists have been debatingforsome timewhatstand-
ing should be accorded the conceptualschemes-better,the-
ories of the worldand theirassociatedconceptualschemes-
of the peoples theystudy (at last report,most of mankind).
The debateis not peculiarto studentsof alien societies.Adam
Smith and Emile Durkheim,to name only two, introduced
theoreticaland explanatoryideas that supersededcommon-
sense views on, respectively,the economyand suicide. The
studyof magicand religionstandslike a crucialexperiment at
the centreof this debate. Both magic and religionpostulate
causal forces at work in the world of which the orthodox
scientific
traditionhas longbeen sceptical.
One of the mostvigorouslypursuedlines of thisdebate in
recentyearswas sparkedoffby Winch's (1964) philosophical
argumentto the effectthat in religiousand magicalmatters
therewas a presumptionof legitimacyfor indigenoustheo-
retical/conceptualschemes.Azande witchcraft, he argued,was
a self-contained universeof discourse,and each universeof
discourseconstitutes a conception,and henceis its own judge,
of whatis real.That is, thereis no privilegedor meta-universe
of discoursewithinwhichotheruniversesof discoursecan be
appraisedas to the extentto whichthey correctlycapturea
transcendent"reality."What God's realitywas or was not,
Winch declared in a provocativeformulation, could only be
settledwithinthe universeof discourseof god-talk.Where
witchcraft was at work and whereit was not could only be
settledwithinthe framework of witchcraft talk and assump-
tions,not,as Evans-Pritchard(1937) did,by declaringit illu-
soryas such.
The fundamentalproblem for Winch's position is what
standingit gives to certainexpressions-commonin universes
of discoursewithwhichI am familiarand not,I am sure,ab-
sent fromWinch's-such as "religionis the opiate of the peo-
ple" or "religion(or magic) is a delusionand a fraud."Such
expressions, whichattemptto assess a universeof discourseas
such, mustbelong to some universeof discourse,but Winch
has yet to give a clear answer to the difficulties they pose
forhim.
Perhaps it was only a matterof time beforeWinch'splea
for not explainingmagic away, i.e., for acceptingit at its
claimedor face value, wouldbe followedby a plea thatmagic
be takenliterallyin a nonmagicaluniverseof discoursesuchas
anthropology. Nevertheless,thereare featuresof Winkelman's
paper that make one wonderwhetherCA's illustriouseditor
is not pullinghis colleagues'collectiveleg in publishingit. Its
argumentis extremely weak; in summary,it would read, "we
shouldtake magicalcausationat face value because thereare
some people in our own societywho take seriouslysome phe-
nomenathat are in some ways reminiscent of magic (and in
some ways not)." This weak argumentis in turnpremisedon
resemblances betweenmanaand psi thatare tenuousand vague
(psi = factorsor processesthat transcendacceptedlaws, i.e.,
mysteriousforces). Furthermore, all the phenomenaWinkel-
man refersto (magic and psi) have alternative,unmysterious
explanations,and most of the people who take it all at face
value are on the fringeof the intellectualworld.
CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY
 But if the publicationof Winkelman'sarticleis a jape, it is
beingplayedwitha straightface, CA* treatment and all, so
I mustfollowsuit. One obviousreminderis in order: regard-
less of the intellectualstandingof the conceptualschemeof
magic,thereis a place forthe sociologyand anthropology of
it. Science, the intellectualstandingof whichis not here in
question,is studiedin this fashion.
With that said, I turnto whyit is that magicand religion
pose specialproblems.Winkelmanseemsto thinkit is because
theypostulatemysteriousor transcendent factorsat workin
the world.This is his mistake:orthodoxnaturalsciencedoes
thatall the time.Most new scientific theoriesare so classedat
first.The problemis not metaphysical,but methodological:
eitherthe claimsof magicand religionare so vague thatthere
is no way to falsifythem,and falsifiability is a minimalre-
quirementforseriousconsideration;or,if theyare clearlyand
sharplyenoughformulatedto be testable,they are so man-
ifestlyembeddedin local cultureand societythat thereare
plentifulintellectual-cum-social mechanismsfor turningaside
and explainingaway failure (Evans-Pritchard1937; Gellner
1973 and 1974). The issue,then,is neitherphysicalnor meta-
physical-the fourfundamental forcesversusan intruder, psi.
Rather,it is methodological:just what is being claimed,and
can we test it?
It is a philosophicalmistaketo dismissAzande witchcraft
withthe claim that we know,still less because we can show,
thatit is false (here Evans-Pritchard got it wrong).If Evans-
Pritchardis rightthat Azande witchcraft explainsmisfortune
happeningto this personnow and we ask what the scientific
worldview has to say about such a problem,the answeris
"nothing."Individual events are treatedby currentscience
and commonsenseas mattersof "luck" or "chance"-in other
words,we do not seriouslytryto explainsingularor individual
events.The personkilled by the ricocheting bullet or struck
downby the rare disease is, we say, "unlucky."Yet we have
no (longerif we everhad a) cosmologyof luck; to invokeluck
amountsto littlemorethansaying"it happened."To the ques-
tions "why me?" and "why now?" the answeris "whynot?"
The logic and methodology of psi are verysimilar.Some of
it is delusionand fraud,as extensiveliteraturenot cited by
Winkelmanattests (e.g., Randi 1975, Kusche 1975, de Mille
1980). Some of it is deviationsfromrandomnessthatare ex-
pectablebecause randomnessis an abstractionrealizedonlyin
a notionalinfinity. None of it is intellectuallyproblematic;it
is only methodologically problematic,Azande witchesmigrat-
ing frombodies are too transienta "poltergeist"phenomenon
for serioustest. Similarly,brain waves bendingspoonsnever
seemable to deflectmetersset to detecttheirforces.Therewill
have to be a lot of keysbentby a lot of peoplebefore"psycho-
kinesis"becomes a repeatableevent warrantingadditionsto
thelaws of physicsratherthanyielding,as it does now,to the
craftsof the Magic Circle.Isolated eventsare ignoredbecause
suggestion, misperception, and self-deception cannotbe tested
for. Natural scientiststhemselvesdo not proliferateghostly
forcesto explainthe noise, blips, artifacts,and garbagethat
turnup in theirresults.They clean themout. The world is
explicableonly in its patterns,not in its singularity. Magical
cosmology, like psychicforces,is above all a cosmologyof in-
dividual persons,local regions,particularsocial statuses or
ritual conditions,and unique conjunctionsof constellations.
Over eons of man's historysuch superstitionfailed to pro-
duce ideas that passed the empiricaltest,hence failedto give
manpowerovernature(Gellner1980,Agassi 1979). Whenthe
moregeneraland moremodestcosmologywe nowrecogniseas
the root of modernnaturalscienceappeared,it grewand was
acceptedbecause it "provedits mettle"in empiricaltest.
Vol. 23 * No. 1 * February1982
Winkelman:
MAGIC. A REASSESSMENT
by BARBARA W. LEX
Departmentof Psychiatry,Harvard Medical School, and
Alcoholand Drug AbuseResearchCenter,McLean Hospital,
Belmont,Mass. 02178, U.S.A. 5 viii 81
I have greatconcernabout the standardsof scholarshipman-
ifest in this paper. Having reviewedcarefullythe guidelines
forarticlesto be publishedin CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY, I am
movedto statethatin myestimationthisarticledoes noteven
beginto approachthe standardof "highestscholarlycalibre"
as I believe it is understoodamongscientistsand anthropol-
ogists.It mightbe best to ignorethiswork,fordignityis con-
ferredby any thoughtful reply.Yet, to ignoreit conferstacit
approval.The dilemmais apparent.
The use of unclearreferents in phrasingmisleadsthe reader
into thinkingthat various ethnographers believe or accept
''paranormal"eventsas actual occurrencesratherthanas folk
beliefsor explanations(especiallysee the thirdparagraphof
the paper-in fact,mutatismutandis,my assessmentsof the
entirepaper are neatlysummedup in the firstsentenceof the
fourthparagraph).In addition,it appears professionally irre-
sponsibleto offerworksby Castaneda as efforts that directly
document"paranormal"events.Anotherproblemstems from
oblique referencesto purportedinsightsto be found in the
"parapsychology"literature.The referencesto Honorton
(1977) and Palmer (1978), for example,are used to support
the contentionthat certainvaguely definedand ill-specified
"alteredstates of consciousness"have some sort of effecton
"extrasensory awareness."More precisely,the "depth" of the
alterationis deemedthe significantly influentialfactor.Since
none of these termsis operationalized, at best the resultis
pseudo-scientistic jargon.
My sentimentsare by no means intendedto discourage
scientificspeculation.However,in the UnitedStatesthe social
sciences,includinganthropology, appear to have fallen into
politicaldisfavor,and perhapsone factorin that processhas
been theirespousal of positionsso relativisticthatall criteria
of judgmentappear to have been suspended.Winkelman's
paper does not suggestthatall otherpossibilitiesbe ruledout
beforeinvoking"paranormal"explanations.Since the various
propertiesof "alteredstates of consciousness"are themselves
incompletely known,it seemsprematureforanthropologists to
introduceany "psi" factorsas additionalunknownquantities.
To do so invitesridicule.It is not my intentionto sanction
censorshipof scientific debate,but it appearsequallyirrespon-
sible to implythat one sortof an explanationis just as good
as another.In summary,Winkelman'sworkappears to be an
abortiveattemptto field-test the Rumpelstiltskin Effect.
by JOSEPH K. LONG
PlymouthState College,Plymouth,N.H. 03264, U.S.A. 10
VII 8 1
The author'sgreatestfailinghere is thathe does not make it
clear to the audience of anthropologists that a vast parapsy-
chologicalliteratureexists on a host of rigorousexperiments
over the past 50 and especiallythe last 20 years.Anthropol-
ogists who are familiarwith this literaturewill have little
doubt that the etic(?) principlesof psi (telepathy,clairvoy-
ance, and psychokinesis)representestablishedfact; thosewho
are not will view this as a returnto supernaturalism. (Emic
categorieslike spirits,apparitions,and spiritpossessionare
generallyestablishedphenomenaalso but, involvingcomplex
combinationsof severaldifferent psi, psychological,and other
elementsas they do, they are not at all well understoodin
termsof the specificpsi contributions to each.) Although15%
49
 of Americanscientistsbelievepsi is establishedand 50% more
believepsi is possibleand worthyof study(see Tart 1980 and
Wade 1980), anthropologists, judgingfrommy observations,
have the lowest rate of belief (physicistsprobablyhave the
highest).This is to be expected,since anthropologists have
extensivetrainingabout psychosocialvariablesof supernatural
beliefsand thusare moreaware of a rangeof alternativeex-
planationsforthe possiblecauses of beliefsystems.Therefore
theymaybe moreenlightened thanothers(or less so). Serious
scholarscan quicklyenlightenthemselvesregardingthe mas-
sive evidenceforpsi by startingfromthe key reviewsin Wol-
man's (1977) summary.Failure to do so may resultin be-
liefs as magicaland rationalizing as those of any "primitive"
(Long n.d.).
Anthropologists should,on the otherhand,be disabusedof
any illusionsthatethnography can establishpsi withthe same
highlevel of verification as in the psychologylab: parapsy-
chologymay lead to parapsychological anthropology, but the
latterwould neverlead psychologyinto parapsychology. The
workof Long (1977b), in a case involvinghex death,Singer
and Ankenbrandt (1980), regarding psychicsurgery, and We-
denoja (1978), studyingpoltergeist,suggeststhat in general
no amountof observationwillsuffice to establisha psi element
convincingly in ethnographic context.
Winkelman'sarticlemightbetterhave been titled"A Theo-
retical Beginning."Althoughthe discussionof intellectualist
and symbolisttraditionsis to be expectedhere,it is basically
unnecessary.These are neither"explanations"nor "theories":
statingthatsome formof humanbehaviorhas social functions
(integrationof the group) and psychologicalfunctions(ra-
tionalization)is about as profoundas sayingthat mammals
striveto eat. Hence I view this articleas a firststep toward
the understanding of and explanationfor social phenomena
like magicand ritual.Granted,thisis a minusculepart of the
understanding of but one small part of religiousphenomena:
anthropological categories(mana, taboo, animism,animatism,
etc.) and those more commonlydiscussedby some parapsy-
chologists(ghosts,out-of-body experience,etc.) are scarcely
mentionedhere and deserveequal discussion.But I applaud
Winkelmanfor takingthis firststep towardintegrating para-
psychologicaldata withanthropological factsand ideas.
I tend to disagree with the assumptionthat psi is non-
physical.Perhaps it is, but only in the sense that the sub-
atomicparticlesof nuclearphysicsare nonphysical(if protons,
e.g., turnout to be merelyenergy,thenperhapsI will stand
corrected).In any case, the effectsof psi are obviouslyphys-
ical, so thinking in thesetermsmerelyconfusesthe issue. As-
sumingthatthereis no physicalexplanationforpsi is similarly
confusing. Severalexplanationshave beenproposed,mostfrom
quantummechanics.Walker's (1977), whichis themost com-
plete,is able to accountforall the eventscalled "psi" by the
applicationof establishedprinciplesof quantum theoryto
changesknownto occur at brain synapses.Granted,this ex-
planationis too complicatedfor most to understandand has
not been "proven,"but it does showthatpsi can be accounted
forwithinthe frameof presentscientific theory.My (1977a)
pragmatic,materialistic,ecological approach to psi will at
some point come into directconflictwiththe nonmaterialistic
approachesapparentlyespousedby Winkelmanwithinthephil-
osophicalframework of anthropology. There is nothingabout
psi per se thatconflicts withtraditionalanthropological theory
or its evolutionistic-materialistic orientation.
by LEONARDW. Moss
Departmentof Anthropology, WayneState University,
De-
troit,Miclh.48202, U.S.A. 30 VI 81
Religionists,doubtlessattemptingto establishpriorclaim to
telekinesis,tell us that faithcan move mountains.Whether
50
psi existsor not is unimportant; giventhe culturalconditions
notedby the author,some social scientistswouldbe forcedto
inventit.
Centralto the discussionis the elementof belief.Thomas
(1928) enunciatedthe social fact: if men believe a thingis
real and act in accordancewiththat belief,the consequences
of theiractionsare real.
Followingthe earthquakeof August1962in Italy,themirac-
ulous liquificationof the dried blood of St. Gennaro,com-
pletelyoffschedule,gave reassuranceto theresidentsof Naples
thattheircitywouldbe sparedfromdisaster(Moss 1963). An
Italian chemicalengineer,whenqueriedabout the miracle,re-
sponded: "It is not true,but I believeit." This seemingpara-
dox indicatesthat, for some, truthexistsat different levels.
There is empirically verifiabletruthand, perhaps,truthwhich
mustbe acceptedon the basis of faith.Mightthisacceptance
be shakenif the "dried blood" turnedout to be ferricthio-
cyanateor someotherdiscoveryof theNorthAfricanmedieval
alchemists?
by RICHARD J. PRESTON
Departmentof Anthropology, McMaster University, Hamil-
ton,Ont.,Canada L8S 4L9. 28 vii 81
Winkelmanmakes an interesting and worthwhilepoint; in re-
thinking "magic"we shouldattemptto accountforthefindings
of experimental parapsychology. He suggestsa cognitive-sys-
tems methodfor doingthis.The impressionI extractedfrom
his overcompactand ratherspiritlessexpositionis thatmagic
is not just the poor man's tranquilizer(the Malinowskian
view) or his poetry(the symbolists'view), but also a part of
his ontology(the cognitiveview) and shouldbe a partof ours,
forgood empirical(?) reasons,(still) poorlyunderstood.
My complaintis that he has not gone beyondthe literal-
minded experimentalists' controlsin incorporatinginto his
schemethe simple,subtle,and universalhumanfactthatpeo-
ple are sometimesconfused."Magic" is surelya domain in
whichperceptionsare chronicallyconfused,inadequatelyex-
pressedin wordform,and wronglyinterpreted by the receiver
of the words. I findit hard to believe that the cognitive-
systemsmethodis adequate to examinethesekindsof anom-
alous experiences.How do people experience,perceive,and
reportanomalies-not onlyin "magic,"but in thewiderarena
of anomalies,withsasquatchand UFO's? What we have dis-
covered about these kinds of poorly understoodphenomena
(Halpin and Ames 1980) shouldinformour rulesof evidence
and our interpretationsin rethinking"magic."
When Winkelmansays "many mysticshave commonphe-
nomenological experiences,suchas theperceptionof a dazzling
whitelight,but theirdescriptionsand explanationsvary,"he
has missedthe point that theirexperiencesalso vary and are
a sourceof confusionto themand to us. To make thisall in-
telligible,withthe epistemologicaland psychologicalproblems
that mustbe answered,is an awesometask. Winkelman'sap-
proachis helpful,but it is not enough.
by LOLA ROMANUCCI-ROSS
Departmentof Anthropology, University
of California,San
Diego, La Jolla,Calif.92092, U.S.A. 7 vii 81
Still amongus, as persistingculturalsurvivals,are cohortsof
investigatorsin the various socal sciences who emulateand
imitate19th-century physicistsin methodology.The definition
of psi is an excellentexample.Physicistshave longreferred to
phenomenaunexplainedby "naturallaw" at any pointin time
as "residuals,"but when this definitional frameis borrowed
by psi-cologists,what do we have to workwithusingan ana-
logue model?Did we at any pointin timeor do we now have
a body of vertifiablefacts regardedas accepted law in the
CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY
realmof "nonphysical"events?If not,is it justifiableto isolate Winkelman:MAGIC, A REASSESSMENT
"residuals" to a quasi-apocryphaltext whose contentshave
created sects and cults of true believersand theirobverse, trationin ESP performances is a relativestatement,sincecon-
scoffersand deniers? centrationcould achieve such insignificant resultsthat even
This is not to say that anthropologists and psychologists the "significantly better"resultsby visualizationwould still
shouldnot documentand openlydiscusswhattheyperceiveas lingerin the insignificantrealm.That a positiveand believing
"paranormal"events.I would argue,however,that we would attitudecan operateas self-fulfilling prophecyis commonplace
be fartheralong the road to concordanceand factualityif we and, of course,can be appliedto theso-calledpsi experimenter
reexaminedand redefinedour conceptof "normal." It is a as well as to the psi subject-whetherin the contextof magic
Blenheimpalace of thoughtconstructsto speak and writeof or in the parapsychology laboratory.The resultsof faithcan
the paranormaland even of parapsychology. be explainedwithoutrecourseto the oftenobscure and im-
Winkelman'swell-documented paper is a substantivecontri- plausiblepsi phenomena.Such resultsfrequently assumepsy-
butionto an understanding of uses and misusesof concepts chosomaticforms.Winkelmanis alert enoughtto know this,
in this area. His own currentresearchon cognitionmay be and he tries to guard himselfagainst criticismby referring
consideredacceptableas withinestablishedcanons of method (n. 9) to "psychosomatic" as a sortof vestigeof the Cartesian
of researchon the "nonphysical."Here, however,he occa- dualismof "mind"and "body." His remarkfalls shortof dis-
sionallyviolatesthe Singerand Ankenbrandt caveat in failing creditingthe concept,but reflectsa weak argument.In any
to make clear whoseobservationsare beingvalidatedand for case, no informed academicadheresto suchdualism;theunity
what purpose (e.g., in the quotationfromMauss on altered of brainfunctionsand somaticeffects is clearenough.
statesof consciousness).In addition,Mauss's and Codrington's If, as the authorseems to agreewiththe literature, faithis
use of Melanesiannotionsof manato buildan argument should conducive,if not prerequisite, to a positivepsi outcome,then
be regardedonly as a firstapproximation. Those who have psi resultshave plentyof companyamongmanyformsof self-
done researchin the fieldin Melanesia have learneda great fulfillingprophecyand selectiveperception.For example,my
deal since thosepristinedays of anthropological writing, par- studyof the Franconianwitchcraft traditionallowed,without
ticularlywithregardto whatMelanesiansconsider"theregular exception,explanationof "magical" (or presumablypsi) inci-
course of nature."In my experience,mana is not outsideof dentsthroughperfectlynormalphysicalor psychologicalpro-
nature(Romanucci-Ross1978). cesses. Winkelmanis not clear enoughabout the distinction
I have assertedelsewherethat in emulatingthe scientist- betweenfaithand psychosomatic effects,on one side, and psi
technologistwe err in adoptinghis logical structures, which phenomena,on the other.Nonetheless,his discussiontriesto
are not always appropriateeven for the physicalworld (see be fairand includesreferences to opinionsand data thatallow
Romanucci-Ross1980). Objects and events do not exist be- suspicionof psi experiencesas being camouflagedformsof
cause we create words or metaphorsfor them. Rivers may faithhealing,faithdiseases (negativeformsof beliefs),or, in
flow,but timedoes no such thing,althoughit may serveas a general,psychosomaticprocesses triggeredby certainbrain
metaphorforthephysicist.Similarly, theword"psychokinesis" circuitry.
shouldnot be used in rationaldiscourseas thoughit werean Throughoutthe paper,however,the authoruncritically ac-
acceptedand provenphenomenon;as Winkelmanlaterstates, cepts the notionthatpsi in fact exists.This reflectsthe facile
the phenomenonmustbe investigatedto ascertainwhetherit acceptanceof the paranormaland the occult thattook an un-
does indeedhave an empirically verifiablebasis. precedentedupswingduringthe counterculture era and seems
I would submit that the phenomenaunder investigation to have come into fullbloomin the New Age romanticism of
wouldyield theirsecretsmore readilyto the recognition that the 1980s. I see this credulityas an attemptto findsolutions
experimental methodswhichhave workedwell in the world and solace outside of traditionalavenues and outsideof the
of matterare moreoftenthannot inappropriate to "paranor- type of strugglecarriedon by secularhumanismto come to
mal" events.Winkelmanappearsto be interested in developing gripswithfrustrating, vexing,and agonizingconditionsof hu-
a new methodology, and one may hope thathe will take into man existence.It illustratesthe currentpopularityof replacing
accountthismostimportantconsideration. empiricismwith spiritualism, scientificthinkingwith wishful
realisticmeasurementswith mentalisticver-
rationalizations,
biage. While such intuitive,imaginative,and colorfulexercises
by HANS SEBALD have theirromanticvalue, theyshould not be confusedwith
Departmentof Sociology,ArizonaState University, Tempe, science.Lest I be labeledan academicLuddite,I shouldliketo
Ariz.85281, U.S.A. 20 vii 81 pointout thathistoryis on my side: Whilescience,laboriously
Winkelmannot onlytriesto comparemagic and parapsycho- and oftenlusterlessly, has added buildingblock afterbuilding
logicalexperiences,but laborsto make a case forthe existence block to createan appreciablyreliablebodyof knowledge, the
of psi in bothphenomena.In the pursuitof thisgoal, he mar- studyor practiceof psi, in one formor another,has continued
shals more speculationthan fact. Acceptingsuch definitional throughout historywithoutaccumulating substantialproofofits
elementsof psi as "personal factorsor processesin nature validityand withoutintegrating a body of reliableknowledge.
whichtranscendacceptedlaws . . . and whichare nonphysical"
(exemplifiedby ESP and PK), he seems to findabundant
evidenceof psi in bothmagicalpracticesand parapsychological by DEAN SHEILS
experiences.While I agreethatsimilar,if not identical,mental Departmentof Sociology/Anthropology, University of Wis-
mechanisms operatein the two genres,I disagreewithdefining consin,La Crosse,Wis. 54601, U.S.A. 5 VIII 81
themas psi processes.Winkelman'sargumentrestson a gigan- Winkelman'sarticleis worthyof close attentionfora number
tic and shakyassumption. of reasons.First,the authordoes an outstanding job of weav-
He lists a numberof dimensionsthat magic and parapsy- ing togetherexperimental resultswithethnographic research.
chologyhave in commonand that presumablyreflectpsi. To Second,his workis on an anthropological frontier thatis rich
say that"a centralcharacteristic of magicalpractice[and pre- withexciting Third,evenifone doesnotagreewith
possibilities.
sumablyalso of parapsychological experiences]is thealteration his argumentor conclusionsit mustbe admittedthat he has
of consciousness"is so generalthatit cannotbe provenincor- raised a significant issue. The "psychic"or "psi" has fortoo
rect.A glass of wine,a joint,or exuberantsex can also alter long been a "tapu" topic in anthropology. It cannotbe said
consciousness. That visualizatonis a bettermeansthanconcen- that Winkelmanhas in fact proven that there is a genuine

Vol. 23 * No. 1 * February1982 51

"psi" elementto magic,simplybecause no singlearticlecan This kind of inaccuracyraises more general issues about
do that,but if his workaccomplishesnothingmore than to parapsychologicalresearchsuch as are discussed by Hansel
forceanthropologists to weightheissue in termsof factrather (1980) in termsof Rhine and Pratt's distinction(1957:140;
than mereprejudiceit will have made a significant contribu- cf. Hansel 1980:24-25 and Rao 1979:163) between"explor-
tion to our science. atory"and "conclusive"experiments. Most experimental work
in parapsychology apparentlyfails to meetRhine and Pratt's
criteriafor conclusiveness.As Hansel (p. 25) summarizes
by PHILIP SINGER and KATE WARE ANKENBRANDT them,these are (1) sound measurement, (2) satisfactory ex-
CenterforHealthSciences,OaklandUniversity/Department perimentalsafeguardsagainstnormalsensorycommunication,
of Humanities,Oakland CommunityCollege,AuburnHills (3) care in recording(here theyremarkthatthe responsibility
Campus,Rochester,Mich. 48063, U.S.A. 3 VIII 81 of recordingdata shouldbe sharedby two personsin such a
way thatno errormade by eithercan go undetected),and (4)
[The following comment is of a lengthnot normally acceptedfor precautionsagainstdeceptionon thepart of theexperimenters
CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY, but it is in itselfa reviewarticlewithsub- themselves.On this basis, Hansel concludes(p. 314): "After
stantialdata thatopenissuesthatshouldbe debated.The accep- 100 years of research,not a singleindividualhas been found
tanceof a comment of thislengthis to be considered extremely who can demonstrateESP to the satisfactionof independent
exceptional and does not indicatea departure frompolicyin this investigators." That this is not simplywillfulskepticism(cf.
matter.-EDITOR.] Rao 1979:159) is clear from the followingstatementsby
Murphy(1971:6), a leadingresearcherin parapsychology:
Winkelmanclearlystatesin n. 3 the problemthatvitiateshis
paper'smethodology and conclusions.Annotating thestatement One factorquiteevidentherewhenyou look at the phenomena
that "the relationshipbetweenparapsychological froma psychometric pointof view,a pointof view based on
researchand familiarity withpsychological testsof all sorts,is the factthat
magical practicesis not straightforward and unproblematic," mostof thescoringlevelsare onlyslightly above chanceexpecta-
he says that"thereare profoundmethodological and epistemo- tion. Consequently, only a verysmall fractionof the variance
logicaldifferences betweenparapsychology and magic,"one of whichappearsin theabove-chance scoresis attributableto ESP;
whichis that "the paranormalphenomenaof parapsychology in otherwords,ninety-nine per centof the observedvarianceis
are generallyobservableonlyin statisticaldeviationsfromnor- due to factorsotherthanESP.
mal expectation,not in the macroeventsor outstanding indi- In consequence,both Murphy and Hansel point out that
vidualperformances characteristic of magic."One mustwonder " 'lawful interrelations' withinthe body of fact in parapsy-
why the paper was written, since its mainpurposeis to com- chology"(Hansel 1980:312; cf. Murphy1971:8) are forprac-
pare two apparentlynoncomparablephenomena.Winkelman's tical
purposesnonexistent:"To date,not a singlelawfulinter-
thesisis that the phenomenological existenceof magic can be relationappears to have been established.. . . each of the re-
demonstrated by relatingit to the (supposedlyproven) phe- portedinvestigations yieldsa resultthathas littlerelationship
nomenologicalexistenceof parapsychologicalfunctions.The
to any of the others"(Hansel 1980:312).
troublewiththisthesisis thatboththe parapsychological and To arriveat this conclusion,Hansel (pp. 25-28) examines
the anthropological literaturecited is less than reliable. a numberof experimentsusually cited by parapsychologists
Unreliability of severaltypes characterizesthe parapsycho- as conclusive.2
UsingRhineand Pratt'scriteria,Hansel shows
logicalmaterial.First,one encounters theproblemof just what that in no case is the researchdesignsufficiently rigorousto
is beingcited: the primaryarticle,in whichan experiment and exclude trickery,collusion,overinterpretation, and the like.
its resultsare describedby the experimenter him/herself, or Therefore,he argues,the body of parapsychological research
a reviewof literatureor othersecondaryarticlein whichex-
must be treatedas, in Rhine's terms,exploratoryratherthan
perimentand resultsare brieflysummarized, oftenby a writer conclusive(pp. 310-11)-and, in fact,he
repeatedlynotesthat
unconnected withthe originalproject.Both typesare valuable, as testingproceduresforpsi have become more rigorous,the
but theirevidentialvalue is different. Sometimesthe distinc- high scores reportedin the '20s and '30s have
disappeared
tionis made here,but of 36 articlescitedwithoutsuchqualifi-
(Hansel 1980:166, 193, 199, 237, 311).
cation-as thoughthey containedprimarydata-at least 11
Other criticismsof parapsychological researchdesign-e.g.,
are reviewsor some otherkindof secondaryarticle.' Some of
by Price (cited in Hansel 1980:149-51, 308-9), Murphy
these unlabeledcitationsappear in contextsthatmay be mis-
(1971), Hansel (e.g., 1969), and others-are easily found,and
leadingbecause different types of articlesare mixedtogether fraudulentresultsin scientific researchhave recentlybeen re-
withoutidentification. In otherexamplesthe phrasingsuggests
portedwithincreasingfrequency(Broad 1981:137). Two of
a reporton originalresearchwhen the article is actually a
the worksWinkelmancites (Rhine et al. 1940,Targ and Put-
review.This methodof citationrequiresconstantreferenceto
hoff1977) are amongthosecriticizedsharplyby Hansel (1980:
the list of "ReferencesCited" and oftento the actual sources
119-21, 291-96), and usingHansel's criteriait is possible to
whenthe information suppliedin thislist is not sufficient. raise serious questions about the evidentialvalue of many
At times,the summaryof an article'scontentsis simplyin-
others.Since thisquestionof evidenceis centralto the evalu-
accurate,as whenWinkelmanwrites: "Ullman (1977) points
ation of Winkelman'sargument, we will exploresome of Han-
out thatas peoplenearpsychoticbreaksor crisestheymanifest
sel's criticismsin depth.
muchstrongerpsi eventsin the courseof therapy."Reading
Winkelmancites Rhine et al. (1940) to supportthe idea
Ullman'sarticle,one findsthatthispointis at bestdebatable-
that"enthusiasm, motivation,interest,and positivemotivation
we will deal withthis further below-and also thatthe article [sic] on the part of the experimenter" are importantforposi-
is actuallya review,so that the evidenceis not immediately
tiveresultsin parapsychological experimentation. Hansel shows
available.
(pp. 106-7) that at least two early experimentalseries-
1 The review or otherwisesecondaryarticleswe found cited by 2 Hansel (1980: 25-27) cites fourauthoritativelists,publishedin
Winkelman without sufficientidentificationare Osis and Bokert Rhine and Pratt (1957), showing four conclusive experiments,
(1971), Honorton (1977), Stanford(1977), Kennedy (1979), Mor- Pratt et al. (1940), showing.six conclusiveexperiments,Soal and
ris (1980), Puthoff,Targ, and May (1980), Kennedy (1979), Stan- Bateman (1954), showing five experiments, threementionedwith-
ford (1977), Rubin and Honorton (1972), Ullman (1977), and out criticism,and McConnell and Schmeidler(1958), showingfive
Stanford (1974). Further,Goodman (1977) does not contain the conclusive experiments.Of these, the Pearce-Pratt,Pearce-Wood-
evidentialmaterial one would expect in an archaeologicalsite re- ruff,and Soal-Goldney series were unanimouslyaccepted; Hansel
port. gives a chantertn each.
52 CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY
Turner-Ownbey and Pratt-Pearce-includedin the 1940 work Winkelman:
MAGIC, A REASSESSMENT
and also on the list of "conclusive"experimentsare by no
meansabove question.In bothcases,Hansel demonstrates, the that their "results . . . are obviously less significantthan those
descriptionof the experiment was graduallymodifiedso that obtainedby [Watkinsand Watkins]withthe same procedure."
its designseems more rigorous.Turner-Ownbey was redesig- They also note (p. 149) the possibilityof "informationleak-
natedin Rhineet al. (1940) as partof a previouslyunheard-of age" because of the researchdesign,althoughtheydeny that
"Rhine-Ownbey"series,and the irregularhandlingof part of such leakage actually occurred.Levi does indeed claim that
thedata-the partwithresultsabove chance-whichwas men- her results"representan independentreplicationand exten-
tionedin Rhine's (1934) Extra-Sensory Perceptionis not men- sion of the Morriset al. study"but thennotes,"Before and
tioned in the 1940 work. It is clear fromHansel's account duringthe experiment I had no explicitexpectationsregarding
(p. 95) that the data in questioncould have been simplyin- actual scoring;I becameaware of theMorriset al. studyonly
vented by Miss Ownbeyand that Rhine himselfmust have after[my] experiment was completed"(pp. 276-77, emphasis
knownof this possibility.Hansel also shows that the results added). In a footnoteshe adds that the reader"should . . .
of thePratt-Pearceseries,almostuniversally acceptedas "con- keep . . . in mind while reading the experimental procedures"
clusive" (pp. 25-27), could easily have been falsifiedby thather "choice of experimental designand variableswas de-
Pearce's simplywatchingunobservedfromone of severalpos- terminedby the social-psychological ratherthanthepsi aspect
sible vantage points while Pratt, the sender,wrote out the of the study."And in fact,althoughthe differences between
order of the cards that Pearce had attemptedto guess (pp. the scoresof hergoal-oriented and process-oriented groupsdif-
111-23). Also, the descriptionof the experiment was changed fered significantly fromeach other,neitherdifferedsignifi-
in the directionof greaterapparentrigoras it was reportedin cantlyfromher controlgroup'sscores (p. 282). The subjects'
Rhineet al. (1940) and othersof Rhine'sworks(pp. 119-21). trial-by-trialpredictionsof theirown hits and misses "were
Whetheror not thesepossibilitiesfor deceptionwere actually correctabout as oftenas would be expectedon the basis of
realized,the value of the experimentsand of Rhine's 1940 chance" (p. 282). That is, apparentlypsi abilitywas not dem-
book is certainlyquestionable. onstrated.Since the task of Levi's subjects (gettinga Schmidt
Targ and Puthoff'sMind-Reach (1977) is the subject of Random-NumberGeneratorto producenumberslargerthan
similarcriticism.On the basis of a letterfromD. Marks and 16) was different fromthat of Morris,Nanko, and Phillips's
R. Kammann,publishedin Nature, Hansel notes (p. 293) subjects(attempting to influencea lightdisplaydetermined by
that the judges who were to matchthe targetswiththe sub- a Random-Number Generator)(Levi 1979:277; Morris,Nam-
ject's reportswereactuallygivena list of the targetsin "cor- ko, and Phillips 1979:147-48), presumablythe designof the
rect" order,thatis, the orderin whichthe targetswerevisited two experiments was different enoughto rule out the possi-
by the sender; that enoughcues were given the subject that bilitythatLevi's is a replicationof theearlierone.
Marks was able to matchup the fivetargetscorrectly without At least two otherexperiments that Winkelmancites have
ever visitingany of them,"solely on the basis of cues con- had attemptedreplications-Targ and Puthoff(1977) by
tained in the transcripts";and that an attemptedreplication Marks and Kammann (Hansel 1980:293) and Braud (1975)
by Marks and Kammannwas unsuccessful.Again,until (or by Stanfordand Mayer (Braud 1975:144)-and at least two
unless) thesepointsare somehowexplainedaway,it seemsim- othersare replicationsof otherpapers. Tedder and Monty's
possibleto accept the book as seriousevidenceforpsi ability. (1981) article,whichwas not available to us, is identified in
Both Murphy(1971:3-4) and Hansel (1980:313) note that its subtitleas "a conceptualreplicationof influenceon a bio-
replicationof experiments,in mostfieldsof sciencethenormal logicalsystem,"and Stanford(1971) has the subtitle"A Rep-
way of dealingwith criticismand establishinga factualdata licativeStudy" (not includedin Winkelman'scitation).Braud
base, does not workin ESP experiments. Hansel mentionsre- (1980) characterizes his paperas an attemptto explorea "pre-
peatedly(1980:99-100, 139, 190,200 [twoexamples],233, 248, diction fromRex Stanford'sconformancebehavior theory"
252, 293) that an attemptto replicatea specificparapsycho- (p. 297) and then lists six other experimentsbased on the
logicalexperiment was made but did not succeed.This is even same theory,one of whichrepresents an unsuccessfulattempt
true of Rhine's work (Hansel 1980:99-100). Hansel char- at replicationof one of the others.4
acterizesthefailureto replicateas "typical"(1980:251); Mur-
phy (1971:8) observesthat the "laws" of ESP "remainbe-
nignhunchesfromabout the time of tTieFrenchand British that equal time is spent in the high and low states. This random
logic signal . . . can be sampled and clocked into a shiftregister
workersof the 1880's." Writingin Science,Wade (1973:142) whenever a new random decision is desired. A counter-decoder
concurs:"Parapsychologists are stillunable to satisfythe de-
sequencingcircuitinterfacesthis informationwith a display to the
mandfora repeatableexperiment." Murphyin factcomments: subject and a counterwhich talliesthe numberof trials (decisions)
and the number of hits (trials in which the decision matched a
Thoseof you who knowthefieldof experimental parapsychology preselectedoutcomeregisteredon a special console). In the present
knowhowveryfarwe are froma coherent systemwhichis ready studies,the display to the subject consistedof a ring of 16 lights
to replacethe Newtonianand the nineteenth-century typesof . . .The binary random decisionswere employed to advance the
physics.... it willtakebothhonestexperimental up to
replication illuminatedlightone step clockwiseor counterclockwise, thus pro-
the hiltand withit an orderedsystemof ideas beforethe new ducing a "random walk" back and forth on the circle. The hit
sciencehas any chanceof establishing
itself. stepsas hits....
counterhad beenpresetto countonlyclockwise
The subject was . . . told that the task was to bias the lightsfor
Winkelmancitesattemptedreplicationsforonlytwooriginal- each run of 16 trialsin eitherthe clockwiseor counterclockwise
depending
direction, on theinstructionsgiventhesubjectin a con-
researchreports: Wells and Klein (1972) for Watkinsand cealed targetenvelope. . . . The random event generatorproduced
Watkins(1971) and Levi (1979) forMorris,Nanko,and Phil- (hits) 51.86
in accordancewiththesubject'sinstructions
decisions
lips (1979).3 Wells and Klein themselvescomment(p. 147) per cent of the time (Z = 2.38, p < .02, two-tailed)." We have not
attemptedan analysis of the statisticsinvolved in parapsychologi-
3 The followingpassage (Morris, Nanko, and Phillips 1979:147-
cal research,for two reasons: first,we are not competentto do so;
48, emphasisadded) illustratesthe great distancebetweenanthro- and second,as we have pointedout, Murphyis on recordas saying
pological descriptionof behavior and parapsychologicalinvestiga- that 99% of the observed variance is due to factors other than
tion: "The apparatus consistsof a four-modulemulti-purposetest- ESP.
ing systemdesignedfor a varietyof studies. . . . It maintainsan 4 Braud (1980:300) refersto a reportby McCarthy,Keane, and
internally-generatedsource of random binary decisions by ampli- Tremmel (1979:83-84) that an unpublishedexperimentby Charles
fyingZener diode noise with a, two transistoramplifier,then con- Fox with mungbeans achieved "highlysignificant"resultsbut that
vertingthe amplifiednoise to logic levels with an LM 339 com- theirown attemptto replicateit was unsuccessful.Braud considers
parator.The resultinglogic signal is then divided by two to insure his Experiments15, 16, and 17 "conceptual replications"-i.e., rep-

Vol. 23 * No. 1 * February1982 53

 Another deficiencyin parapsychologicalresearch design,
whichagain Hansel (1980) repeatedlymentions(e.g., 92-97,
102-3, 116-17), is the possibility,noted above, of "informa-
tionleakage" fromexperimenter to subject.In additionto the
worksalready mentioned,otherarticlescited by Winkelman
involvethisproblem.The resultsof Dean and Nash's (1967)
plethysmograph experimentlook impressiveuntil one looks
closelyat the design(room plan,p. 2; descriptionof method,
pp. 2-6) and realizes that the subject mighthave been re-
spondingto subliminalvocalizingand perhapsothersubliminal
cues heardthrougha hole in thewall. The experimenters them-
selves admitthis possibility(p. 11), maintaining that it does
not invalidatetheirexperiment but notingthattheyintendto
avoid the possibilityin the future.Grad's experiments with
healingof wounded mice and growthof traumatizedplants
(Grad, Cadoret, and Paul 1961; Grad 1963, 1964), all in-
volving the allegedlysupernormalhealing powers of Oskar
Estebany,becomeless impressivewhenone realizesthatEste-
bany was employedto tend both the mice and the plants
duringthe time when the experiments were being conducted
(Grad 1963:129; 1964:492; cf. Grad, Cadoret, and Paul
1961:18-19), so thatthehealerhad constantcontactwiththle
researchsubjects. Grad maintains(Grad, Cadoret,and Paul
1961:19) that"interference [bythehealer]was mostunlikely,"
but,again,theseexperiments are not conclusive.Sincethesub-
jects of these experiments are close to our own professional
interests,we telephonedGrad on July27, 1981,to ask whether
his experimentshad been replicated.He told us that he is
aware of several attemptsat replicationwhichhe has been
informedwere successful.One has been privatelypublished
(MacDonald, Hickman,and Dakin 1976); the othershave not
been publishedat all. He himselffeels that his workis con-
clusive.When asked whetherhis researchdesign-specifically,
the presenceof OskarEstebany,the healer,as employeehelp-
ing to care forthemice and plantsthatwerethe researchsub-
jects-had been criticized,he repliedthat so far as he knew
it had not. His earlier plant experimentswere "only semi-
blind,"but the last one, publishedin 1967-to whichWinkel-
man does not referand whichwe have not seen ourselves-
was, he thinks,arrangedin far too complicateda fashionto
be tamperedwitheven thoughEstebanymighthave had the
opportunity. In any case, he characterizedthe receptionof his
workas "mainlysilence"; he is aware that most otherscien-
tists-he is by trainingan endocrinologist-seemnot to be
interestedin followingup the researchleads his work pro-
vides.5 Forwald's (1954) PK experimentson the sideways
bouncingof dice, whichWinkelmanalso cites, are still less
conclusivebecause Forwaldacted throughout as his own sub-
ject (Forwald 1954:224). This researchdesignwas criticized
by J. F. Nicol and by E. Girden(Hansel 1980:195-96), the
latterbeingquoted by Hansel as sayingthat"Forwald's 1954
workbegan some nineyearsafterpublicationof Extrasensory
Perceptionafter Sixty Years [Rhine 1940], and yet by the
standardsof thatbook, all his data would be unacceptable."
Demonstrating thephenomenological existenceof eitherESP
or magic-even by fitting one or bothintopresent-day physics
or metaphysics, and still moreby discoveringthat fundamen-
tal changesin eitheror both of these systemsare necessary
because of the natureof psi or mana or both-would require
lications of a concept (p. 313) rather than of an experiment.
Braud's Experiment17 "was inspiredby" (p. 310) an experiment
reportedin Rush (1979), but differentmechanical devices were
used by the two experimenters;in neithercase were the results
more than marginallysignificant(Braud 1980:311; Rush 1979:89).
In none of these reportsis the physical researchdesign described
in enough detail to be evaluated.
5 Grad says that he will gladly give any interestedresearcherthe
benefitof his experiencewithsuch experiments. He may be reached
at the Departmentof Psychiatry,McGill University.
54
a changein the basic paradigmof science.Kuhn (1970) has
shownthatsuchchangesresultpartlyfromfashion-a sugges-
tionthatis borneout by the currentpopularityof beliefin psi
in theabsenceof proof-and thattheyare in a real sense con-
versions(see Kuhn 1970:185-87, 213-14). At least equally,
however,such changesresultfroman accumulationof anom-
alies, apparent violations of paradigm-induced expectations
(Kuhn 1970:114-15). As Kuhn points out (1970:chaps. 6,
7; cf. Hansel 1980:310-11), scientificparadigmschange to
accommodateinformation or to solve problemsthatcannotbe
handledby the old model; but in the fieldof parapsychology,
despite the industryand imaginationof many researchers-
and theirreadinessto suggestpossiblenew paradigmsforgen-
eral adoption (e.g., Dobkin de Rios 1975; Long 1977:233-
42)-there seems to be a dearthof well-documented, factual
materialthat,in thisspecial way,does not fit.
The part of Winkelman'sargumentthatdependson anthro-
pologicalevidenceis just as littleproved. Before lookingat
materialthat allegedlysupportsthe phenomenological reality
of magic,we repeatthatmagic is quite unrelatedto parapsy-
chology;in fact,we trustit is clear fromthe foregoing how
little parapsychology-withits experimentalmethods,statis-
ticallyexpressedconclusions,and predictiveintent-has to do
with culturalanthropology, the normalmethodof which is
participantobservation(Wax 1971:3-14; Powdermaker1966:
10-12; Devereux 1967:3-17; Haring 1947).
Winkelman'suse of anthropological literaturefor "proof"
of the realityof magicis as distortedas his citationsof para-
psychologicalliterature.AlthoughWinkelmancites our paper
(Singer and Ankenbrandt1980), he does not seem to have
graspedits point-whichwas not simplythat"anthropologists
have failed to make clear whether[their]reportsare [i.e.,
represent?]theirinformants' own observations or beliefs,their
own observations,scientifically establishedoccurrences,or ad
hoc rationalizations,"but that,because of thiskindof inaccu-
rate reporting, the bulk of anthropological writingabout al-
legedlyparanormaloccurrences is no morethananecdote.Con-
sequently,we maintain,it is necessaryto filmallegedlypara-
normalevents,test theirresults,utilize trainedobserversas
well as magicians,and make use of any othereffective way of
securingdata thatwill have evidentialvalue.
Winkelmandoes not commenton these recommendations.
However,he seems to hold out a promiseof anthropological
evidencewhenhe says that "anthropologists have recentlybe-
gun to documentparanormalpointsdirectly."The examples
he gives whichwe have been able to obtain do not support
his assertion.For instance,he says that "Castaneda's . . . re-
portsof paranormaleventshave strainedthecredulity of many
(e.g., de Mille 1976, 1980)," implyingthat these books are
solid ethnography but so marvellous,unusual,etc., as to be
difficultto believe.This is not at all the burdenof de Mille's
two carefullydocumentedworks.Rather,de Mille throughout
questionsCastaneda'sscientific credibilityand thefactualbasis
of his writings.De Mille's contentionis that the Don Juan
books were put togetherfrommaterialsthat Castaneda got
eitherfrombooks or fromhis friends.In our experience, also,
verbal parallels-for instance,to the writingsof Alan Watts
and Fritz Perls-are numerousand easilyidentifiable (Anken-
brandt1980:35-42). Thus, Winkelman'simplicationthat Cas-
taneda'swritingssomehowsupportthe phenomenological real-
ityof eitherpsi or magicseemsat best factitious.Of theother
materialscited in thisparagraph,we have succeededin exam-
iningonlySharon(1978). This workmakestheclaim-normal
in descriptions of shamanism(cf. Howells 1962[1948]:127)-
thatthe wizardEduardo has telepathicand clairvoyant powers
and that Sharonacquired similarpowerswhileservingas his
apprentice(Sharon 1978:30, 47, 113). Both claims may be
true,but if theyare to functionas evidenceof anythingmore
data, preferablysuppliedby an observeruninvolvedin the
CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY
 shamanistic process,are necessary.We wouldhope thatSharon
wouldparticipatein researchdesignedto showwhetherhe and
Eduardo actually have such powers.That "other anthropol-
ogistsmay also have observedparanormaleventsin the field
but remainedsilenteitherbecause of the fear of censure. . .
or . . . lack of an appropriatetheoreticalframework"seems
pureconjecture;at any rate,we knowof no cases to supportit.
As withthe parapsychological material,Winkelmanalso re-
fers to secondaryworks-e.g., Bourguignon(1979)-rather
than to the primaryarticleson whichthe point in question
(cf. Bourguignon 1979:67-68) is based and to workswithpoor
researchdesign-e.g., Rose's work (1955; Rose and Rose
1951) with AustralianAborigines,which is discussedbelow.
He does not mentionthe part of our 1980 article in which
some of the difficulties of doing researchwitha folk healer
are explored.As a resultof thisexperienceand of the contro-
versyarisingout of it (Singerand Ankenbrandt 1981), we are
sharplyaware of thedifficulties of attempting to understand-
or even to observeaccurately-whatexactly,in phenomeno-
logical terms,a folkhealer or shamanis doing.Nevertheless,
we maintainthat not only carefulobservation,but, ideally,
filmingand sound recordingare necessaryif the resultis to
have any evidentialvalue. Perhaps most evidentialis the
healer'sabilityto replicatehis/herown featsunderconditions
thatwould make sleight-of-hand impossible.The Filipinopsy-
chic surgeonJuan Blance, who workedwithhuman subjects
in public demonstrationsessions in Michigan during 1979
(Singer and Ankenbrandt1980, 1981), apparentlyhas this
ability;even so, further testingand bettercontrolof test con-
ditionswill be necessarvforcompletecertainty. The factthat
a personis an effective healer or seems to have paranormal
abilitieswhileworkingunderuncontrolled conditionsdoes not
constituteproof.
Again, of this issue Winkelmanseems unaware.Much of
his material,forinstance,Lang (1894) and de Vesme (1931),
is anecdotal,as he notes. In neitherof Barnouw's articles
(1942, 1946) does he indicatebeliefin the phenomenological
realityof mediumistic or shamanisticevents; in bothhe is pri-
marilyconcernedwiththe culturalshapingof suchphenomena
(1942:141-42, 146; cf. Singerand Ankenbrandt1981), and
in bothhis mode of analysisis psychologicalratherthanpara-
psychological(1942:160-67; 1946:18-21). His earlierarticle
ends withthe pointthat "over and above pathologyand pro-
fessionalgain, there are many little-understood motives at
workbothin mediumsand in thosewhomtheyserve" (1942:
167), so that furtherresearchis essential.Elkin is at least as
skeptical.Far fromhaving"studiedAustralianAborigines're-
portedparanormalabilitiesand suggestedthat theywere re-
lated to Rhine'sexperimental parapsychology," Elkin nowhere
mentionsRhine; he threetimes refersto G. N. M. Tyrrell's
work (Elkin 1978[1945]: 42, 44, 46, and notes 4, 7, 12), but
only for confirmation of pointsabout psychicalresearchthat
mightshed lighton the Aborigines'reports.Throughout,El-
kin's approach is skeptical,and his explanationstend to be
rationalistic:for instance,in discussingan unusuallycircum-
stantialreportof an Aboriginal"cleverman" 's allegedsuper-
normalpowers,he notesthat"the explanationmustbe sought
in group suggestionof a powerfulnature" (1978[1945]:54).
Like most anthropologists, he did not observein person the
allegedlyparanormalmaterialhe is reporting.His principal
interestis in the characterand trainingof the "men of high
degree"in the contextof local systemsof beliefand behavior.
The citationwith whichWinkelman'sparagraphends ad-
duces a workby Long thatwe have examinedat length(Singer
and Ankenbrandt1981), arguingthat many scholars-Long
amongthem-and othersconcernedwiththe investigation of
allegedlyparanormalphenomenaare so committedto eithera
positiveor a negativeview thattheyfail to considerevidence
Vol. 23 * No. 1 * February1982
Winkelman:
MAGIC, A REASSESSMENT
on its merits.The evidenceon whichLong's positiveconclu-
sions rest is not at all conclusive.In 15 anthropological ac-
countscited by Long, evidenceforpsi phenomenaturnedout
to be eithernonexistent or based solely on the claims of an
informant.Four others are possibly evidentialbut depend
whollyon the unsupportedword of the anthropologist. This
kind of evidence is at best anecdotal-an invitationto re-
search,not a substituteforit.
Four of the worksthatWinkelmancites in this connection
(Rose 1955,1956; Rose and Rose 1951; McElroy 1955) report
parapsychologicalresearchwith AustralianAborigines.The
Roses' two articles (Rose and Rose 1951; Rose 1955) de-
scribe testingof subjects under somewhatrough-and-ready
conditionsfor GeneralESP and PK. The PK testsproduced
no significantresults (1951:122, 129-30; 1955:97-98); the
GESP tests revealed one high-scorer, an old woman named
Lizzie Williams(1955:127-28; Rose 1955:94-95). The Roses
themselvesnote that their resultsare not conclusive: they
wereworkingunderfieldconditions, witha groupof onlookers,
and withsubjectswhose hyperacutehearingis notable (Rose
and Rose 1951:125); theypaid theirsubjectsin cigarettesand
tobacco, not merely for participationbut for high scores
(1951:124), and consideredthatoldersubjectswereprobably
also motivatedby cultural pride (1951 :124). (As Hansel
[1980:309] notes,whenthereis "a possiblemonetaryor pres-
tigemotivefortrickery" researchdesignneedsto be especially
good.) A later seriesof testsproduced"independently signifi-
cant" scores from6 of the 12 personstested,thoughagain
Lizzie Williams'sresultswere outstanding(1955:94). In this
later report,Rose notes that conditions"would not meet the
stringentrequirementsof contemporary laboratorytesting"
(1955:93), thoughhe feelsthat theywere "adequate." In his
1956 book, he maintainsthat ESP was "conclusivelydemon-
strated"(p. 211), but since the researchdesignremainedun-
changed(1955:92) we cannotagree. McElroy,whose reports
Winkelmanalso cites, likewisenotes the difficulties of such
workunderfieldconditions(1955:118, 121, 124), the incon-
clusivenessof the PK test (p. 123), and the discoverythat
few subjects' scores were impressive(p. 118). Again, given
the researchdesign,6his resultsare exploratoryratherthan
conclusive.Also, like McElroy (1955:119), we wouldquestion
whetherthiskindof formaltestingof Aboriginesis not some-
what "artificial."It seems more valuable to test tribalpeo-
ple-if at all possible-on theirown culturalclaimsto para-
normalabilitiesthanto forcethemintotestsof whatWestern
experimenters believehumanbeingsoughtto be able to do.
In this connection,Winkelmanquotes the familiarclaim
that "the presenceof nonbelieversrendersmagical activities
null and void." In our experienceit is not truethattraditional
healersclaimingparanormalpowersinsiston excludingunbe-
lievers. Juan Blance performedseeminglyparanormalfeats
before several groups includinga professionalmagicianand
composedlargelyof physicians,whose skepticismand some-
timesfrankunbeliefwerefrequently obvious (Singer1979:20;
Singerand Ankenbrandt 1980; Ankenbrandt 1979). Later,he
admittedthathe "can stilldo thework"undersuchconditions.
Others-Jamsie Naidoo of Guyana (Singer 1973), Chief K.
0. K. Onyiohaof Nkpora,Nigeria(Singer1978), SwamiSach-
6 Finding card-guessingexperimentsunsuccessfuland time-con-
suming,McElroy switchedto using fivetobacco tins,one of which
contained a piece of stick tobacco and two of the other four of
which contained"an equivalent-sizedpiece of unscentedsoap" (p.
121) because "the piece of tobacco rattledat timesin laying out
tins beforethe subject." McElroy himselfnotes Aborigines'"acuity
of smell" and cites a study of it (p. 121) ; it seems possible that
either smell or hearing might subliminallyor consciouslyreveal
such a difference.
55
chidananaof Mysore,India (personal communication, 1981),
SiddhaBaba of Saugor,MadhyaPradesh,India (Singer1977),
"Simon Luke," an Ojibwa tent-shaker and healer in western
Ontario (Singer and Ankenbrandt1981), and even Sai Baba
(Sandweiss 1975)-perform beforebelieversand unbelievers
alike,and all exceptSai Baba have assuredus of theirwilling-
ness to performalso beforemovie or videotapecameras.We
are planningto bringBlance back to Detroit for more evi-
dential testingand to filmthe various feats of Swami Sach-
chidanandawhen we have sufficient fundsto cover air fare,
camera rental,film,and processing.Even thoughRhine and
others(Wade 1973:140) have doubtedthe value of studying
"the more esotericaspects of the occult" such as materializa-
tion,theshamansare nevertheless there,willingto demonstrate
to an unbelievingWesternerthe realityof the powers they
claim. The numbersof people who seek help from such
healers-Juan Blance says thathe alone treatsfrom50 to 70
patientsper day and Merz (1979:18) speaks of "hundredsof
thousands"fromthe UnitedStates,Europe,Canada,Australia,
and Japan duringthe last decades-suggest that it is a moral
imperativefor scientiststo determinethe truthor falsityof
theseclaims.But, again,we emphasizethatformaltestingand
especiallythe use of film,videotape,and sound recordingas
well as magiciansas observersare necessaryifwe are to under-
stand the processesof folk healingand othertraditionalbe-
havior involvingallegedlyparanormalphenomena.This kind
of testingand recording will not replacetraditionalparticipant
observationof the healer or otherspecialist; rather,the two
methodscomplementeach other.
A more perniciousthemeof Winkelman'spaper is his sug-
gestionthat fraudand trickeryon the part of the traditional
specialistencouragepositiveexpectationin the onlookersand
therebyfacilitatepsi phenomena.This idea is difficult to recon-
cile with the materialshe cites to supportit. Rose (1956)
tendsto refermuchor all of the Aborigines'claimsthatthey
have paranormalpowerseitherto theirhabitualexaggeration
and mythmaking(p. 204) or to mass hypnosis(pp. 155-66).
Levi-Strauss(1963a) seems to us to suggestthat the pro-
cesses he describesare interpersonal ratherthanparanormal-
the same interpersonalprocesses investigatedat lengthby
Frank (1963), Kiev (1972), Torrey (1972), Singer (1976),
and othermedical anthropologists. The suggestionthat para-
normalor psi powersmay also be involvedmay well be true,
but it is not as yet substantiated.Reichbart'sthesisthattrick-
ery is psi-conduciveis far less definitethan Winkelmansug-
gests; Reichbartis concernedmorewiththeshaman'sattitudes
towardsthe powershe/she claimsthan withthe phenomeno-
logical reality of those powers (Reichbart 1978: 157-61).
What Reichbartsubstantiates is thatshamansare aware of the
importanceof beliefin theiraudiences,that the participants
tend to believe that the shamanhas supernormal powers,and
so on, not thatparanormalphenomenaever actuallyoccurin
shamanism(cf. his summary[p. 163] and n. 7). Thus, the
mainthrustof Reichbart'sarticleis veryclose to Malinowski's
theorythat traditionalpeople tend to utilizemagic in situa-
tions involvinguncertainty so as to increasetheirself-confi-
dence (Malinowski1954 [1925]:28-32). Otheralternativehy-
pothesesare also possible, for instance,one summarizedby
Wallace, citingOmar K. Moore (1966:172):
Moore pointsout thatin the situationof the northern Indian
withtheleastlikelihood
hunter. . . thestrategy of repeatedfail-
ures(endingin thecatastrophe of starvation)is to randomize his
choices[of huntingterritory]each year. . . . For suchpurposes,
readingtheirregular patternof cracksand charredspotson the
burnedscapulaof a caribouis as gooda technique as any.
But of suchalternative
possibilities
Winkelmanseemsunaware.
In summary,we say that the case forpsi based on the an-
thropologicalliterature-likethe case based on parapsycho-
56
logical research-remains unproven.The field is inviting,
crowdedwithshamans,swamis,and psychicsurgeonswhopro-
fesswillingness notjust to talkabout,but to demonstrate para-
normalabilities.We trustthat in a few years' time the evi-
dence to prove or disprovetheirclaimswill be on the record.
On the basis of the above, we findWinkelman'streatment
of theoryinadequate.As he himselfsays, "The conceptsof
mana and psi are far frombeinghighlycongruent."In fact,
the parallels Winkelmannotes between them seem forced,
since the outstandingcharacteristic of mana is that,precisely
because it is extremely powerful, it is regardedas transmissible
and even contagious:
[In Polynesia]manacouldbe contained in any personor thing;
however, a man'spotentialcapacitydependedon his positionin
thewholehierarchy.... sincemanaflowedfromhighto low,an
unguarded contactbetweena chiefand a commoner was therefore
an evil thing;thechiefsuffered a lossof mana,. . . and thecom-
moner. . . mightbe blownout likea fuse.[Howells1962(1948):
33-34]
The passageof valuablequalitiesfromsomesacredobject-human
or non-human, animateor inanimate, partor whole-to a lessvir-
tuoussubjectis oftenconsidered to be accomplished by thesub-
ject's touchingthatobject. . . In all such transactions, power
Thispowermaybe generalized
passesfroma donorto a receptor.
and omnifacile, as in mana....
Justas, in someinstances, sacredthingsare to be touched
so in otherinstances sacredthingsare to be not touched,or are
otherwise to be avoided,in orderto preventthepowerthatis in
themfrominjuringthe person.(Frazerlumpedmana and taboo
procedures in a commoncategoryof "contagious magic.")Such
avoidedobjectsare commonly said to be subjectto "taboo."[Wal-
lace 1966:60-61]
In termsof folkbelief,then,mana is not comparableto psi,
whosepoweris so faintas to requirestatisticalanalysiseven
to be discovered.Mana does not requirebelief.Its power is
openlydemonstrated:if one's gardengrowswell aftera cer-
tain stone is buried in it, then that stone did indeed have
mana (Howells 1962 [1948]:25). A bettercontemporary anal-
ogy to mana thanpsi wouldbe "pyramidpower,"the general
conceptof whichsuggeststhat,just as a particularstone is
filledwithmana and thuscan make one's gardengrow,so the
pyramid,filledwith"pyramidpower,"makes the razorblade
stay sharpor keeps fruitfromrotting.
Probablyit shouldalso be notedthattwo entitiesthatshare
some characteristicsare not necessarilythe same.The formof
argumentWinkelmanuses amountsto the logical fallacyof
the "undistributed middle." To be valid, such an argument
would have to show that,besides sharingcharacteristics, the
two entitiessomehowbelong to the same class-and that is
by no means establishedhere.
FollowingMalinowskiand Norbeck,Winkelmanidentifies
the originof magic as "spontaneousemotionalforms,over-
flowingwithpassion and desire,"as distinguished from"the
institutionalizedtraditionalmythological formsembodyingso-
cial values and customsintowhichsystemsof magicdevelop."
He thenattemptsto showthatthe first,earliertypeof magic
mustinvolvepsi, sincepsi is generallyagreedto be involved-
somehow-withemotion.But how,exactly?On thispoint,the
researchdata of parapsychology are not only weak, but far
more mutuallycontradictory than Winkelman'sbrief sum-
mariesreveal; as Hansel (1980:312) notedmoregenerally, no
"singlelawfulinterrelation" is to be found.
For instance,Rogo (1975) does indeedreviewmaterialsome
of which "implicate[s]emotionalties." Most of these cases
suggestthatthe "ties" are strongly positive(e.g., pp. 122-26);
some, however,seem to involveno tie whatsoever(e.g., pp.
127, 136, 140, 143-46).7 Rogo's chapterendswitha discussion
7 The effectof this evidenceis diminishedby Hansel's (1980:49,
emphasis added) critique: "Members of the various societieswho
CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY
 of the Kappers Greinerstudy(pp. 14647), in whichno cor-
relationbetweenpersonalitytraitsand spontaneousESP ex-
perienceswas found.Roll's workon poltergeists is considered
by Winkelmanto "suggest"that not emotionalties, but "a
strongpsychodynamic of repressionunderliessuch phenom-
ena." Ullman (1977), citedin apparentsupportof thispoint,
in fact says (p. 567, emphasisadded) that the workof Rogo
and Roll suggeststhat"the implicatedagentmay be analogous
to the identified patientin familytherapyand like the latter
may not be the sourceof the disturbancebut rather,the vic-
tim. Considerablymore work would have to be done along
these lines, however,beforeany of these conjecturescan be
definedconvincingly." Ullmanqualifieshis moregeneralpoint
that "as people near psychoticbreaksor crisestheymanifest
muchstrongerpsi eventsin the courseof therapy"by noting
(p. 557) that"in tryingto relatepsi eventsto psychopathology
we face the uncomfortable factthatin neitherinstanceare we
dealingwithclear-cutentitiesabout whichthereis basic con-
sensus." Finally,Dean and Nash (1967) are cited in support
of the point that "the functioning of psi is closelyrelatedto
emotionalfactorsrelevantto theindividual'spsychodynamics."
As we have noted,however,the designof Dean and Nash's
experiment is by no means conclusive.Furthermore, withre-
gardto the psychodynamics, Stanford(1974:38) refersbriefly
to Devereux's (1953:40-41, 406-12) idea that instancesof
whatseemsto be ESP betweenpatientand psychiatrist should
be dealt with simplyas part of the whole body of psycho-
analyticdata and also states (p. 52) anotherrelevantpoint
Winkelmandoes notmention:"Whilesome studieshave failed
to show the anticipatedsignificant negativerelationshipbe-
tweenneuroticism(and otherindicationsof maladjustment)
and ESP performance, in generalthe resultsof experimental
studiespointin thisdirection.There have been fewsignificant
reversals."
Thus we are left with questions: Does spontaneousESP
involvepositiveemotionalrelationships (or sometimesnoneat
all), while poltergeistphenomenainvolve emotionalrepres-
sion? Are ESP abilitiescorrelatedwith an approachingpsy-
chotic break,the patient'snegativetransference to the psy-
chiatrist,or the absence of neurotictraits?Is ESP one thing
in ordinarylife and somethingtotallydifferent in laboratory
experiments?It is at least evident that the ways in which
"emotionaltension"is "centralto psi" remainto be discovered.
Winkelmanthenarguesthat both anthropological data and
parapsychologicalresearch suggest "that psi processes are
closelyrelatedto primarythoughtprocesses."Again,the hy-
pothesismightbe supportedif we had good evidenceforthe
existenceof psi. What is clear,at least fromtheWesternpoint
of view,is thatbeliefin magicrepresents a stagein the devel-
opmentof adult thoughtprocesses.Roheim (1962 [1955]:46)
showsthe symbolicnatureof magicalthoughtratherthanthe
phenomenalrealityof magicalevents:
We growup through magicand in magic,and we can neverout-
growtheillusionof magic.Ourfirstresponse to thefrustrations of
realityis magic;and withoutthisbeliefin ourselves, in our own
specificabilityor magic,we cannotholdour ownagainsttheen-
vironment and againstthesuperego.
The infant. . . learnsin timeto recognize theparentsas those
who determine its fate,but in magicit deniesthis dependency.
The ultimatedenialof dependency comesfromthe all-powerful
sorcerer whoactsout therolewhichhe onceattributed to thepro-
jectedimages.
Roheim exploresthe similaritiesbetweenmagic and schizo-
phrenia:schizophrenics
oftenclaim to possess magicalpowers
have reported [spontaneous psi] experiencesin journals must be
aware of the importanceof supplyingsupportingevidence, but,
so far, these surveyshave failed to provide a single story that is
conclusivelysupportedby ample confirmatory data."
Vol. 23 * No. 1 * February1982
Winkelman:
MAGIC, A REASSESSMENT
or to be influencedby others'magic (p. 94); theirlack of ego
boundariesmeans that theytend to identifywithothersand
yet react withanxietyto any attemptto influencethem (pp.
99-101); their fantasiesoften resembleeffectsclaimed for
black magic by the sorcererand fearedby the "normalprim-
itive" (p. 102). He considersthe major difference between
magic and schizophreniato be that,whereasin folk society
magicalprocesses"are generallyego-syntonic, and are drama-
tized and shared by the social group,"in schizophrenic psy-
chosis "these processes, thoughthey are generallydrama-
tized,are not ego-syntonic and are not sharedby the social
group" (pp. 226-27).
A closely similarpoint is made about psi by Reichbart
(1978:169): "to grantrealityto psi is to come face to face
. . . with the possibilitythat our spontaneous,subconscious
death wishes directedtowardloved objects can be effective.
This possibilityis somnething whichwe do not wish to enter-
tain." For this same reason,Reichbartsays, watchingstage
magic is "analogous to watchinga horrormovie"; we react
with excitementcombinedwith fear and afterwardsfeel re-
assurance because what we saw was not real after all (pp.
169-70). Reichbartarguesalso that stagemagiciansoftenre-
solve the conflictbetweenrealityand "theirwished-for omni-
potence"by denialor reactionformation, whichRoheimcalled
(1962 [1955]:46) the denial of dependency:"magicianssuch
as [Milbourne] Christopherand 'The AmazingRandi' . . .
turnto magicin a kindof cynicalparodyof theirformerde-
sire,and theydenythatpsi abilityof any kindexists"(Reich-
bart 1978:171). Reichbarttherefore suggeststhat"manypara-
psycholgoists,and others,who blithelyinvite magiciansto
commenton allegedlypsychiceventsare extremely naiveabout
the possible psychologicaldepthof a magician'sresistanceto
acceptingparapsychological data no matterhow convincing"
(p. 171). Later he notes specifically"the transparent bias of
Randi, who leaves Christopher farbehindin his psychological
need to deny the existenceof psi" (p. 172)-a bias that we
have also experienced(Singer and Ankenbrandt1980:31;
1981). But it seemsan inescapablecorollarythatthe opposite
attitude-uncriticalacceptanceof poor researchdesign,ques-
tionableconclusions, and anecdotal"evidence"-just as clearly
representsthe mechanismof denial, thoughof the opposite
variety.
Therefore,it seemsto us thatRoheim'sworkrepresents the
"adequate theoryof magic" that Winkelmansays "must ex-
plain the role of psi in the developmentof magicand the rea-
sons for and the processof generalization of the basic struc-
turesof magicintoits social forms."The problemis not that
this theorydoes not exist,but thatWinkelmanapparentlyis
not acquaintedwithit. In the currentstate of the evidence,
both parapsychological forthe phenome-
and anthropological,
nological realityof psi, a psychologicalexplanationis quite
sufficient.When,or if, any proofemerges,the theorycan be
enlargedto accommodateit.
For the mostpart,it does not seem necessaryto comment
on Winkelman'stheoryuntil, or unless, there is more hard
evidenceto supportit. One point,however,shouldprobablybe
made. Winkelman'sdiscussionin this sectionof various the-
ories of magicwould seem to rule out culture-and-personality
as a researchfieldin favor of
or psychologicalanthropology
statisticalmanipulationof alleged psi eventsin a laboratory.
In his discussionof "symbolistapproaches,"which"share a
view of magicas a symbolicsystemwhichdescribesthe pat-
tern of social relationsin the societyin whichit exists,"he
says that "symbolistapproachescannotaccountforuniversal
magicalpracticesand beliefsbecause universalscannotbe ex-
plainedas functionsof highlyheterogeneous social variables."
57
This point seems untenable: societies,however"heterogen- to generatethe most fruitful hypothesesas to how psi works,
eous," neverthelessexhibitcommontraits and themes.The what it is made of, and whereit comes from.Few scholars
psychoanalyticapproach,as exemplified by Roheim's theory who grantthe realityof active psi phenomenawould dispute
of magic,is a symbolicone in thatRoheimtreatsmagicas a thatit is a productof the brainat work.Thus, to groundpsi
code fortheexpressionand communication of commonhuman productionin neurophysiological and/orneurochemical mech-
experiencesinvolvedin growingup and attempting to establishanisms is no more a reductionism than it is to acknowledge
one's individualidentity. that dreams,poems,even philosophicalinquiryare ultimately
Finally,we would like to see some data-or even a con- the productof biochemicaleventsof the brain. In the brain
nectedargument-tosupportWinkelman'scontentionthat"if materialism and mentalismare boundtogether.
magicalpracticesand beliefsseem largelynon-psi-related to- Winkelman'sconditionsforthe most conduciveproduction
day,it may be because of a declinein the effectiveness of psi-of psi pointto a biologicalsubstrate.Indeed,the mostnotable
related practicesas a result of the disruptionof the social indicationthat psi is a neurologicalproductis that it arises
institutionsthat once trainedpractitioners to manipulatepsi duringan alteredstate of consciousness. Throughoutthemed-
potentials."It seemsto us that,farfromdeclining, such socialical, psychological,psychopharmacological, and anthropological
institutionsare multiplyingtoday, in such formsas witch literature, alteredstatesof consciousnessare linkedwithstruc-
covens (Gundela and otherself-described witchesappear on tural,chemical,and/orelectricalchangesin the brain.These
national television), psychic readers,psychic and spiritual mightinclude changesin brain wave activity(Wallace, Ben-
healers,psychicsurgeons,and some formsof alternativemedi- son, and Wilson 1971, Blackmore1977, Schuman1980), dif-
cine and psychotherapy (see Singerand Ankenbrandt1981). ferentialglucose metabolism(Science News 1981), abnormal
College-levelcoursesin parapsychology are taughtat bothour activityof discretebrain structuressuch as the reticularac-
institutionsof higherlearning(see Wade 1973:139). There tivatingsystem (Moruzzi and Magoun 1949, Delafresnaye
is the journalPhoenix: New Directionsin the Studyof Man, 1954), alterationsof neurochemical synthesis(Cole and Katz
with a commitmentto broadeninganthropologyto include 1964,Ray 1972,Furst 1976), or any numberof otherphysio-
psychicresearch,and its parentorganization, the Association chemicalchanges. (Indeed, this list is extremelyattenuated
forTranspersonalAnthropology. both forpotentialneuronalchangesand forreferences
There is the rack of tabloids regard-
beside the supermarket checkoutstand,the NationalEnquirer ing those changes.)
prominent amongthem,thatwill seemingly printany storyso Since Winkelmandrawsdistinctions betweenkindsof magic
longas it is mystical,magical,or occult.And in case psi ability
and the situationsin whichtheyoccur,he shouldalso distin-
turnsout to correlatewithmentalillness,thatalso has an in- guishbetweentypesof alteredstates of consciousness.These
creasingincidencetoday-at thisrate,largenumbersof people can be dividedintohypoaroused(characterizedby lowerthan
shouldbe near the thresholdof psi events. normalsomaticactivity)and hyperaroused(characterizedby
If theyare not, thereseem to be severalpossibleexplana- higherthannormalsomaticactivity).Goodman(1972) shows
tions. Perhaps psi abilitiesdo not reallyexist. Perhapspara- thatthesedistincttypesare inducedby different "drivingtech-
psychologicalresearchdesignhas not been such as to demon- niques." It is possible (but has not yet been tested to my
stratethereal natureof suchabilities.To investigate theques- knowledge)that they also produce distinctbrain wave pat-
tion,we mustgo back to descriptive, "macro"approachessuch terns,and the bifurcationmay then appear in very different
as we have recommended earlier. psi manifestations.
In conclusion: The secondconditionforpsi production, visualization,should
1. We do not denythe possiblephenomenological existencenot be treatedas a discretepotentiator, but ratheras a tool
of psi abilitiesor events,but we do not considerthatexistence that is sometimesused to generateparticularalteredstatesof
provenby the materialthatWinkelmancites or thatwe have consciousness.It should be noted,however,that in some in-
thus farseen. stances visualizationis deliberatelyeschewed (see Schuman
2. Similarly,we do not denythe possiblephenomenological 1980 for a discussionof the relationsbetweenvisualization
realityof magic,but we mustinsiston the necessityof testing and hypoarousedtrance). In these cases otherdrivingtech-
claims to paranormalpowersput forwardby shamans,tent- niques not mentionedby Winkelman,suchas hyperventilation
shakers,diviners,waterwitches,swamis,psychicsurgeons,and and stereotypicmovements,are used to generatethe physio-
otherreligiousspecialists. chemicalchangesthatare necessaryprecursors of alteredstates
3. We do not thinkthat,giventhe presentstate of the evi- of consciousness.
dence for eitherpsi or magic, psi phenomenacan be em- If psi has a biologicalreality,it is capable of doingwork;
ployedto explainmagic-or the reverse. therefore the harnessingof psi throughmagicis a technology.
This would allow us to understandwhy some magic is psi-
relatedwhileothermagicis not.Winkelmanfeelsthatnon-psi
by SHEILAWOMACK magic is a degradedritualisticby-product of the institutional-
UniversityCity Science Center,3624 MarketSt., Philadel- ization of magic,but this is simplya matterof puttingthe
phia, Pa. 19104, U.S.A. 29 vii 81 question one step off.Merely explaininginstitutionalization
Winkelman'sveryprovocativetheorythat some magicworks as an expected outcome of the developmentalsequence of
and that its primary,yet mysterious led to the inven- magico-religious
efficacy formations (Wallace 1965,Weber1956 [1922])
tion of explanatoryontologiesand cosmologiesis more con- avoids relating magical practicesto the ever changingfabric
vincingwhenit is seen in a materialistlight.This is, in part, of other culturalelements,especially other technologies.If
what he seems to have in mind when he bases mentalphe- magicis viewedas a technologyin itself,its effectiveness can
nomena such as cosmologieson empiricalpsi events,but I be comparedto the productioncapabilitiesof alternatetech-
thinkthe materialisticnatureof psi shouldbe moreforcefully nologies,and the ensuingefficiency analysiscan providea ra-
delineated. tionaleforthe patterning of psi and non-psimagicamongand
If psi phenomenapossessempiricalreality,theymustbe the withinsocieties.
product of some materialactivity,and anthropologists and I would suspectthatpsi magicis a low-efficiency technology
parapsychologistsmust be able to explaineventuallyhow psi in relationto the technologiesthat herald industrialization.
works.The growingbodyof experimental, anecdotal,and field- This would explaina generallydecreasingrelianceon magic.
observationalevidenceseems to attest to the validityof psi At the same time,thenotionof magicas competing technology
production.Now an amalgamwiththeneurosciences is needed would explain (1) pockets of magical beliefs and practices

58 CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY
existingwithina modernizedsocietyand (2) the institutional-
izationof magic as a formwithoutprimary-work content.In
the firstcase, magicalpraxismightcoexistwithadvancedtech-
nologybecause magic may work in those domainsin which
mechanicaltechnologies In thesecondcase,
have low efficiency.
whereas neithermagic nor mechanicaltechnologiesare effi-
cient,magic may be utilizedin its institutionalizedformbe-
cause it offerssecondaryrewards (Malinowski 1948, Vogt
1952). When this is the case, magicis best studiedin a men-
talist framework.
Reply
byMICHAEL WINKELMAN
Irvine,Calif.,U.S.A. 29 ix 81
It is encouraging thatthemajorityofthecommentators recog-
nize theimportanceoffurther investigation ofthetopicsraised
here.Clearly,thereare differences ofopinionwithrespectto the
natureof the evidenceaccumulatedto demonstratethat some
magicalpracticesinvolvemanipulationof psi; however,ignor-
ingtheconnection betweenthetwohas beendetrimental to our
understanding of thesephenomena.My responsefocusesupon
a fewmainissues:thenotionofa newparadigm,the definition
of magic,culturalfactorsshapingresponseto reportsof psy-
chokinesisand conceptualizations ofpsi and mana,therelation-
ship between psychosomaticand psychokineticeffects,the
reliabilityofparapsychological research,and, finally,
misrepre-
sentationsofmyworkand thatofothers.
Several commentators suggestthat the perspectiveoffered
hereis a newparadigm.If a paradigmshiftis occurring, how-
ever,it is at thelevelofthedisciplinary matrix,notat thelevel
of exemplars,wheremuchof Kuhn's workfocuses.Analysisof
the relationship betweenscienceand parapsychology (Winkel-
man 1980,Mackenzie and Mackenzie 1980) suggestschanges
farmorebasic thanthoseinvolvedin whatKuhn refersto as a
paradigmshift.I have argued elsewherethat these changes
amountto what Popper (1975) calls an ideologicalrevolution.
AlthoughKuhn'sworkis oflimitedvalue in explicatingchanges
at thislevel,it is apparentthathis modeldoes not necessarily
implyimpendingscientific revolution, regardlessof thequality
oftheevidenceforpsi. Scientific revolutions occurwhenanoma-
lies conflictwiththeprogressof theexplicationofa paradigm.
"Normalscience"can ignoreanomaliesas longas theydo not
impedethe articulationof the paradigmin the directionsdic-
tatedby thevaluesand metaphysicofthescientific
community,
whichdo not changeduringscientific
revolutionsor paradigm
shifts.Acceptanceof parapsychological
researchdependsless
upon scientificevidencethan upon social and culturalfactors
suchas changesin thevaluesofthescientific community.
As Romanucci-Rosspoints out, emulationof 19th-century
physicistshas been detrimental to explorationof the"paranor-
mal,"and a newmethodology
is needed.It appearsthatexplain-
ingpsi requiresfundamental
changesin metaphysic, epistemol-
ogy, and values as well. Feyerabend(1975) argues that the
Copernicanrevolutionrequiredwholenewsets of observations
and evidences,new observationallanguagesand means of ob-
servation,and new worldviews and framesof reference.In
constructing a new system,we must keep in mind that any
systemof knowledgemuststartfromuntestedand untestable
assumptions(Popper 1959, Feyerabend 1975), basic axioms
fromwhichwe deriveconsequencesthatwe can verifyorfalsify.
The newsystemwe developshouldnot onlyaddressdeliberate
and obviousmanifestations ofpsi, but also explorethepossible
roleofunconsciouspsi in suchactivitiesas languageacquisition
and otherformsof enculturation.
As Goodman,Hultkrantz,and Womackpointout, paranor-
mal activitiesinvolvingalteredstatesofconsciousnessseeman
Vol. 23 * No. 1 * February1982
Winkelman:
MAGIC, A REASSESSMENT
ideal area forfurtherinvestigationof psi abilities.Kelly and
Locke (1981) confirmthis in theirhistoricalsurvey.Womack
suggeststhat we begin to acquire data about concomitant
functioning at the neurophysiological level; the Experiential
LearningLaboratoryoftheDepartmentofElectricalEngineer-
ingat Duke University has takena majorstepin thisdirection
with the developmentof portable radio telemetrysystems
(Klein 1976) that can be used formonitoringphysiological
variablesin thefield.Locke and Kelly (1981) offer a framework
forcross-cultural analysisofalteredstatesand psi whichcould
profitably guidebothfieldresearchand reviewsofethnographic
materials.
Dundes suggeststheneedto relatethisdiscussionto "debates
over the difficultquestionof the definition of magic (and the
inevitablyfruitlessattemptto differentiate it fromreligion)."
Such a projectwas beyondthescope of mypaper and prema-
turefromthe point of view taken.Definitionsof magic have
suffered fromtwoassumptionsbroughtintoquestionhere:that
magicis a unitarycomplexand thatit has no technicalefficacy.
The argumenthere is that what has been consideredmagic
involves different phenomenawith different ontologiesand
and thatsomeofit is effective in wayswe do not yet
functions
of magic withinthis perspec-
understand.More investigation
and
tive will be necessarybeforeproceedingwith definitions
of magic withinthis perspective
comparisons.A redefinition
would,however,crosscutthe typologyofferedby Rosengren
(1976). The existenceofpsi-relatedmagicas an exampleof an
empiricallyeffective techniquewouldinvalidatehis typologies
and substruction;social ritualand cosmological/metaphysical
magic wouldprobablyfallwithinhis "ceremony"and "ideol-
in some cases, it
ogy." Even if magic is empiricallyeffective
stillmustbe understoodas a worldview (Wax and Wax 1963)
and as a formof religion(Hammond1970). In fact,the three
aspectsofmagicsuggestedherewouldall appear to be present
withinreligiousactivities.I deliberatelyavoided therelationof
magic to religionand the implicationsof psi phenomenafor
studiesof religion(althoughsome religiouswritershave not;
see, forexample,Thurston1952). It is interesting thatnoneof
thecommentators has raisedtheissueeither.
Hultkrantz,Hallpike,and Prestonaddressthe confusionof
different aspectsof magicwithotherprocesses.Clearly,magic
does notalwaysinvolvepsi,noris it alwayseffective. The oper-
ation of "blocks to falsifiability"undoubtedlyplays a much
greaterrolein maintaining magicalbeliefand practicethando
psi-mediatedsuccesses.My suggestionis thatmagic (occasion-
notthatpsi necessarily leads to magic.
ally) involvespsi effects,
Clearly,human needs and otherpsychologicaland cognitive
processesnotdirectlyrelatedto psi providetheimpetusforthe
development ofmagicalpractices.However,it does appear that
magical practiceshave to some extentdevelopedalong lines
recognizedas facilitatingthe manifestation of psi. The simi-
laritybetweenthe associationalprocessesof the humanmind
ofmagicwithother
and theprinciplesofpsi and theintegration
technologiesundoubtedlycontributeto a confounding of the
different processesin the developmentof magic and of the
different aspectsofmagic.Failureor inabilityto verifysuccess-
es or accountforfailuresofmagicalpracticeswouldcontribute
to a confusion ofvariousaspectsofmagicbothby practitioners
and byinvestigators. As Prestonpointsout,broaderresearchon
howpeopleperceive,experience, and reportanomaliesis neces-
saryto guidethereformulations suggestedhere.The confusion
may be unresolvable;the different aspects of magic identified
here-psi-related,metaphysical/cosmological, and social ritual
-should be seen as focalpoints,not as exclusiveor exhaustive
categories.The perspectiveofferedhere is exploratory,not
final.
Preoperatory thoughtbearsa certainresemblanceto magical
 beliefsand undoubtedlycontributesto the difficulty in dis-
entanglingthe variousaspects of magic. However,insteadof
assertingthat magic representsa stage in the developmentof
adult thoughtprocesseswe shouldsay thatwe attributemagic-
likeprinciplesto earlierstagesofhumanthoughtdevelopment.
There are veryfewcontinuities betweenthe magicalpractices
observedby anthropologists and thecharacteristics oftheearly
stagesof humanthoughtthat we call magical; theattribution
seemssomewhatethnocentric. Additionalresearchis necessary
to clarifytheextentto whichtheattribution ofpreoperatory or
magicalthoughtto childrenand membersofprimitivesocieties
is appropriate.
Dundes suggests"that whereas'psi' involvesknowledge of
events,magic involvescausingevents." However,his list of
"principalallegedmanifestations of'psi' "omits psychokinesis.
AlthoughI agreethat"magicin themorerigorous, narrowsense
oftheanalytictermdoes implythe influencing or manipulating
of nature in some causal way" (emphasisadded), a broader
definitionwouldincludedivination.PerhapsDundes's pointis
thatmagicin the narrowsenseneeds to be differentiated from
divination.With this I completelyagree, and I implicitly
recognizethese differences in organizingthe sections"Magic
and Psychokinesis"and "Divinationand Psi-MediatedInfor-
mationGathering."Althoughparapsychological researchmay
be moregermaneto divinationthanto magicnarrowlydefined,
as Dundes suggests,it remainsto be seen whetherPK effects
can be shown,underexperimental controls,to be involvedin
some magicalacts.
The commentsofDundes and others(e.g., Romanucci-Ross,
Hultkrantz,and Bharati[1977])indicatemoreresistanceto the
idea ofPK thanto thatofESP, a resistancethatseemsto have
a broad culturalbasis. The SocietyforPsychicalResearchin
general early abandoned studies of physical mediumshipin
favorof studiesof mentalmediumship,althoughveryimpres-
sive physicalphenomenawereobtainedby skepticalinvestiga-
tors skilled in detectingfraudand workingunder controlled
conditions(Fielding,Baggally,and Carrington1963 [1908]).
D. D. Homes also providedexcellentevidenceformacro-PK
underlaboratoryconditionsforthe physicistCrookes(1874),
whocame to psychicalresearchwiththeintentto debunkwhat
he consideredfraud.Rhine delayedpublicationof his firstPK
researchfora numberofyears,recognizing thetenuousaccep-
tance ofESP researchand the greaterresistanceto PK. Some
of the skepticismof the physicalphenomenais based on the
greaterpossibilityof fraud.However,as Eisenbud suggests
hereand exploresmorefullyelsewhere(Eisenbud 1970), guilt
about the destructiveaspects of psi has resultedin repression
and projectionand resistanceto theidea of PK may be related
to theseprocesses.
Romanucci-Rosspointsout that in Melanesia mana is part
of the "regularcourseofnature."Since mydiscussionofmana
focusedupon it as a "universalor near-universal concept"as
discussedamong anthropologists, divergencesfromthe Mela-
nesian conceptcould be expected.However,I agree withher.
The definition of mana is a productof the Westernminden-
countering an alien concept;psi was originallydefinedin direct
oppositionto thedominantmaterialist/mechanistic framework
of Westernscience,and it is this definition, ratherthan the
contemporary a moreoperationalizedperspec-
ones reflecting
tive, that I adopted. There is undoubtedlymisrepresentation
ofthedomainsto whichpsi and mana applyin sucha wayas to
produce some spuriouscongruence.Rao (1979) and Harary
(1981) suggestthat psi is an aspect of nature,as Romanucci-
Ross suggestswith respect to mana. Nonetheless,thereare
congruences betweentheconcepts.I am not arguing,as Singer
and Ankenbrandt suggest,thatpsi and mana are thesame,but
ratherthat,althoughtheydiffer, theyshowsomefundamental
similaritiesas a resultofbeingformulated in relationto similar
domains.
Sebald requests clarificationof the relationshipbetween
60
psychosomaticand PK influences.The conceptshave similar
bases, mindoverbodyand mindovermatterrespectively. The
primarydifference seems to be that while the psychosomatic
influence endsat theboundaryofthebodyto whichthemindis
attributed,the PK influenceimpliesno spatial limit.Psycho-
somaticeffects couldbe considereda specialclass ofPK effects.
Althoughthemajoritytheoreticalviewpointin neuroscience is
that thereis a one-to-onerelationshipbetweenphysicaland
mentalevents,someeminentbrainscientists(e.g., Sherrington
1955,Penfield1975,and Eccles [Popperand Eccles 1977])favor
an interactionistpointof view in whichsome formsof human
activitycannotbe explainedin termsofbrainfunctionsalone.
Eccles's hypothesisthat the self-conscious mindinteractswith
criticallypoised regionsof the brain, "effect[ing] changesin
neuronalevents" (p. 363) "to deflectand moulddynamicpat-
ternsof activities"(p. 364), impliesa PK-like force,although
he and Popper"decide not to referto parapsychology"(p. ix).
The interactionist positionrequiressome mechanismthrough
which the mind interactswith the brain, presumablysome-
thingakin to a PK force,and seemsto requirean assimilation
of thepsychosomatic to thepsychokinetic.
Whetheror not one accepts the dualistic position,some
problemsin distinguishing the psychokineticfromthe psycho-
somatic do arise. Althoughcontrolssuch as isolationof the
healer fromthe patient and randomlyand blindlycounter-
balanced treatmentperiods help eliminatethe possibilityof
gross psychosomaticresponses,problems remain. If ESP
operates,whatappears to be a PK effectmightbe a psychoso-
maticresponseofthepatientinitiatedby his/herunconsciously
extrasensoriallyacquired knowledgeof the healer's intent.
Monitoringthe physiologicalstatesof healerand patientmay
revealdetailsoftheinteractive processin sucha wayas to make
PK the morelikelyexplanation,but it may remainimpossible
to distinguish thetwo.For thisreason,theestablishment ofpsi
effects in healingceremoniesis problematic.Eliminationof the
possibilityof gross psychosomaticeffectswould seem to in-
volve such drasticalterationsof the interactivecontextthat
the experimental designwouldviolate its integrity. Failure to
provideevidenceforpsi undersuch conditionswould not tell
us about psi effects in the normalhealingcontext.Descriptive
studies may eventuallyenable us to make some distinction
betweenthe two processesin the field.As Goodman (1974)
suggests,effectswithinfantsor moribundpatientsreducethe
plausibilityof psychosomaticeffects,as would the use of
animalsas patients.Since we may not be able to establishpsi
conclusivelyin the fieldwithoutdestroyingthe contextwhich
apparentlycreates the manifestations, we may be forcedto
rely upon laboratorystudies to establishthe generalcharac-
teristicsof psi and thenuse those characteristics to directus
to thoseaspectsof activitieswhichappear to involveit.
As Long points out, we should not expect ethnographyto
establishpsi withthe same level of reliabilityas we findin the
laboratory.However, we cannot limit our investigationsto
thosephenomenawithwhichwe can establishtheoperationof
psi with absolute certainty.Althoughdescriptiveevidenceis
of littlevalue in convincingskeptics,it is essentialforunder-
standingthe phenomena.As Dobkin de Rios points out, we
need collectionsof descriptivestudiesof eventswhichappar-
entlyinvolvepsi to identifythe conditionsand circumstances
favoringsuch events. Case studies can be invaluablein this
regard (e.g., see Rhine 1981). As Fontenrose(1978) demon-
stratesin his analysisof the accountsof the oraclesof Delphi,
such collectionscan provide their own internalcriteriafor
differentiating valid and invalid cases. (Fontenrosedoes not
suggestthat the oraclesare evidenceforpsi.)
Of course,we shouldapplyexperimental controlsand instru-
mentationwheneverpossible. However,maintainingthe con-
textwhichfacilitatesor elicitspsi may requirethat we utilize
observation with controls rather than experimentalpara-
digms.The use of camerasand magiciansas controlssuggested
CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY
by Singerand Ankenbrandt will not solve theproblemsraised
by critics.Film providesvery little convincingevidence,as
Phillipsand Shafer'sworkshoppresentationof a filmof osten-
sible macro-PKeventsat the 1981 Parapsychological Conven-
tion showed,and Randi's earlier filmindicated the unreli-
abilityof filmin revealingfraud.Nor is filmlikelyto be of
much evidentialvalue in investigationof most aspects of
magicalpractices,forexample,establishingwhat extrasensory
contentmaybe presentin the ecstaticexperiencesof shamans,
in mediumistic trance,or in divinationproceduresor indicating
whetheror not PK is operatingin most magical acts. Unless
we test the psi hypothesisundercontrolledconditions,it will
be possible to discountany potentialpsi phenomenonwith
labels such as delusion,hallucination,faultyperception,folk-
lore,fraud,and placeboand psychosomatic effects.
Acceptance
of thepsi hypothesisor the basic assumptionof magicalbelief
does not eliminatetheneed forfurther explanation.Rather,as
Locke and Kelly (1981) demonstrate, it providesthe basis for
a systematicphenomenological investigationof the relation-
ship betweenpsi and othervariables such as culturalbeliefs
and alteredstatesof consciousness.
The reliabilityof parapsychologicalresearchis a principal
concernin consideringthe implicationsof parapsychology for
anthropology. Jarvie'ssuggestionthatworkon stagemagicians,
theBermudaTriangle,and Castaneda atteststo the "delusion
and fraud"ofthe"logicand methodology ofpsi" is an example
of the rejectionof parapsychologyon the basis of material
thathas nothingwhatsoeverto do withit. Singerand Anken-
brandt's criticismsappear more closely tied to parapsycho-
logical research but are vitiated by heavy reliance upon
Hansel (1980). Child (1980) argues that Hansel's book is
propagandistic, repeatsmany assertionsshownin printto be
erroneous,and demonstratesignoranceof importantpublica-
tionsin the parapsychological literature.Hansel's (and Singer
and Ankenbrandt's)biases are revealedwhenone noticesthat
theworksconsideredwerepublished20-40 or moreyearsago.
By thecriteriaofreplication, parapsychology does extremely
well withrespectto otheraspects of science.Honorton(1976)
reviewsEnglish-language publicationsbetween1934 and 1939,
the period immediatelyfollowingRhine's initial publications
and the one in which academic psychologypaid the most
attentionto parapsychology. He findsthat of 50 studies,70%
werereplications,including61% of the 33 studiescarriedout
at independentlaboratories.He comparesthese figureswith
Sterling's(1959) reporton a sampleof 362 publishedresearch
reportsin psychology,none of which were replications.He
also cites Bozarth and Robert's (1972) examinationof 1,344
psychologicalresearchreports,of whichfewerthan 1% were
replications.The ParapsychologicalAssociationconferenceto
which Honorton was reportingincluded 48 experimental
reports,73% of whichwereattemptsat replicationofprevious
findings,43% of themsuccessful.
Singerand Ankenbrandtrelay Hansel's assertionthat the
criteriaforconclusivenessin parapsychologicalresearchhave
not been metbut failto deal directlywithwhatHansel sees as
its crucialshortcoming-insurance againstexperimenter fraud.
Since criticsrefuseto creditparapsychologists with personal
and scientificintegrity,meetingtheircriteriaof conclusiveness
is problematic.Recognizing the impossibilityof excluding
experimenter fraud (in any branch of science), parapsychol-
ogistshave formulated new criteriaforthe evaluationof their
data. The idea of the conclusivestudyhas been recognizedas
unrealistic;parapsychologists recognizethatindividualstudies
can neverbe immuneto criticismin theformofany numberof
unfalsifiablehypotheses.Morris(1980b) suggeststhat,in gen-
eral, exact replicationis impossible,especiallysince subject
characteristicsand handlingare crucialand nearlyimpossible
to maintainconstantbetweenstudies.He argues that the im-
portantcriterionforassessingparapsychological researchis the
extentof generalconceptualreplicationwithincertainareas of
Vol. 23 * No. 1 * February1982
Winkelman:
MAGIC, A REASSESSMENT
research,particularlythose whichrelate psi scoringto some
othervariable.He suggeststhatstudiesrelatingvariablessuch
as absence of neurosis,extraversion, hypnosis,and avoidance
ofresponsebias to ESP success(reviewedin Palmer1978:sect.
3.2.1, 3.2.2, 2.6.1, and 4.1.2, respectively)constitutea con-
sistent set of findings.Other areas of partially repeatable
researchincludefindingsthat hypanagogic-like states are psi-
conducive(Palmer 1978:sect.2.6.2) and random-event gener-
ator PK studies (see Schmeidler1977:sect. 4.4 for review).
Effectivecriticismof parapsychology wouldrequiretheposing
of alternativetestablehypothesesforthe relationships found.
Studieswhichrelatepsi to someothervariablewouldappear to
be particularly immuneto criticismforsubjectfraud,sinceone
wouldhave to assumethatonlypersonsdisplayingthevariable
wereable to perpetratefraud.
Many ofSingerand Ankenbrandt's criticismsare directedat
misrepresentations of my paper; a carefulreadingwill differ-
entiate what I state fromwhat they attribute.A point-by-
pointresponseto theseis impossiblewithinthespace available.
Given theirconcernwiththeevidentialvalue of citations,it is
curiousthat theyfail to apply similarcriteriain the selection
and evaluationof the materialstheycite. A numberof their
criticismsare based on misrepresentations ofothers'work.One
is reference to Hansel's accusationthat the Pratt-Pearceseries
could have involvedsubject fraud; Stevenson(1967) reviews
manyof thepublishedresponsesto Hansel's (1969) inaccurate
accusations,includingdetailingthe physicalimpossibilityof
the scenariosHansel suggests.(Hansel's updated versionfails
to correctthese inaccuracies.)Singerand Ankenbrandtcite
Hansel regardingMarks and Kammann's (1978) claim that
thejudgesin Targ and Puthoff's(1977) studyreceivedthelist
of targetsin the same orderin whichthe targetswerevisited;
Morris(1980b)has sincepointedout that the researchers pro-
vided Marks and Kammann,duringthe draftstages of their
book,withadditionaldetailscorrecting thescenariosuggested.
Singerand AnkenbrandtdistortMurphy's (1971) work in
assertingthathe says therehave been no satisfactory demon-
strationsofESP and nolawfulinterrelations in parapsychology.
Actually,Murphyis considering"laws comprisinggeneraliza-
tions about conditionsunder which extrasensoryperception
occurs" (p. 5) and does not at all call into the question the
evidence for ESP itself. Furthermore,he points to "three
widely quoted parapsychologicallaws," including"a rather
strikingseries of successfulreplications,showingthose who
believe in the possibilityof success in clairvoyancein experi-
mentalconditionshave scoresthat run above chanceexpecta-
tion" (p. 5), and says that this factorhas "been ratherwell
replicatedin the majorityof studies." Murphydoes not deny
that thereare regularinterrelations, but pointsout the failure
to state and test "psychologicallaws ... in a firm,clear,
quantitative form"(p. 8, emphasisadded), such as the conser-
vation and gas laws of physics.AlthoughMurphydoes point
out the need fora more consistentrepeatability,he suggests
thatsomegeneralizations can be made.
Singerand Ankenbrandt link in a singlesentencereferences
to criticismof parapsychological researchdesignsand a recent
articleon fraudin science,withoutpointingout thatthearticle
on fraudmakes no referencewhatsoeverto parapsychology.
Althoughthey"rule out the possibility"thatLevi (1979) is a
replicationof Morris et al. (1979), since there were several
minordifferences, theyassertthatMarksand Kammannfailed
to replicateTarg and Puthoff'swork withoutconsideringthe
major procedural differencesin Marks and Kammann's
attempt.Withreference to Grad's (1963, 1964) research,they
suggest that there was a failureto controlthe experiment
adequatelybecause of the role that the healerplayed as a co-
experimenter, but theyfail to mentionthatblindand double-
61
blind procedureswere employedto eliminatethe possibility
that any sensoryinformationor bias could cause spurious
findings.
Singerand Ankenbrandt suggestthat the notionthat fraud
and trickery to reconcilewiththe
may facilitatepsi is difficult
materialI cite, but they ignorewhat that materialactually
claims.AlthoughReichbartdoes not attemptto establishthe
realityofshamans'psi abilities,his thesisis that"magic[trick-
ery] is used by shamans as a psi conducive technique...
whichI wouldsuggestactuallyworksgiventhepropercircum-
stances" (p. 156; also p. 157 and elsewhere).AlthoughLevi-
Strauss (1963a) is discussingthe role of trickeryin a social
psychologicalframework, he makes it clear that the shaman
recognizesthat successfulsleight-of-hand leads to cure and
employsit deliberately.Rose points out (pp. 94-95) that the
Aboriginaldoctorsrecognizethattrickery helpsthepatientget
better,and althoughhe considershypnosisas a hypothesishe
is verycriticalof its usefulness:"Hypnosiscan be invokedto
explain many aspects of aboriginal magic, includingfast
traveling.By doingso, however,we place extraordinarily heavy
demands upon it and some explanationsseem rather far-
fetched"(p. 168). Even whenRose does suggesthypnosisas a
mechanism,he is clearlytalkingabout somethingmore than
hypnosisas conventionally understood.Invokinghypnosisas
as explanationof apparentpsi eventsis of littleuse whenthe
processesinvolvedare as incredibleand as littleunderstoodas
thoseof psi (and presumablymay involveit). AlthoughRose
does suggestthatsomeof theclaimsto paranormalpowersare
and mass hypnosis,he
based on exaggeration, myth-making,
also statesthat"the conditionsfavoringpsychicawarenessare
probablyoptimumin the case of the aborigines"(p. 156) and
that"telepathy. .. is theleast farfetchedhypothesis"(p. 155).
Singer and Ankenbrandtcall inaccuratemy summaryof
Ullman's (1977) article in which I suggest that "Ullman
(1977) pointsout thatas peoplenearpsychoticbreaksor crises
theymanifeststrongerpsi eventsin the course of therapy."
This was nota summary,but a reference: accordingto Ullman
(1977:563), "Ullman (1949, 1952), in his clinicalobservation,
noted that patientswho functionclose enoughto a psychotic
break to be aware of its possible imminencedo manifestpsi
abilityin the therapeuticcontextmore frequentlyand more
consistentlythan do otherpatients." The point is certainly
subjectto debate,but it is notdebatablethatUllmanmakesit.
The quotation Singer and Ankenbrandtprovide suggesting
thatUllmanqualifiesthispointis fromtheintroduction to the
articleand is not directedat thisgeneralization.
In referringto the materialswhichsuggestthat poltergeist
cases involve a strongdynamicsof repression,Singer and
Ankenbrandt point out, citingUllman,that the workof Roll
and Rogo indicatesthattheagentmaybe a victimratherthan
the source.Rogo (1980) recognizesthat poltergeistcases may
reflecta familydynamics,withall membersshowinghighlevels
of repressionand aggression,but this does not contradictthe
pointthatrepression is present.Singerand Ankenbrandt discuss
otherportionsof theworkrelatingpsi to emotionalfactorsand
seem to implythat the additionalsourcestheyprovidecon-
tradict my position. In fact these citations (e.g., Stanford
1974) supportit. Furthersupportcomesfromthefindings that
extraversion and absence of neurosisare positivelyrelatedto
ESP (see above) and thatdefensiveness inhibitsit (see Haralds-
son and Johnson1979 for review). Singerand Ankenbrandt
pointout that thewaysin whichemotionalfactorsrelateto psi
remainto be discovered;theneedforfurther investigationdoes
not refutethe point that such relationshipsare central.In
addition to these, thereare links betweenemotionalfactors
and otherpsi-conducivefactorssuch as alteredstates of con-
sciousness.As Honorton(1977) pointsout withreference to the
workon alteredstates,thesefindingssuggestsupportforthe
general theoreticalperspectiveprovided by Bergson's filter
62
model,in whichdecreasesin barriersin the organism(such as
decreaseddefensiveness or neuroticism or the changesbrought
about by psychoticbreaksor alteredstates of consciousness)
facilitateESP.
Experimental findings suggestthatenculturation experiences
influencethe manifestation of psi abilities.Such findingsneed
to be subjectedto cross-cultural verification; ethnographic in-
vestigationsare indispensableforthe explicationof the rela-
tionshipof psi to culture.Otherfociof futureresearchwould
includeexaminationoftheeffects ofchild-rearing practicesand
life-stylesuponpsi abilitiesand thewaysin whichsocial forces
mold thepersonalitiesofparanormalpractitioners.
Cited
References
AGASSI, JOSEPH. 1979. Towards a rational theoryof superstition.
ZeteticScholar3-4:107-20. [ICJ]
ANKENBRANDT, KATE WARE. 1979. Report 1. Psychic surgeryat
Oakland University,11/26/79.Report 2. Hungry for a miracle,
11/27/79-12/1/79. MS. [PS, KWA]
. 1980. Emic/etic/superorganic. MS. [PS, KWA]
ASSION, PETER. 1975. Zur Kritik einer parapsychologischen Volks-
kunde. Zeitschrift far Volkskunde71:161-80. [AD]
BARNOUW, VICTOR. 1942. Siberianshamanismand Western spiritual-
ism. Journalof theAmericanSocietyfor Psychical Research36:
140-68.
. 1946. Paranormal phenomenaand culture. Journal of the
AmericanSocietyforPsychicalResearch40: 2-2 1.
BARRY, J. 1968. Generaland comparativestudyof the psychokinetic
32:334-43.
effectupon a fungusculture.JournalofParapsychology
BATESON, GREGORY. 1958. Naven. Stanford: Stanford University
Press.
BHARATI, A. 1977. "Separate realities:Sense and (mostly)nonsense
in parapsychology,"in Extrasensory ecology.Edited by JosephK.
Long, pp. 12-28. Metuchen,N.J.: ScarecrowPress. [AB]
BLACK, MAX. 1962.Modelsand metaphors. Ithaca: CornellUniversity
Press.
BLAKEMORE, COLIN. 1977. Mechanicsof themind.Cambridge:Cam-
bridgeUniversityPress. [SW]
BOURGUIGNON, ERIKA. 1979. Psychological anthropology. New York:
Holt, Rinehartand Wilson.
BOZARTH, J. D., and R. ROBERTS. 1972. Signifying significantsignifi-
cance. AmericanPsychologist 27:774-75.
BRAUD, WILLIAM. 1975. Psi-conducivestates. JournalofCommunica-
tion 25:142-52.
. 1980. Lability and inertiain conformancebehavior.Journal
of theAmericanSocietyforPsychicalResearch74:297-318.
BRAUDE, STEPHEN. 1980. ESP and PK: A philosophical examination.
Philadelphia:Temple UniversityPress.
BROAD, C. D. 1962. Lectureson psychicalresearch.New York: Hu-
manitiesPress.
BROAD, WILLIAM J. 1981. Fraud and the structureof science.Science
212:137-41. [PS, KWA]
BROWN, S. D. 1978.The mythofforesight: Case studiesfromMexico
and northernGhana compared.CambridgeAnthropology 4:58-77.
[AD]
CANNON, WALTER. 1942. Voodoo death. AmericanAnthropologist 44:
169-81.
CARPENTER, JAMES. 1977. "Intrasubjectand subject-agenteffects in
ESP experiments,"in Handbookof parapsychology. Edited by B.
Wolman,pp. 202-72. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
CASTANEDA, CARLOS. 1968. The teachingsof Don Juan. Berkeley:
Universityof CaliforniaPress.
1971. A separatereality.New York: Simon and Schuster.
1972. Journeyto Ixtlan. New York: Simon and Schuster.
1974. Tales of power.New York: Simon and Schuster.
1977. The second ring of power. New York: Simon and
Schuster.
CHILD, IRVIN. 1980. ESP and parapsychology: A criticalreevaluation
by C. E. M. Hansel. JournalofParapsychology 44:358-61.
CLAUSEN, LARS. 1969. Behauptungder Magie. Internationales Jahr-
buchfur Religionssoziologie 5: 141-55. [AD]
CLEMEN, CARL. 1921. Wesen und Ursprungder Magie. Archivfuir
Religionspsychologie 2-3:108-35. [AD]
CODRINGTON, R. H. 1969 (1891). The Melanesians. Oxford:Claren-
don Press.
COLE, N. O., and M. M. KATZ. 1964.The psychotomimetic drugs:An
overview. JournaloftheAmericanMedical Association187: 758-61.
[SW]
CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY
CORNFORD, F. M. 1957. From religionto philosophy:A studyin the Winkeltnan:
MAGIC, A REASSESSMENT
originsofWesternspeculation.New York: Harper and Row. [JE]
Cox, W. E., et al. 1966. The effectof PK on electromechanicalsys-
tems.2. Furtherexperiments and analysiswithPK clocksmachine. PRESSEL. 1974. Trance, healing, and hallucination: Three field
JournalofParapsychology 30:123-51. studiesin religiousexperience. New York: Wiley. [FDG]
CROOKES, WILLIAM. 1874. Researchesin thephenomenaof spiritual- . 1977. States of consciousness:A new classification.Paper
ism. London: J. Burns. presentedto the 76th annual meetingof the AmericanAnthro-
DEAN, E. D., and C. B. NASH. 1967. Coincidentplethysmograph pological Association.
results under controlledconditions. Journal of the Societyfor GOODMAN, JEFFREY.1977. Psychicarchaeology:Time machineto the
PsychicalResearch44:1-14. past. New York: Berkeley.
DELAFRESNAYE, J. F. 1954. Brain mechanismsand consciousness. GRAD,BERNARD.1963. A telekineticeffectupon plant growth.Inter-
Oxford:Blackwell ScientificPublications. [SW] nationalJournalofParapsychology 5:117-33.
DE MILLE, RICHARD. 1976. Castaneda'sjourney: The powerand the --. 1964. A telekineticeffectupon plant growth.2. Experiments
allegory.Santa Barbara: Capra Press. involvingthe treatmentofsalinein stopperedbottles.International
. Editor. 1980. The Don Juan papers: FurtherCastanedacon- JournalofParapsychology 6:473-98.
troversies. Santa Barbara: Ross-Erickson. - . 1967. The "laying on of hands": Implicationsforpsycho-
DEVEREUX, GEORGE. Editor. 1953.Psychoanalysis and theoccult.New therapy,gentling,and the placebo effect.Journalof theAmerican
York: InternationalUniversities. [PS, KWA] SocietyforPsychicalResearch61:286-305. [PS, KWA]
. 1967. Fromanxietyto methodin thebehavioralsciences.New . 1977. "Laboratoryevidenceof the 'laying-on-of-hands,"in
York: HumanitiesPress. [PS, KWA] Frontiersofhealing.Edited by N. Regush,pp. 203-13. New York:
DE VESME, CAESAR. 1931. A history ofexperimental spiritualism.Vol. Avalon.
1. Primitiveman. Translatedby Stanleyde Barth. London: Rider. GRAD,BERNARD,R. CADORET,and G. PAUL. 1961. An unorthodox
DOBKIN DE RIos, MARLENE. 1972. Visionaryvine:Psychedelic healing method of treatmentof wound healing in mice. International
in thePeruvianAmazon.San Francisco: Chandler. JournalofParapsychology 3:5-24.
. 1975.Is sciencecatchingup withmagic?A lookat thecontent GRIAULE, MARCEL. 1965. Conversations with Ogotemmeli. London:
of beliefsystems.Medical Anthropology Newsletter7 (November): OxfordUniversityPress.
4-7. [PS, KWA] GROBER-GLtCK, GERDA.1974. "Second sightin northernGermany:
-. 1976. The wildernessof mind: Sacred plantsin cross-cultural Traditional popular belief and precognition,"in Parapsychology
perspective. BeverlyHills: Sage. [MD] and anthropology. Edited by Allan Angoffand Diana Barth, pp.
. 1978. A psi approach to love magic,witchcraft, and psyche- 180-202. New York: ParapsychologyFoundation. [AD]
delics in the PeruvianAmazon. Phoenix2:22-27. [MD] HALIFAX-GROF, JOAN. 1974. "Hex death," in Parapsychologyand
DWYER, PETER. 1979. Animal metaphors:An evolutionarymodel. anthropology. Edited by Allan Angoffand Diana Barth,pp. 59-73.
Mankind 12:13-27. New York: ParapsychologyFoundation.
EISENBUD, JULE. 1967. The worldof Ted Serios. New York: Morrow. HALLPIKE, C. R. 1979. Foundationsof primitivethought.Oxford:
[JE] ClarendonPress.
1970.Psi and psychoanalysis. New York: Gruneand Stratton. HALPIN, MARJORIE, and MICHAEL AMES. Editors. 1980. Manlike
-. 1981. Paranormalforeknowledge: Problemsand perplexities. monsterson trial: Early recordsand modernevidence.Vancouver:
New York: Human SciencesPress. [JE] Universityof BritishColumbia Press. [RJP]
ELKIN, A. P. 1977 (1945). Aboriginalmenof highdegree.New York: HAMMOND,DOROTHY. 1970.Magic: A problemin semantics.Amnerican
St. Martin's Press. Anthropologist 72:1349-56. [AD]
EMERSON, J. N. 1977."Intuitivearcheology,"in Extrasensory ecology. HANDY, E. S. C. 1927.Polynesianreligion.Honolulu: Bishop Museum.
Edited by JosephK. Long, pp. 293-304. Metuchen,N.J.: Scare- HANSEL,C. E. M. 1969. ESP: Deficienciesof experimentalmethod.
crow Press. Nature221:1171-72. [PS, KWA]
. 1979. Intuitive archaeology: A pragmaticstudy. Phoenix . 1980. ESP and parapsychology: A criticalreevaluation.Buf-
3(2) :5-16. falo: Prometheus. [PS, KWA]
EVANS-PRITCHARD,E. E. 1933. The intellectualist(English) inter- HARALDSSON, E., and M. JOHNSON.1979. ESP and the Defense
pretationof magic. Bulletinof the Faculty of Arts, University of Mechanism Test (DMT) Icelandic Study no. III: A case of the
Egypt1: 282-311. [AD] experimenter effect?EuropeanJournalofParapsychology 3:11-20.
-. 1937.Witchcraft, oracles,and magicamongtheAzande.Oxford: HARARY,S. 1981. "Psi as nature." Programand presentedpapers.
OxfordUniversityPress. [ICJ] 24th annual ParapsychologicalAssociation convention,Syracuse,
- . 1972 (1958). Witchcraft, oracles,and magicamongtheAzande. August.
Oxford:ClarendonPress. HARING,DOUGLASG. 1947. Scienceand social phenomena.American
EVANS-WENTZ, W. Y. 1978 (1935). Tibetanyogaand secretdoctrines. Scientist35:351-63. [PS, KWA]
New York: OxfordUniversityPress. HARKORT,FRITZ. 1968. "Volkserzaihlungsforschung und Parapsy-
FIELDING, E., W. BAGGALLY, and H. CARRINGTON. 1963 (1908). chologie: Gemeinsame Probleme," in Volksiiberlieferung: Fest-
"Report on a seriesof sittingswithEusapia Palladino," in Sittings schriftfiirKurtRanke. Edited by Fritz Harkort,Karel C. Peeters,
withEusapia Palladino and otherstudies,by E. Fielding.New York: and Robert Wildhaber,pp. 89-105. G6ttingen:Otto Schwartz.
UniversityBooks. [AD]
FERNANDEZ, JAMES. 1974. The mission of metaphorin expressive HARRIS,MARVIN.1980. Cultural materialism:The strugglefor a
culture. CURRENTANTHROPOLOGY15:119-45. scienceof culture.New York: Vintage Books. [AH]
FEYERABEND, P. 1975. Againstmethod.London: Humanities Press. HEYWOOD, ROSALIND.1978. The sixthsense: An inquiryinto extra-
FONTENROSE, J. 1978. The Delphic Oracles. Berkeley:Universityof sensoryperception. Harmondsworth:Penguin. [AD]
CaliforniaPress. HONIGMANN, J. J. 1976. The development of anthropologicalideas.
FORWALD, H. 1954. An approach to instrumentalinvestigationof Homewood: Dorsey Press. [EB]
psychokinesis.JournalofParapsychology 18:219-33. HONORTON, C. 1976. "Has sciencedevelopedthe competenceto con-
FRANK, JEROME. 1963. Persuasionand healing.New York: Schocken. frontclaims of the paranormal?" in Researchin parapsychology
[PS, KWA] 1975, pp. 199-224. Metuchen,N.J.: ScarecrowPress.
FRAZER, JAMES. 1929 (1911). The goldenbough.Vol. 1. New York: 1977. "Psi and internalattentionstates," in Handbookof
Book League of America. parapsychology. Edited by B. Wolman, pp. 435-72. New York:
FURST, PETER T. 1976. Hallucinogensand culture.San Francisco: Van NostrandReinhold.
Chandlerand Sharp. [SW] HOWELLS, WILLIAM. 1962 (1948). The heathens:Primitiveman and
GELLNER, ERNEST. 1973. "The savage and the modern mind," in his religions.Garden City: Doubleday Anchor. [PS, KWA]
Modesofthought. Edited by R. Hortonand R. Finnegan.London: HULTKRANTZ,AKE. 1981. "Ritual and mystery: On the art of medi-
Faber. [ICJ] cine-men,or what the scholardid not tell," in Der Wissenschaftler
. 1974. Legitimationof belief.Cambridge:CambridgeUniver- und das Irrationale,vol. 1. Edited by H. P. Duerr. Frankfurtam
sityPress. [ICJ] Main. [AH]
. 1980. Spectacles and predicaments.Cambridge: Cambridge JAMEs, E. 0. 1961 (1938). Comparative religion.London: Methuen.
UniversityPress. [ICJ] JONES, DAVID. 1979. Visions oftimeexperiments in psychicarchaeol-
GOLDENWEISER, A. A. 1919.Magic and religion.Psychological Bulletin ogy.Wheatley:TheosophicalPublishingHouse.
16:82-90. [AD] KELLY, E., and R. LOCKE. 1981. Alteredstatesof consciousnessand
GOODMAN, FELICITAS D. 1972. Speaking in tongues:A cross-cul- laboratory psi research:A historicalsurveyand researchprospectus.
tural studyof glossolalia. Chicago: Universityof Chicago Press. New York: ParapsychologyFoundation.
[FDG, SW] KELSEN, HANS. 1943. Society and nature. Chicago: Universityof
.1974. Possible physiologicalmechanismaccountingforsome Chicago Press. [JE]
cases offaithhealing.Medikon 3(6/7): 39-41. KENNEDY, J. E. 1978. The role of task complexityin PK: A review.
GOODMWAN, FELICITAS D., JEANNETTE H. HENNEY, and ESTHER JournalofParapsychology 42:89-122.

Vol. 23 * No. 1 * February1982 63

 . 1979. Redundancy in psi information:Implicationsfor the
goal-orientedhypothesisand forthe applicationof psi. Journalof
Parapsychology 43:290-314.
KENNEDY,J. E., and J. TADDONIO.1976. Experimentereffectsin
parapsychologicalresearch.JournalofParapsychology 40:1-33.
KIEV, ARI. 1972. Transcultural psychiatry. New York: Free Press.
KLEIN, F. 1976. A low-powered4-channelphysiologicalradiotelem-
etry systemfor use in surgicalpatients.IEEE Transactionson
BiomedicalEngineeringBME-23, pp. 58-63.
KREITLER,H., and S. KREITLER. 1972. Does extrasensory perception
affectpsychologyexperiments? JournalofParapsychology 36:1-45.
. 1973. Subliminal perceptionand extrasensoryperception.
JournalofParapsychology 37:163-88.
KRIPPNER, S. Editor. 1977-. Advancesin parapsychology. New York:
Plenum.
KUHN,THOMASJ. 1970. "The structureof scientificrevolutions,"in
Foundationsof theunityof science: Towardan international ency-
clopediaofunifiedscience,vol. 2. Edited by Otto Neurath,Rudolf
Carnap, and Charles Morris,pp. 53-272. Chicago: Universityof
Chicago Press.
KUSCHE,LAWRENCE DAVID. 1975. The BermudaTrianglemystery-
solved.New York: Harper and Row. [ICJ]
LANG,A. 1894. Cock Lane and common-sense. London: Longmans,
Green.
. 1897. The bookof dreamsand ghosts.London: Longmans,
Green.
LEATHERDALE, W. H. 1974. The roleofanalogy,models,and metaphor
in science.New York: AmericanElsevier.
LESTER, D. 1972. Voodoo death: Some new thoughtson an old
phenomenon.AmericanAnthropologist 74:386-90.
LEUBA,JAMEs H. 1912. The varieties,classification,and originof
magic.AmericanAnthropologist 14: 350-67. [AD]
LEVI, ARIEL. 1979. The influenceof imageryand feedbackon PK
effects.JournalofParapsychology 43:275-89.
LEVI-STRAUSS, CLAUDE. 1963a. "The sorcererand his magic," in
Structuralanthropology, pp. 167-85. New York: Basic Books.
. 1963b."The effectiveness of symbols,"in Structuralanthro-
pology,pp. 186-205. New York: Basic Books.
. 1963c.Structuralanthropology. New York: Basic Books.
LEX, BARBARA. 1974. Voodoo death: Some new thoughtson an old
explanation.AmericanAnthropologist 76:818-23.
LOCKE, R., and E. KELLY. 1981. "A frameworkfor cross-cultural
analysisof alteredstatesand psi," in Alteredstatesofconsciousness
and laboratorypsi research:A historicalsurveyand researchpros-
pectus,by E. Kelly and R. Locke. New York: Parapsychology
Foundation.
LONG, JOSEPH K. 1977a. "Extrasensoryecology: A summaryof evi-
dence," in Extrasensoryecology.Edited by Joseph K. Long, pp.
371-88. Metuchen,N.J.: ScarecrowPress.
. 1977b. Psychical events and religiousdevelopment.Paper
presentedat the annual meetingof the AmericanAnthropological
Association,Houston, Tex.
. 1977c."Shamanismand voodoo death: Stresstheoryin medi-
cal anthropology,"in Extrasensoryecology.Edited by JosephK.
Long, pp. 257-70. Metuchen,N.J.: ScarecrowPress.
. Editor. 1977d.Extrasensory ecology.Metuchen,N.J.: Scare-
crow Press. [MD]
. n.d. Psychoanalyticanthropology:A case ofabortedcritique.
SouthernAnthropologist 9(3). In press. [JKL]
LOWIE, ROBERT. 1952. Primitivereligion.New York: Liveright.
MCCARTHY, DONALD, PATRICE KEANE, and LA ;VRENCE TREMMEL.
1979. "Psi phenomenain low complexitysystems:Conformance
behaviorusing seeds," in Researchin parapsychology 1978. Edited
by W. G. Roll, pp. 82-84. Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press.
[PS, KWA]
MAcDONALD, R. G., J. L. HICKMAN, and H. S. DAKIN. 1976. Pre-
liminaryphysicalmeasuresof psychophysical associatedwith
effects
threeallegedpsychichealers.Privatelyprinted(H. S. Dakin, Engi-
neeringCenter,3101 WashingtonSt., San Francisco,Calif.94115).
[PS, KWA]
McELROY, W. A. 1955. Psi testingin ArnhemLand. Oceania 26:
118-26.
MACKENZIE, B., and S. MACKENZIE. 1980. Whence the enchanted
boundary? Sources and significanceof the parapsychological
tradition.JournalofParapsychology 44:125-66.
MALINOWSKI, B. 1935. Coralgardensand theirmagic.2 vols. London:
GeorgeAllen,Unwin.
. 1948.Magic,science,and religionand otheressays.New York:
Free Press. [SW]
. 1954 (1925). "Magic, science,and religion,"in Magic,science,
and religionand otheressays, pp. 17-92. New York: Doubleday
(Anchor).
-.1972 (1931). "The role of magic and religion," in Readerin
comparativereligion.Edited by W. A. Lessa and E. Z. Vogt, pp.
63-71. New York: Harper and Row.
64
MARKS,D., and R. KAMMANN. 1980. The psychology of thepsychic.
New York: PrometheusBooks.
MAUSS,MARCEL.1972 (1950). A generaltheoryofmagic.Translated
by Robert Brain. New York: Norton.
MERZ,RENE. 1979. Philippinen.Paper read at ParapsychologyCon-
ference,Zurich,Switzerland,November.
MILLER, RONALD S. 1981. An interviewwith FritjofCapra. Science
ofMind Publications,July,pp. 8-18. [MD]
MORRIS, ROBERT. 1980a. New directionsin parapsychologicalre-
search: The investigationof psychic development procedures.
Parapsychology Review11(2):1-4.
. 1980b.Some commentson the assessmentof parapsychologi-
cal studies: A reviewof The psychology of thepsychic,by David
Marks and Richard Kammann. Journalof theAmericanSociety
forPsychicalResearch74:425-43.
MORRIS, R., M. NANKO, and D. PHILLIPS. 1979."Intentionalobserver
influenceupon measurementsof a quantum-mechanicalsystem:
A comparisonof two imagerystrategies,"in Researchin para-
psychology1978. Edited by W. G. Roll, pp. 146-50. Metuchen,
N.J.: ScarecrowPress.
MORUZZI,G., and H. W. MAGOUN.1949. Brain stemreticularforma-
tionand activationoftheEEG. Electroencephalography and Clinical
Neurophysiology 1: 455-73. [SW]
Moss, LEONARDW. 1963. Su alcuni problemimetodologicidell'antro-
pologia culturale: L'osservatore partecipante in una situazione
di disastro.De Homine 17-18:260-66. [LWM]
MURPHY,GARDNER.1961. Challengeof psychicalresearch:A primer
of parapsychology. New York: Harper. [AD]
. 1971. The problem of repeatabilityin psychical research.
Journal of the AmericanSocietyfor Psychical Research65:3-16.
[PS, KWA]
NORBECK,EDWARD. 1961. Religionin primitivesociety.New York:
Harper and Row.
OPLER,M. 1936. Some pointsofcomparisonand contrastbetweenthe
treatmentof functionaldisordersby Apache shamansand modern
psychiatricpractice.AmericanJournalof Psychiatry92:1371-87.
Osis, KARLIS,and E. BOKERT. 1971. ESP and changed states of
consciousness induced by meditation.Journal of the American
SocietyforPsychicalResearch65: 17-61.
OSTRANDER, SHEILA,and LYNN SCHROEDER.1970. Psychic discov-
eries behindthe Iron Curtain. Englewood Cliffs:Prentice-Hall.
[AD]
PALMER,JOHN.1971. Scoringon ESP tests as a functionof beliefin
ESP. 1. The sheep-goateffect.Journalof theAmericanSocietyfor
PsychicalResearch65:373-408.
. 1978. "Extrasensory perception: Research findings,"in
Advancesin parapsychology 2. Edited by S. Krippner,pp. 59-222.
New York: Plenum.
PENFIELD,W. 1975. The mystery of themind. Princeton:Princeton
UniversityPress.
POPPER,K. 1959. The logic of scientific discovery.New York: Basic
Books.
. 1975. "The rationalityof scientificrevolution,"in Problems
of scientificrevolutions.Edited by R. Harre. Oxford: Clarendon.
. 1976. "The mythof the framework,"in The abdicationof
philosophy.Edited by Eugene Freeman. London: Open Court.
[ICJ]
POPPER,K., and J. ECCLES.1977. The selfand its brain:An argument
forinteractionism. Berlin: Springer.
POWDERMAKER, HORTENSE.1966. Strangerandfriend:The way ofan
anthropologist. New York: Norton. [PS, KWA]
PREUSS,K. TH. 1938. Das Irrationalein der Magie. Zeitschrift fur
Ethnologie70:272-86. [AD]
PRINCE,R. 1964. "Indigenous Yoruba psychiatry,"in Magic, faith,
and healing.Edited by A. Kiev, pp. 84-120. New York: Free Press
of Glencoe. [EB]
PUTHOFF,H., R. TARG,and E. MAY. 1980. Experimental psi research:
Implicationsforphysics.Menlo Park: StanfordResearchInstitute.
RADCLIFFE-BROWN, A. R. 1965. Structureand functionin primitive
society.New York: Free Press.
RADIN,PAUL. 1957. Primitivereligion.New York: Dover.
RANDI,JAMES(THE AMAZING).1975. The magicof Uri Gedler.New
York: Ballantine. [ICJ]
RAO,K. RAMAKRISHNA. 1978. "Theoriesof psi," in Advancesin para-
psychology2. Edited by S. Krippner, pp. 245-95. New York:
Plenum.
- . 1979. "Psi: Its place in nature,"in Researchin parapsychology
1978. Edited by W. G. Roll, pp. 159-83. Metuchen,N.J.: Scare-
crowPress.
RAY,0. S. 1972.Drugs,society,and humanbehavior. St. Louis: Mosby.
[SW]
REICHBART,R. 1978. Magic and psi: Some speculations on their
relationship.JournaloftheAmericanSocietyforPsychicalResearch
RHINE,J.B. 1977. "Extrasensoryperception,"in Handbookofpara-
CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY
 psychology. Edited by B. Wolman, pp. 163-74. New York: Van Winkeltnan:MAGIC, A REASSESSMENT
NostrandReinhold.
RHINE, J. B., and J. G. PRATT. 1957.Parapsychology: Frontierscience
ofthemind.Springfield: Thomas. [PS, KWA] --. 1977.Hindu loavesandfishes(16-mmfilm).Rochester,Mich.:
RHINE, J. B., J. G. PRATT, B. M. SMITH, C. E. STUART, and J. A. Singer-Sharrette Productions. [PS, KWA]
GREENWOOD. 1940. Extra-sensoryperceptionafter sixty years. . 1978. "No moresecrets":Initiationand change(16-mmfilm).
Boston: Bruce Humphries. Rochester,Mich.: Singer-Sharrette Productions. [PS, KWA]
RHINE, J. B., B. M. SMITH, and J. L. WOODRUFF. 1938. Experiments
* 1979. Interviewwith Juan Blance, 11/29/79(cassette tape
bearingon the precognitionhypothesis.2. The role of ESP in the transcribedby K. W. Ankenbrandt,4/4/80). [PS, KWA]
shuffling of cards. JournalofParapsychology 2(2):119-38. SINGER,P., and K. W. ANKENBRANDT. 1980. The ethnographyof the
RHINE, L. 1981. The invisiblepicture:A studyof psychicexperiences. paranormal.Phoenix 4(1): 19-34.
Durham, N.C.: McFarland. . 1981. "Hungry for a miracle": Transference/countertrans-
ROGO, D. S. 1975. Parapsychology: A centuryof inquiry.New York: ferencein psychic surgeryand parapsychologicalanthropology.
Taplinger. MS. [PS, KWA]
. 1980. "The poltergeistand familydynamics:A reporton a SKORUPSKI,JOHN.1976. Symboland theory.Cambridge: University
recentincident,"in Researchin parapsychology 1979, pp. 108-9. Press.
Metuchen,N.J.: ScarecrowPress. STANFORD, REX. 1971. EEG alpha activityand ESP performance.
ROHEIM, GEZA. 1962 [1955]. Magic and schizophrenia.Edited by Journalof theAmericanSocietyforPsychicalResearch65 :144-54.
WarnerMuensterberger and S. H. Posinsky.Bloomington:Indiana . 1972. Suggestibilityand success at augury-divination from
UniversityPress. "chance" outcomes.Journalof theAmericanSocietyfor Psychical
ROLL, WILLIAM. 1972. The poltergeist. New York: Doubleday. Research66:233-52.
. 1978.Towards a theoryforthepoltergeist.EuropeanJournal . 1973. Extrasensoryeffectsupon associative processes in a
ofParapsychology 2(2):167-200. directed free response test. Journal of the AmericanSocietyfor
ROMANuccI-Ross, LOLA. 1978. "Melanesian medicine," in Culture
PsychicalResearch67:147-90.
and curing.Edited by Peter Morley and Roy Wallis. London: - . 1974. An experimentally testablemodel forspontaneouspsi
Peter Owens. [LR] events.2. Extrasensoryevents.JournaloftheAmericanSocietyfor
. 1980. On the researchingof lost images. Anthropology PsychicalResearch68:34-57.
and . 1977. "Experimentalpsychokinesis,"in Handbookof para-
HumanismQuarterly5(1): 14-20.
ROSE, LYNDON, and RONALD ROSE. 1951. Psi experimentswith psychology. Edited by B. Wolman, pp. 324-81. New York: Van
AustralianAborigines.JournalofParapsychology 15: 122-31. Nostrand Reinhold.
ROSE, RONALD. 1955. A second report on psi experimentswith STEVENSON, I. 1967.An antagonistviewofparapsychology:A review
AustralianAborigines.JournalofParapsychology of ProfessorHansel's ESP: A scientificevaluation.Journalof the
19:92-98. AmericanSocietyforPsychicalResearch61: 254-67.
-. 1956. Livingmagic.New York: Rand McNally.
STERLING, T. 1959. Publicationdecisionsand theirpossibleeffecton
ROSENGREN, KARL ERIK. 1976. Malinowski'smagic:The riddleof the
inferencesdrawnfromtestsof significance or vice versa.Journalof
empty cell. CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY 17:667-85. [AD] theAmericanStatisticalAssociation54:30-34.
RUBIN, L., and C. HONORTON. 1972. "Separating yins fromyangs: STUMPFE, KLAUS-DIETRICH. 1976.Der PsychogeneTod des Menschen
An experimentwiththeI Ching,"in ProceedingsoftheParapsycho- als Folge eines Todeszaubers.Anthropos71:525-32. [AD]
logical Association,1971. Edited by W. G. Roll, R. Morris,and SWANSON, Guy. 1960. The birthof thegods. Ann Arbor: University
J. Morris.Durham: ParapsychologicalAssociation. of MichiganPress.
RUSH, JOSEPH H. 1979. "A non-verbalg e s p studywithcontinuous TADDONIO,J. 1976. The relationshipof experimenter expectancyto
recording,"in Researchin Parapsychology 1978. Edited by W. G. performanceon ESP tasks. Journalof Parapsychology 40:107-14.
Roll. Metuchen,N.J.: ScarecrowPress. [PS, KWA] TARG,R., and H. PUTHOFF.1977. Mind-reach: Scientistslook at
ST. CLAIR, SHEILA. 1972. Psychic phenomenain Ireland. Cork and psychicability.New York: Delacorte Press.
Dublin: Mercier. [AD] TART, C. T. 1980. Is the paranormal "normal"? Science 207:712.
SANDWEISS, SAMUEL H. 1975. The holyman and thepsychiatrist. San [JKL]
Diego: BirthDay. [PS, KWA] TEDDER, W., and M. MONTY.1981. "Examination of long-distance
SANNWALD, GERHARD. 1965. ParapsychischePhanomene im Volks- PK: A conceptualreplicationof influenceon a biologicalsystem,"
marchen. Zeitschriftfur Parapsychologieund Grenzgebiete der in Researchin parapsychology 1980. Edited by W. G. Roll. Metu-
Psychologie8: 1-41. [AD] chen,N.J.: ScarecrowPress. In press.
SAPIR, J. D., and J. C. CROCKER. Editors. 1977. The social use of THOMAS,N. W. 1904. Studiesin terminology.1. Magic. Man 4:163-
metaphor.Philadelphia: Universityof PennsylvaniaPress. 67. [AD]
SARGA, JOHN. 1974. Contributionsto the problemof the originand THOMAS,WILLIAMI. 1928. The childin America.New York: Knopf.
psychologyof magic.Anthropological Journalof Canada 12:11-17. [LWM]
[AD] THURSTON, H. 1952. The physicalphenomenaof mysticism. London:
SCHMEIDLER, GERTRUDE. 1970. High ESP scoresaftera swami'sbrief Burns Oates.
introductionto meditationand breathing.JournaloftheAmerican TITIEV, M. 1972. "A freshapproach to the problemof magic and
SocietyforPsychicalResearch64: 100-103. religion,"in Readerin comparative religion.Edited by W. Lessa and
- . 1977. "Research findingsin psychokinesis,"in Advancesin E. Z. Vogt,pp. 430-33. New York: Harper and Row.
parapsychology. Edited by S. Krippner,pp. 79-132. New York: TORREY,E. FULLER.1972. The mindgame:Witchdoctors and psychia-
Plenum Press. trists.New York: EmersonHall. [PS, KWA]
SCHMEIDLER, GERTRUDE, and GARDNER MURPHY. 1946.The influence TRUZZI,MARCELLO.1972. The occult revival as popular culture:
ofbeliefand disbeliefin ESP upon individualscoringlevels.Journal Some random observationson the old and the nouveau witch.
of Experimental Psychology 36: 271-76. SociologicalQuarterly13:16-36. [AD]
SCHUMAN, MARJORIE. 1980. "The psychophysiological modelof medi- TYLOR,E. B. 1948 (1871). Primitiveculture.New York: Harper.
tation and altered states of consciousness:A critical review,"in ULLMAN, M. 1949. On the nature of psi processes.Journalof Para-
The psychobiology ofconsciousness.Edited by J. M. Davidson and psychology 13:59-62.
R. J. Davidson, pp. 333-72. New York: Plenum Press. [SW] -. 1952. On the natureof resistanceto psi phenomena.Journal
ScienceNews. 1981. 119:76-78. [SW] of theAmericanSocietyforPsychicalResearch46: 11-13.
SEBALD, HANS. 1978. Witchcraft: The heritageofa heresy.New York: 1977. "Psychopathologyand psi phenomena,"in Handbook
Elsevier. [HS] of parapsychology. Edited by B. Wolman,pp. 557-74. New York:
SETTLE, Tom. 1971. The rationalityof science versusthe rationality Van Nostrand Reinhold.
of magic. Philosophyof theSocial Sciences 1:173-94. [AD] VIRTANEN,LEEA. 1976. Paranormale Spontanerlebnissein der
SHAH, IDRIES. 1968. Orientalmagic.New York: Octagon. modernenErzaihltradition. Studia Fennica 20:338-47. [AD]
SHARON, DOUGLAS. 1978. Wizardof thefour winds.New York: Free VOGT,EVONZ. 1952. Water witching:An interpretation of a ritual
Press. pattern in a rural Americancommunity.ScientificMonthly75:
SHERRINGTON, C. 1955. Man on his nature.Garden City: Doubleday 175-86. [SW]
Anchor. WADE,NICHOLAS.1973. Psychicalresearch:The incrediblein search
SINGER, PHILIP. 1973. Trance,dance,and healingin Guyana (16-mm of credibility.Science 181: 138-44. [PS, KWA]
film).Rochester,Mich.: Singer-Sharrette Productions. [PS, KWA] WADE,N. 1980. News and comments.Science207:41. [JKL]
1976. "Introduction: From anthropologyand medicineto WALKER,E. H. 1977. "The compleat quantum mechanicalanthro-
'therapy'and neo-colonialism,"in Traditionalhealing:New science pologist,"in Extrasensory ecology.Edited by JosephK. Long, pp.
or newvcolonialism?(Essays in critiqueof medical anthropology). 53-95. Metuchen,N.J.: ScarecrowPress. [JKL]
Edited by Philip Singer, pp. 1-25. The Conch: A Sociological WALLACE,A. F. C. 1965. Revitalizationmovements.AmericanAn-
JournalofAfricanCulturesand Literatures9 (1 and 2). [PS, KWA] thropologist 58:264-81. [SW]

Vol. 23 * No. 1 * February1982 65

 -. 1966. Religion:An anthropologicalview.New York: Random WHITE, RHEA. 1977. "The influenceof experimentermotivation,
House. attitudes,and methodsof handlingsubjectsin psi test results,"in
WALLACE, R. K., H. BENSON, and A. F. WILSON. 1971. A wakeful Handbookof parapsychology. Edited by B. Wolman,pp. 273-304.
hypometabolicphysiologicstate. AmericanJournalof Physiology New York: Van NostrandReinhold.
221:795-99. [SW] WIMMER, WOLF. 1972. Wiederkehrder Magie? Zauberglaube und
WATKINS, G. K., and A. M. WATKINS. 1971.PossiblePK influences Wissenschaft.Zeitschrift fur Rechtsmedizin 70: 136-47. [AD]
on theresuscitationofanesthetizedmice.JournalofParapsychology . 1975. Parapsychologie,Aberglaube und Verbrechen.Zeit-
35:257-72. schriftfur Volkskunde 71:181-201. [AD]
WINCH, PETER. 1964. Understandinga primitivesociety.American
WAX, MURRAY, and ROSALIE WAX. 1963. The notion of magic.
CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY 4:495-518. [AD] PhilosophicalQuarterly1. [ICJ]
WINKELMAN, MICHAEL. 1979. Extrasensory,cognitive,and social
WAX, ROSALIE H. 1971. Doing fieldwork:Warnings and advice. featuresamong Nahuatl children.ParapsychologyReview 10(5):
Chicago: Universityof Chicago Press. [PS, KWA] 18-23.
WEBER, MAX. 1956 (1922). The sociologyof religion.Translated by . 1980. Scienceand parapsychology:An ideologicalrevolution.
Ephraim Fischoff.Boston: Beacon Press. [SW] Revision3(1): 59-64.
WEBSTER, HUTTON. 1948. Magic: A sociologicalstudy. Stanford: -. 1981. The effectsof formaleducation upon extrasensory
StanfordUniversityPress. [AD] abilities: The Ozolco study. Journalof Parapsychology.In press.
WEDENOJA, WILLIAM. 1978.Religionand adaptationin ruralJamaica. WINKELMAN, M., and G. KAWANAmI-ALLEN. n.d. The effects of for-
Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation,Universityof California, San mal educationupon extrasensory abilities:The Farm School study.
Diego, La Jolla,Calif. JournalofParapsychology. In press.
WELLS, R., and J. KLEIN. 1972. A replicationof a "psychichealing" WOLMAN, B. Editor. 1977. Handbookof parapsychology. New York:
paradigm.JournalofParapsychology 36: 144-49. Van Nostrand Reinhold.

ANTHROPOLOGICAL LITERATURE
AN INDEX TO PERIODICAL ARTICLES AND ESSAYS - QUARTERLY
A uniqueindexof morethan1,000serialpublications and collections
ofessaysreceivedbythe
TozzerLibraryofthePeabodyMuseumofArchaeology andEthnology. The indexis producedby
undertheguidanceofa distinguished
thestaffofTozzerLibrary AdvisoryBoardrepresenting all
majorsubfieldsofanthropology:
CyrilS. Belshaw,
Eugene MaryHaas,Frank
Giles, Hole,
JuneNash,SolTax,
andRichardB. Woodbury.
The Editoris Nancy J.Schmidt.
ANTHROPOLOGICAL LITERATUREis the most comprehensive indexof currentarticles
availableto anthropologistsandresearchers in tangentdisciplines.
It listssignificantmaterialsin
all languages,althoughthemajorlanguagesofcollection areEnglish, French,Spanish,German,
andSlavic.Collections ofanthropological essays- suchas, symposia, and
colloquia,festschrifts,
collectionsof readings- are also indexed.The 9,000to 10,000entriescompiledeachyearare
organizedintofiveclassified sections:(1) cultural/social
anthropology (economic, political,
social,
religious,other);(2) archaeology;
(3) biological/physical
anthropology; (4) linguistics;
(5) general,
method,and theory.Publishedquarterly sinceWinter1979.

1 yr. 2 yr. 3 yr.

Individual $28 $52 $ 76
Institutional $38 $72 $106

To subscribe
contact:
REDGRAVEPUBLISHINGCOMPANY
P.O. Box 67, South Salem, New York 10590 (203)431-0454

66 CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY