The Agential View of Misfortune

Human Nature 35 (1):63-88 (2024)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In many traditional, small-scale societies, death and other misfortunes are commonly explained as a result of others’ malign occult agency. Here, we call this family of epistemic tendencies “the agential view of misfortune.” After reviewing several ethnographic case studies that illustrate this view, we argue that its origins and stability are puzzling from an evolutionary perspective. Not only is the agential view of misfortune false; it imposes costs on individuals and social groups that seem to far outweigh whatever benefits the view might provide. We thus doubt that the agential view of misfortune is explainable in terms of adaptive effects. However, neither does it seem readily explainable as a consequence of belief formation strategies that are on the whole adaptive (as is plausibly the case for certain other of our false beliefs, including some that are costly). Accordingly, we contend that the commonness of the agential view of misfortune demands a special evolutionary explanation of some kind. We provide a partial explanation of this phenomenon by highlighting the adaptive benefits that often flow to occult specialists in environments where the agential view of misfortune is entrenched. What this does not explain, however, is the general lack of resistance we observe in response to occultists’ exploitative behaviours over (cultural) evolutionary timescales. We conclude by canvassing a few possible explanations for this puzzling lack of resistance, and while we commit ourselves to none, we do find one option more promising than the others.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,283

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Deriving Features of Religions in the Wild.Pascal Boyer - 2021 - Human Nature 32 (3):557-581.
Fortunate Misfortune Revisited: Further Reflections.Saul Smilansky - 2023 - Roczniki Filozoficzne 71 (2):93-108.
Does the normal brain have a theory of mind?Valerie E. Stone & Philip Gerrans - 2006 - Trends in Cognitive Sciences 10 (1):3-4.
The source of universal concepts: A view from folk psychology.Angeline Lillard - 1998 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (4):580-580.
Animal Behavior.Stephen J. Crowley & Colin Allen - 2008 - In Michael Ruse (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Biology. Oxford University Press. pp. 327--348.
Seeing is not (necessarily) believing.Virginia Slaughter & Linda Mealey - 1998 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (1):130-130.

Analytics

Added to PP
2024-03-21

Downloads
25 (#637,002)

6 months
25 (#115,879)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Ronald J. Planer
Australian National University
Kim Sterelny
Australian National University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

The Enigma of Reason.Dan Sperber & Hugo Mercier (eds.) - 2017 - Cambridge, MA, USA: Harvard University Press.
Why do humans reason? Arguments for an argumentative theory.Dan Sperber - 2011 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 34 (2):57.
The evolution of misbelief.Ryan McKay & Daniel Dennett - 2009 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32 (6):493–510; discussion 510–61.
Language, embodiment, and the cognitive niche.Andy Clark - 2006 - Trends in Cognitive Sciences 10 (8):370-374.

View all 13 references / Add more references