Re-calling Magical Thinking and Social Distance
Re-calling
Magical Thinking and Social Distance
Azher Hameed Qamar, Ph.D (www.drazher.com)
We have been living in a post-corona
Neo-normal world for quite some time. Though things are returning to their
pre-COVID functioning state, we have not truly “bounced back.” We are moving
ahead in a new innovative world where we are preparing to embrace and cope with
anything like COVID-19. Nonetheless, one thing that we learned during COVID-19
is “social distance.” In this short note, I share my thoughts on magical
thinking and social distance.
Contrary to dengue, which was visible to
human eyes, the coronavirus is invisible. The fear of the “unseen” threat
increases anxiety. Following the direction and instruction from medical gurus,
we have developed defense mechanisms to cope with anxiety in such conditions;
examples include washing away “corona fears” with 20 seconds of hand-washing,
socially distancing oneself from the physical world, and adhering to ‘do not
touch’ warnings. The fundamental premise is that physical contact might be
dangerous. The governments put a lot of effort into making social distance a
‘temporary norm’ through lock-down. Through the media, we were persuaded to
substitute a 3-foot ‘masked’ greeting for handshakes, hugs, and kisses. We are
learning to utilize our ‘magical thinking’ to refrain from risk-taking behavior
that was once seen as normal. It seems that magical thinking has been
extensively invoked for ‘rescue’.
Hence, we took advantage of ‘work from home’
holidays and kept busy with online work, adhering to the popular slogan ‘stay
home — stay safe’. If we ran out of food, we either ordered online or went to
grocery shopping while taking safety precautions like wearing gloves and a mask
and maintaining a social distance. This was a result of social and electronic
media campaigns that featured images of ‘untouchable’ dead bodies and the
misery of COVID-19 sufferers. To be safe, it was normal practice to use hand
sanitizer, put on a mask and gloves, pay with a credit card, avoid the sales
desk, and only handle certain grocery products. When I got home after
‘successful food shopping’ I had to complete a 20-second ritual of hand-washing
and promptly changing the “untouchable” clothes. I was able to recognize the
change in behavior and the influence of media on behavior. Regardless of
whether one came into contact with a suspicious object or someone who could be
carrying the COVID-19 virus, it was wise to practice precautions.
I am aware that I was not the only one to go
through this during COVID-19 (before vaccination). This cognitive programming
to make one feel secure and safe makes me think of Frazerian’s law of
contagion, which explains how magical thought is connected to the magical power
of physical touch. Frazer (1925), an armchair researcher, compiled pieces of
information from various ethnographic narratives and postulated that people
frequently assume that ‘physical touch’ might magically connect two people or
things. Even if the contact is broken, this magical connection still exists. As
a result, anyone with whom the contagious person comes into physical contact
may acquire the contagious person’s qualities and symptoms. Because they are
unable to see a causal (logical) connection, people use ritualized cleaning
that varies depending on culture to get rid of the contagious effects. Alcock
(1995) highlights how the neurobiological structure of the human brain
contributes to this magical thinking and helps people understand the
unexplained. Amidst the several contentious views on the myths and truths of
COVID-19, We are currently witnessing an ‘extension’ of germ theory in the form
of a consensus between magical and causal thinking. The public and private
media highlighted the notion of “social distance” to promote the government’s
lock-down efforts, despite the fact that WHO is referring to physical distance
in the context of the spread of COVID-19. In some countries, like Pakistan,
maintaining a social distance may be the only way of keeping a physical
distance. Companies promoted their products through commercials that featured
hand-washing ‘competitions’ in response to the rise in demand for cleaning and
disinfection products. People started to be more cautious about physical touch,
and hand-washing rituals started to take on more importance. No longer was the
‘power of touch’ idealized. I perceive these institutionalized attempts to use
magical thinking as a coping strategy to reduce anxiety. The ‘magical thinking’
that has been characterized as ‘irrational’ (Piaget, 1929), ‘primitive’
(Frazer, 1925), ‘unreasonable’ and ‘invalid’ (Eckblad and Chapman, 1983),
appears to be a ‘normal’ human thinking in accordance with scientific thinking
that served as a defense mechanism during Covid-19. In my opinion, the
socio-cognitive screenplay that the agents of socialization created was quite
effective in imparting to us the crucial lesson of ‘how to change behavior?’
However, it can cost us more than we realize to watch a variety of ‘behavior
change specialists’ in the media constantly influencing public opinion. In the
present day, when a medical emergency has evolved into psycho-social and
economic crises, I assume that the post-COVID-19 world may encounter new
psycho-social issues, such as a modified form of OCD (obsessive-compulsive
disorder), problems with ‘internalized’ social isolation, a normalization of
magical thinking, and possibly a ‘globalization’ of protective behavior.
References
Eckblad, M. & Chapman, L.J.
1983. Magical ideation as an indicator of schizotopy. Journal of Consulting and
Clinical Psychology, 51, 215–225.
Frazer, J.G. (1925). The Golden
Bough. New York: The Macmillan Company.
Alcock, J. (1995). The belief
engine. Skeptical Inquirer, 19(3), 14-18.
Piaget, J. (1929). The child’s
conception of the world. London: Kegan Paul.
Rosengren, K. S, & Hickling,
A. K. (2000). Metamorphosis and magic: The development of children’s thinking
about possible events and plausible mechanisms. In K.S. Rosengren, C.N. Johnson
& P.L. Harris (Eds.), imagining the impossible. Magical, scientific, and
religious thinking in children, pp. 75–98. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University
Press.
Comments
Post a Comment