Research Blog #9: Argument and Counterargument

This is my argument:
The use of gadgets like EMF (electromagnetic frequency) readers and audio recorders to capture EVPs (electronic voice phenomenon) allows ghost hunters to falsely present their findings as scientific, and the prominence of paranormal media reinforces this misunderstanding. This representation of ghost-hunting technologies, as a result of the “naturalizing” effect, incorrectly legitimizes paranormal investigations and tricks people into trusting the flimsy evidence that such technologies provide. The general public’s lack of scientific understanding makes them susceptible to this misconception, thus perpetuating a belief in paranormal existence. 

These are my research questions:
In what ways do ghost hunting technologies falsely legitimize the scientific aspect of the paranormal? How does the media (i.e., paranormal programming) perpetuate these misunderstandings?

Ghost hunting technologies make the paranormal seem scientific as a result of the “naturalizing” effect; basically, when investigators and the media treat such gadgets as scientific tools that capture hard evidence of ghosts, they end up tricking viewers into believing that paranormal existence can be proved with science. Paranormal programming has been able to perpetuate these misconceptions by drawing in curious viewers who want to believe in the paranormal. These viewers project their desires onto the ghost hunting shows that they watch, which then reaffirms their desires as plausible and even scientific. This feeds people’s fascination and belief in the paranormal, which pushes them to consume even more paranormal media. 

One source that I can use for my counterargument is Heather Ridolfo’s “Social Influences on Paranormal Belief: Popular Versus Scientific Support.” Here is the bibliographical information:

Ridolfo, Heather, et al. “Social Influences on Paranormal Belief: Popular Versus Scientific 
    Support.” Current Research in Social Psychology, vol. 15, no. 3, Center for the Study of 
    Group Processes, 2010, pp. 33–41, https://crisp.org.uiowa.edu/sites/crisp.org.uiowa. 
    edu/files/2020-04/15.3.pdf

The counterargument here is essentially that paranormal belief does not need to be seen as scientific in order to be believable; rather, as long as paranormal belief is seen as “popular” among the masses, people will be more inclined to accept the idea of ghosts. Here, I want to argue about how social influence may actually play a larger role than so-called “scientific” evidence of paranormal belief. Instead of disagreeing with my counterargument, I would actually like to concede to it. The “naturalizing” effect mostly impacts people who want to trust science, while social influence has a greater impact on those who may distrust science. Then, I would like to argue that the “naturalizing” effect from my original argument can be seen as an extension of social influence towards a different audience, as the “naturalizing” effect relies on the words or suggestions of other people. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Scouting the Territory

    I'd like to mostly keep my original topic but focus more on the history of séances and the occult (possibly just in America, but I'm not entirely certain for now). I'd also like to talk about why people seem to be so fascinated with the idea of ghosts and contacting the dead. I still think it would be interesting to further explore more "modern" and "scientific" ways of contacting spirits today as well; however, after looking into the topic some more, I think I will end up discussing actual scientific explanations for why people think they see ghosts as well as the reasons for why different technologies used to detect or contact ghosts actually prove nothing. Originally, I wanted to touch on both sides of the "Are ghosts real?" argument, but after doing some further research, it would be far easier for me to explain why ghosts do not exist, as I am now thoroughly a skeptic. Thinking ahead, I think I'd like to open my paper with the hist...
Read more

Research Blog #10: Abstract and Works Cited

 Abstract The rise in popularity of paranormal media has been followed by a growth of paranormal belief throughout the twenty-first century. The gadgets used in paranormal media results in a scientific presentation of ghosts and paranormal existence. This paper explores how the technology-heavy representation of ghost-hunting tools in paranormal media misleads viewers into believing that ghosts can currently be scientifically proven with evidence like EMF and EVP. This paper also examines the factors behind viewers’ tendency to paranormal belief, such as the naturalizing effect, the public’s lack of scientific understanding, and social influence.  Works Cited (Note: Formatting may be odd on Blogger despite my attempts at reformatting) Axtell, Cassie C., "Assessing Electronic Voice Phenomena through Speech Science"  (2017).   Honors Theses . 415. https://encompass.eku.edu/honors_theses/415 Buckner V, John E., and Rebecca Anders Buckner. “Talking to the Dead, Listening...
Read more

Research Proposal

Working Title: The Effect of Cognitive Ability and Scientific Misrepresentation on Paranormal Belief Topic :       I will examine the possible reasons behind people’s continued belief in the paranormal. This paper will link people’s cognitive ability to scientific misrepresentation, particularly in media, and explore the unreliability of ghost-hunting techniques, such as EVP.  Research Question:       What sparked people’s interest in contacting spirits? How have our methods of reaching the undead evolved, and are these methods reliable? Despite the mounting evidence against the existence of spirits, why do people continue to believe in the paranormal? Theoretical Frame: In the study by Gordon Pennycook et al. “Analytic Cognitive Style Predicts Religious and Paranormal Belief,” and the study “Probability Misjudgment, Cognitive Ability, and Belief in the Paranormal” by Jochen Musch et al., researchers looked into the link between people’s c...
Read more