Another article (from 2008) on "magicology," the newly named study of the interaction of neuroscience and magic. It's Devin Powell's "Magicology: Casting a Spell on the Mind," New Scientist, Dec. 24, 2008. The author says in part,
Over the past couple of years, neuroscientists and magicians have been getting together to create a science that might be called “magicology”. If successful, both sides stand to benefit.By plundering the magicians’ book of tricks, researchers hope to develop powerful new tools for probing perception and cognition. And if they find any tricks they can’t explain, that could lead to new knowledge about how the brain works.
Similarly, magicians hope that the collaboration will lead to new magic tricks by alerting them to perceptual or cognitive weaknesses that they didn’t already know about. “The real proof that a science of magic has come of age will be when we can use science to build a better magic trick,” says Richard Wiseman, a psychologist at the University of Hertfordshire in Hatfield, UK.
Interesting. I'd suggest that some of the additional value of a real science of magic might also be in explaining why and how the brain continues to accept (rationally) fakes and understandable but error-prone identifications, for example. That could be helpful in prosecuting fraud and other crime. The study of "seeing things that are not 'there'" encompasses more than just the study of magic and neuroscience. Check out David Eagleman's "Visual Illusions and Neurobiology," from 2001. There are lots of studies of optical illusions and their effects on the brain. I would suggest that if adherents of "magicology" are really talking about just the active creation of magic effects, deceptions, and illusions primarily for entertainment purposes, they're missing out on an opportunity to help out with some really valuable insights into social and legal issues. Why do people who "know" that something is impossible believe that it "could" be possible after seeing a magician perform a trick? What effect on critical thinking? Why do children believe as they do after seeing a magic trick? Two researchers, Karl Rosengren and Anne Hickling, have published some interesting material on how children as young as 4 or 5 perceive magic tricks. Contrast it with a publication by Andrew Shtulman and Susan Carey on how children think about unusual events.
Comments