The Trickster and the Paranormal

by George P. Hansen

  Max Weber was one of the giants of sociology. His concept of rationalization describes the rise of modern civilization. Part of rationalization entails disenchantment, i.e., the suppression of magic, miracles, and supernatural phenomena. Weber was eminently clear on this, but very little attention has been given to his ideas in regard to the paranormal. This is altogether astounding because his theory of rationalization has proven to be one of the grandest and most comprehensive visions in sociology. It describes cultural trends over thousands of years. It is widely known not only within sociology, but also in other academic disciplines. It crucial for understanding the structure of society.

  Weber’s concept of charisma was an integral part of this. In its pure form, charisma involves supernatural power, a fact that Weber clearly stated. Again amazingly, scholars almost universally ignore that. If they do acknowledge it, they seem puzzled. For Weber, charisma was central to understanding authority, power, and domination. Authority is required in all societies, and he identified three types: bureaucratic (found in our society today), traditional (found in tribal and feudal cultures), and charismatic authority. Charisma is the primordial base; traditional and bureaucratic authority involve attenuated forms of charisma, and sociologists are more comfortable discussing them.

  We will return to Weber’s ideas many times in this book because they have extraordinary applicability. They will be especially pertinent in Part 5 with discussions of totemism, French structuralism, and literary theory.

  The third chapter in this Part is devoted to cultural transformation, and it draws upon the work of anthropologist Anthony F. C. Wallace, who was a leading theorist on cultural revitalization movements. Wallace’s description of cultural transformation has remarkable parallels with van Gennep’s ideas in The Rites of Passage. The supernatural played a role in many cultural transformations, and those are illuminated by theories of the trickster, liminality, and anti-structure.

  Winkelman, Weber, and Wallace drew from history and anthropology. They enlightened us about a range of cultures, from simple hunter-gatherer societies to today’s post-industrial world. Their theories have great generality.

  The work presented in this Part is sociological; it is formulated primarily at the level of groups. As such, it is a bit more abstract than some of the other sections of this book. Part 4 presents a number of concrete examples from modern society, and those will help clarify the ideas.

  The problems of parapsychology cannot be understood without considering wide historical and cultural contexts. The works of Winkelman, Weber, and Wallace provide them. The implications of their work are profound.

  CHAPTER 7

  Michael Winkelman on

  Magico-Religious Practitioners

  The supernatural and its place in society are central topics of this book. Thus the people who directly engage supernatural forces are of particular interest, and their roles and social positions tell us much. Michael Winkelman wrote an enlightening monograph on the topic entitled Shamans, Priests and Witches: A Cross-Cultural Study of Magico-Religious Practitioners (1992). Winkelman is an anthropologist at Arizona State University. In 1982, while still a graduate student, he published a paper integrating findings of parapsychology with anthropological theories of magic. The paper appeared in Current Anthropology, a journal devoted to debate and dialogue, and a number of eminent anthropologists responded. Winkelman also carried out ESP experiments during his anthropological fieldwork, and he published them in the Journal of Parapsychology. He later served as president of the Society for the Anthropology of Consciousness (SAC), an affiliate of the American Anthropological Association. The SAC has an interest in mediumistic and mystical traditions, possession trance, indigenous healing practices, shamanism, and related topics.

  In his monograph, Winkelman differentiated the roles of shaman, shaman/healer, healer, medium, and priest, all of whom are involved with the manipulation of supernatural powers (he also covered witches and sorcerers, but those will not be discussed here). For his analysis, he selected a stratified, representative sample of 47 cultures from the Standard Cross-Cultural Sample, a database used in anthropological research. He examined 98 variables in computer statistical analyses. Some of his analyses were suggested by previous works, but earlier anthropologists had utilized smaller samples that were convenient but

  perhaps biased. Winkelman’s sample was large and representative, and thus we can place confidence in his findings.

  A primary focus of his investigation was the practitioners’ statuses in relation to the complexity of their societies. The interrelationships between the individual and society are often theoretically ambiguous and confusing, and Winkelman’s work helps clarify that territory. He explains that “The least complex societies are typified by the hunting and gathering economies without hierarchical political integration; the more complex societies are typified by agriculture, social stratification and hierarchical political integration.” Hunting and gathering societies are typically much smaller than those based on agriculture, and the lives of the hunter-gatherers are marked by greater contingency. They need to be mobile, to move to find game and avoid famine. Unlike agricultural societies, hunter-gatherers are unable to stockpile large caches of food to tide them over lean years. They are more dependent upon the vagaries of nature. Agriculture requires long-term planning and care of crops over a period of months, unlike hunting parties that might be a few hours or days long. Thus hunter-gatherer societies are typified by greater instability, fluidity, uncertainty, and more contact with the wilderness; they are perhaps more part of nature than separate from it, and they participate in it more than trying to control it. Agricultural societies are less mobile; they exert more control over nature and are less subject to its vagaries.

  The specific roles designated in Winkelman’s analysis are very helpful for understanding. However, the reader should be warned that most literature on shamanism does not make these particular distinctions, and often all these roles are lumped under the term “shaman.” A graphical summary of his findings is presented in Figure 2, and I will describe them.

  Shamans

  Under Winkelman’s classification regime, shamans are typified by use of altered states of consciousness (ASCs) in which they command spirits to do their bidding, and they display a variety of paranormal powers. Divination, healing, and finding game animals through magical means are primary activities of the shaman. They come to their vocations after involuntary visions, serious illnesses, or vision quests. These individuals are typically part-time practitioners who also assist with their tribes’ subsistence efforts. They generally hold high status in their societies and are regarded as healthy, charismatic leaders.

  Figure 2 Status of Magico-Religious Practitioners as a Function of Societal Complexity (Based on Wikelman, 1992)

  Shamans are found in hunting and gathering societies with no social classes and little or no political hierarchy beyond the local level.

  Shaman/Healers

  Shaman/Healers use altered states of consciousness and obtain the help of spirit allies thereby, and they may also utilize impersonal supernatural power (mana). Their primary activities are healing and divination. Like the shamans, they come to this vocation after vision

  quests or serious illness. They hold only moderate status in agricultural societies with priests present, but high status if there are no priests.

  Healers

  Healers also are primarily involved with divination and healing but make limited or no use of altered states of consciousness in the course of their work. The gods are superior to them, and they may make offerings to propitiate the gods. Healers may have impersonal kinds of power such as mana and utilize rituals, spells, and formulas. Typically a healer’s recruitment is by voluntary selection and involves payment for training. They generally hold high socioeconomic status and power and are integrated within the institutional structures of society. They are found in agricultural societies that have a political hierarchy b
eyond the local level.

  Priests

  Priests make little or no use of altered states of consciousness for their endeavors. Much of their work involves ritual, worship, and propitiation of the gods. They have no control over spirits. Priests are selected through social inheritance or political appointment and are generally full-time professionals who enjoy very high social and economic status. Their profession typically has hierarchically ranked positions. Priests are found in agricultural societies with political integration beyond the local level.

  Mediums

  Mediums use ASCs, specifically possession trance during which spirits communicate. The spirits control the mediums, and thus mediums are not held personally responsible for their actions during trance. Mediums’ primary functions are healing, divination, and worship and propitiation of spirits. They are found in complex societies that also have healers and priests. As a result, mediums have very low status and are the only category here consisting primarily of women who are often described as crazy, neurotic, or hysterical. They frequently receive no remuneration for their efforts.

  Implications

  Winkelman notes that “systematic differences in magico-religious practices can be organized around the principle that beliefs and practices in more complex societies indicate a displacement of responsibility, repression of awareness, and reduction of direct ego control over information revealed or actions taken; practices and beliefs in simpler societies indicate a more direct ego contact with supernatural power and experiences.” Of the practitioners considered here, shamans and mediums make the most use of ASCs; more than any of the others, they directly and intentionally engage supernatural powers. Based upon the findings of parapsychology, we can expect shamans and mediums to make the most use of psi. They also have the greatest number of trickster characteristics and are particularly associated with deception.

  Winkelman’s analysis clearly identifies important relationships between societal structure and the status of psi practitioners. The findings are crucial to understanding where cultivation of psychic functioning will be welcomed and where shunned, and the trends can be seen even in Western culture. The high status and visibility of priests and medical doctors is an example, as is the social invisibility of mediums. Supernatural powers have been recognized for thousands of years. Yet when societies become complex, the practitioners who attempt to directly engage them are shunted to the margins; they are denigrated as “crazy,” “epileptic” or “deviant.” This labeling, sanctified by establishment science and medicine, helps preserve the existing hierarchy.

  Direct contact with psi and the supernatural is anti-structural, and in our society it is found with the marginal. The institutions of science and medicine are among the elite, and they are hierarchical in structure.

  Those who expect parapsychology to be soon accepted by scientific establishments should not overlook the profound implications of Winkelman’s findings. Hostility to psi is usually attributed to ideologies such as materialistic rationalism, but that is entirely insufficient to explain it. The matter is not primarily an ideological dispute. The source of antagonism toward parapsychology is much more fundamental; it is a consequence of the structure of society. Of this, almost everyone is unconscious.

  CHAPTER 8

  Max Weber, Charisma,

  and the Disenchantment of the World

  Max Weber (1864-1920) is one of the giants of sociology, and his work forms a substantial part of the core of that discipline. He had extraordinary vision and a vast knowledge of history and cultures. He is considered a founder of the sociology of religion, and his best known work The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (190405) retains its influence and is still debated today. Weber was one of those exceptional figures who underwent a creative illness. While in his thirties, he had a breakdown that left him incapacitated for several years and intermittently thereafter. Nevertheless his output was immense, and in his lifetime he produced thousands of pages. Much remained unfinished at the time of his death, and later a number of scholars collaborated to compile, edit, publish, and translate his work.

  Weber strived to address fundamental sociological issues, including the crucial topics of authority and domination. Authority is required for any civilization or society to exist; authority serves as a foundation. Authority establishes laws, rules, determines what is true, specifies what will be done, by whom, and when. It is a broad concept

  that any comprehensive sociological theory must address. In his massive

  2

  two-volume work Economy and Society (1913), Weber differentiated three types of authority: bureaucratic, as seen in today’s society; traditional, as in feudal and primitive cultures; and something he called charismatic authority.

  The term charisma refers to an extraordinary power, and Weber defined it thus: “The term ‘charisma’ will be applied to a certain quality of an individual personality by virtue of which he is considered extraordinary and treated as endowed with supernatural, superhuman, or at least specifically exceptional powers or qualities. These are such as are not accessible to the ordinary person, but are regarded as of divine origin or as exemplary.” Charisma can produce great good or great evil—both Hitler and Ghandi were charismatic leaders. Such persons have had an exceptional impact on history, but surprisingly many introductory sociology texts quickly skip over charisma. Even entire books have been devoted to it, but as I will show, sociologists subtly avoid confronting its full implications.

  Weber’s concept of pure charisma is of primary interest here. Though sociologists may discuss other types, it is pure charisma that they typically ignore. This is an example of why it is so important to consult original sources and not rely upon summaries of others. Reading Weber and Victor Turner directly, one discovers that the properties of pure charisma are virtually identical with those of liminality, anti-structure and communitas. Weber drew predominantly from sociology and history, whereas Turner’s sources were primarily from anthropology; thus the concepts were derived largely independently. The remarkable parallels between the two formulations indicate their considerable explanatory power, and I will review some of the commonalities. As with Turner, I will directly quote Weber rather extensively. I do this to not only demonstrate the clear overlap, but also to emphasize that Weber’s explicit points on the supernatural have been willfully ignored.

  In many passages, Weber’s writings on pure charisma describe anti-structure. For instance he states that “in a revolutionary and sovereign manner, charismatic domination transforms all values and breaks all traditional and rational norms.” He also says: “Since it is ‘extra-ordinary,’ charismatic authority is sharply opposed to rational, and particularly bureaucratic authority, and to traditional authority … It recognizes no appropriation of positions of power by virtue of the possession of property, either on the part of a chief or of socially privileged groups.”5 This is further elaborated, as Weber tells us that: “In radical contrast to bureaucratic organization, charisma knows no formal and regulated appointment or dismissal, no career, advancement or salary, no supervisory or appeals body, no local or purely technical jurisdiction, and no permanent institutions in the manner of bureaucratic agencies.”6

  Weber says specifically that charisma “cannot remain stable, but becomes either traditionalized or rationalized, or a combination of both.” Because of their instability, both pure charisma and anti-structure (liminality) are opposed not only to structure but, almost paradoxically, ultimately to themselves.

  Charisma is also intimately linked with communitas and with mysticism. We are told that: “Pure charisma is specifically foreign to economic considerations. Wherever it appears, it constitutes a ‘call’ in the most emphatic sense of the word, a ‘mission’ or a ‘spiritual duty.’ In the pure type, it disdains and repudiates economic exploitation of the gifts of grace as a source of income, though, to be sure, this often remains more an ideal than a fact.” He later explains that “In order to live up t
o their mission the master as well as his disciples and immediate following must be free of the ordinary worldly attachments and duties of occupational and family life. Those who have a share … in charisma must inevitably turn away from the world.” He tells us that “charisma rejects as undignified all methodical rational acquisition, in fact, all rational economic conduct,” and like Turner, Weber cited Saint Francis as an exemplar!

  Pure charisma, like liminality, is directly linked with the supernatural. It is “guaranteed by what is held to be a proof, originally always a miracle.” The leader “gains and retains it solely by proving his powers in practice. He must work miracles, if he wants to be a prophet.” The role of altered states of consciousness was also recognized as critical, and Weber mentions “the ecstatic states which are viewed, in accordance with primitive experience, as the pre-conditions for producing certain effects in meteorology, healing, divination, and telepathy … We shall henceforth employ the term ‘charisma’ for such extraordinary powers.”

  Weber also discussed more attenuated kinds of charisma, that allowed its accommodation by more stable, bureaucratic cultures. For instance some of the more moderated, rationalized versions are referred to as pseudocharisma, lineage-charisma, charisma of office, and manufactured charisma. The transition from pure charismatic authority, involving miracles and supernatural power, to one of the more stable forms is a source of ambiguity and causes confusion among scholars. Turner faced similar difficulties as he tried to distinguish the liminal from the liminoid.14