The dissemination of divination in roman republican times

action. It was argued that these results supported the overall thesis. Based on insights from
cognitive science in how humans categorize the world into psychological, biological and
physical domains, it was further hypothesized that these ontological domains had a consequence
for the ratings of credibility. This was similarly tested with another experiment which
demonstrated that the ontological domain employed in divination had an effect on the evaluation
of credibility. Forms of divination employing humans as sign producers were more credible than
those employing animals. These in turn were more credible than those employing natural objects
The interpretation part of impetrative divination starts from the identification of the divinatory
sign as intentional. It was argued that the popular theory in the cognitive science of religion
about hyperactive agency detection (HADD) was not adequate to account for this identification.
Instead it was argued that some sort of hyperactive intentionality detection (HIDD) must be
responsible for the identification of a counterintuitive agent as the ultimate author of the sign.
The interpretation proceeds with the identification of the outcome as, not merely an intentional
act, but also a communicative sign. This is facilitated by the question posed in the beginning.
The concrete interpretation of the content follows the same principles as normal communication
and it was argued that Dan Sperber’s and Deirdre Wilson’s cognitive communication theory,
relevance theory, provided an adequate description of the process of interpretation in divination.
Still, important differences between divinatory communication and normal communication were
found. Most notably, the relation between the sign and its reference was found to be less “coded”
in divination than in normal communication. Further it was argued that divination was restricted
in its utility. Whereas normal language can be used to express anything, divination practices are
usually restricted in their form and subject. Three types of form restriction exist: binary, discrete
and rich. Two further types of subject restriction was found: either the divination practice is
restrained, because it can be used only for a limited range of subjects, or it is open and can
therefore be used for many types of subjects. Another part of interpretation has the function of
assessing the credibility of the information produced. Here it was found that a cognitive bias
towards attaching greater credibility to prestigious individuals existed. A review of cognitive and
social psychological studies revealed that this prestige bias was the most powerful factor in
assigning credibility value to testimony in general. This kind of prestige was called direct
prestige. Since divination cognitively stimulates a representation of a counterintuitive agent as
227