The dissemination of divination in roman republican times

The wide variety of divination techniques in the world suggests that there are other factors
contributing to the judgments of credibility than ritualization, or to put it more plainly: there
are many different kinds of ritualized action, but they are not all considered equally credible.
What other factors help to predict which divination techniques are more credible than others?
Is it merely local cultural differences or are there also significant cognitive biases that make
some types of divination techniques more likely to be thought of as credible?
Since the overall thesis is that divination through ritualization of action creates an
inference of another hidden intentionality, such as a god 45 , it would be reasonable to assume
that the focus of the technique is important. Human categorization is divided into different
ontological domains such as intuitive psychology, intuitive biology and intuitive physics
(Atran 1990; Bloom 2004; Keil 1979; Keil 1989). Although these domains are domain
specific, intuitive biology is closer to intuitive psychology than intuitive physics since the
former two share more features. Animals and humans both move by them selves and live and
die, whereas that is not the case for stones. It would therefore be possible that techniques,
with a focus on categories activating the domain of intuitive psychology, would be more
likely to facilitate an inference of a hidden intentionality than those activating intuitive
biology. They would in turn be more likely than those implying intuitive physics.
In order to test this possibility an experiment was designed along the same lines as
experiment 1. A fictive story was created where a person wants to find out the reason for his
disease. He is faced with a choice between three different types of diviners, of whom he can
consult only one. The only significant difference between them is that they use different
kinds of ritual techniques activating assumptions from intuitive psychology (ecstasy), biology
(watching birds) or physics (listening to the wind).
Experiment 2
Participants 40 participants, 17 male 23 female aged 16-20 (M=18.33, SD=1.3), 77.5 %
from the western Copenhagen Region and 22.5% from Esbjerg at the west coast of Denmark.
They were primarily Christian protestant (49%) and Non-believers (44%). Other religious
affiliations were 7%.
45 Technically there is no difference between gods, spirits, souls and ancestors in the cognitive science of
religion since what is important is their disembodied intentionality.
76