THE PSYCHOLOGY OF SATANIC CULT INVOLVEMENT: AN ...

54
CHAPTER FOUR
REALIST THEORIES OF SATANIC CULT INVOLVEMENT
Introduction
Realist explanations of Satanic involvement differ both in terms of their theoretical
models, and in terms of their level of inquiry, i.e., whether the posited causal factors are
located within the individual or within social institutions and processes acting upon the
individual. The following discussion will begin at the abstract social level by considering
what may be termed sociological factors, before proceeding to discuss narrower socialpsychological,
and individual psychological causes. These theoretical levels are not
mutually exclusive, but differ primarily in terms of whether social or individual factors
are emphasised. Within each level of inquiry, however, different theoretical models may
compete by advancing conflicting explanations for the same phenomenon. Unlike other
subject domains, which have a long history of theoretical debate, few coherent and
comprehensive psychological theories have emerged to explain the various aspects of
Satanic cult involvement. Clear categorisation of the literature in terms of theoretical
models is thus difficult, particularly in the case of those authors who appear eclectic or
avoid committing themselves to a well-defined theoretical viewpoint.
4.1. Political destabilisation and radical social transition
From the realist perspective the increasing social attention devoted to Satanism reflects
significant increases in actual Satanic cult involvement (Forsyth & Olivier, 1990). The
factors, or constellation of factors, which predispose individuals to Satanic cult
involvement must, therefore, derive from contemporary social change and the impact of
this change on psychological life. The most general explanation for the psychological
attraction of Satanism is thus a sociological one. This level of analysis focuses on the
role of socio-historical ruptures or discontinuities, manifest in radical institutional and
ideological transformation on the spiritual inclinations of historically contextualised
communities. This sociological account implicitly informs the discussion in Chapter