Large-scale brain networks are collections of widespread brain regions showing functional connectivity by statistical analysis of the fMRI BOLD signal, or other recording methods such as EEG, PET and MEG.
An emerging paradigm in neuroscience is that cognitive tasks are
performed not by individual brain regions working in isolation, but by
networks consisting of several discrete brain regions that are said to
be "functionally connected" due to tightly coupled activity. Functional
connectivity may be measured as long-range synchronization of the EEG,
MEG, or other dynamic brain signals. Synchronized brain regions may also be identified using spatial independent component analysis (ICA). The set of identified brain areas that are linked together in a large-scale network varies with cognitive function. When the cognitive state is not explicit (i.e., the subject is at "rest"), the large-scale brain network is a resting state network (RSN). As a physical system with graph-like properties,
a large-scale brain network has both nodes and edges, and cannot be
identified simply by the co-activation of brain areas. In recent
decades, the analysis of brain networks was made feasible by advances in
imaging techniques as well as new tools from graph theory and dynamical
systems. Large-scale brain networks are identified by their function,
and provide a coherent framework for understanding cognition
by offering a neural model of how different cognitive functions emerge
when different sets of brain regions join together as self-organized
coalitions. The identification of the coalitions will vary with
different parameters used to run the ICA algorithm, which can results in a different number of networks. In one model, there is only the Default Mode Network and the task-positive network,
but most current analyses show several networks, which are enumerated
below. The property called functional network flexibility a brain region
with strong functional connections within a brain network suddenly
establish many connections to a different network.disruption in activity in various networks have been implicated in neuropsychiatric disorders such as depression, Alzheimer's, autism spectrum disorder, schizophrenia and bipolar disorder.
The
default mode network is active when an individual is awake and at rest.
It preferentially activates when individuals focus on
internally-oriented tasks such as daydreaming, envisioning the future,
retrieving memories, and theory of mind.
It is negatively correlated with brain systems that focus on external
visual signals. It is the most widely researched network.
Dorsal attention
This network is involved in the voluntary deployment of attention and reorientation to unexpected events.
Within the dorsal attention network, the intraparietal sulcus and
frontal eye fields influence the visual areas of the brain. These
influencing factors allow for the orientation of attention.
Ventral attention:
Three areas of the brain are active in this network, and they include the visual cortex, temporoparietal junction, and the ventral frontal cortex. These areas respond when behaviorally relevant stimuli occur unexpectedly.
The ventral attention network may also become inhibited during focused
attention in which top down processing is being used, such as when one
is visually searching for something. This response may prevent goal
driven attention from being distracted by non-relevant stimuli. It
becomes active again when the target, or relevant information about the
target is found.
The
salience network consists of several structures, including the anterior
(bilateral) insula, dorsal anterior cingulate cortex, and three
subcortical structures which are the ventral striatum, substantia
nigra/ventral tegmental region. It plays the key role of monitoring the salience of external inputs and internal brain events. Specifically it aids in directing attention by identifying important biological and cognitive events.
Fronto-parietal:
This network initiates and modulates cognitive control and comprises 18 sub-regions of the brain.
There is a strong correlation between fluid intelligence and the
involvement of the fronto-parietal network with other networks.
Lateral visual
This network is important in complex emotional stimuli.
Several other brain networks have also been identified: auditory, motor, right executive, posterior default mode, left fronto-parietal,
cerebellar, spatial attention, attention, language, left executive, sensorimotor network, somatomotor, visual, temporal, limbic, visual perception, and visual imagery.
This misfortune began after the Red Sox sold star player Babe Ruth (sometimes nicknamed "The Bambino") for $125,000 to the New York Yankees after the 1919 season. Before that point, the Red Sox had been one of the most successful professional baseball franchises, winning the first World Series and amassing five of the first fifteen World Series titles.
After the sale, they went without a title for nearly a century, as the
previously lackluster Yankees became one of the most successful
professional sports franchises in North America. The curse became a focal point of the Yankees–Red Sox rivalry over the years.
The curse had been such a part of Boston culture that when a "reverse curve" road sign on Longfellow Bridge over the city's busy Storrow Drive was graffitied to read "Reverse The Curse,"
officials left it in place until the Red Sox won the 2004 World Series.
After the World Series that year, the road sign was edited to read
"Reversed Curse" in celebration.
Although it had long been noted that the selling of Ruth had been the
beginning of a decline in the Red Sox' fortunes, the term "curse of the
Bambino" was not in common use until the publication of the book The Curse of the Bambino by Dan Shaughnessy in 1990.
It became a key part of Red Sox lore in the media thereafter, and
Shaughnessy's book became required reading in some high school English
classes in New England.
Although the title drought dated back to 1918, the sale of Ruth to the Yankees was completed January 3, 1920. In standard curse lore, Red Sox owner and theatrical producer Harry Frazee used the proceeds from the sale to finance the production of a Broadwaymusical, usually said to be No, No, Nanette. In fact, Frazee backed many productions before and after Ruth's sale, and No, No, Nanette
did not see its first performance until five years after the Ruth sale
and two years after Frazee sold the Red Sox. In 1921, Red Sox manager Ed Barrow left to take over as general manager of the Yankees. Other Red Sox players were also later sold or traded to the Yankees.
Neither the lore, nor the debunking of it, entirely tells the story. As Leigh Montville wrote in The Big Bam: The Life and Times of Babe Ruth, the production No, No, Nanette had originated as a non-musical stage play called My Lady Friends, which opened on Broadway in December 1919. That play had, indeed, been financed as a direct result of the Ruth deal.
Various researchers, including Montville and Shaughnessy, have pointed
out that Frazee had close ties to the Yankees owners, and that many of
the player deals, as well as the mortgage deal for Fenway Park itself,
had to do with financing his plays.
Yankee fans taunted the Red Sox with chants of "1918!" one weekend in September 1990. The demeaning chant echoed at Yankee Stadium each time the Red Sox were there.
Yankee fans also taunted the Red Sox with signs saying "1918!", "CURSE
OF THE BAMBINO", pictures of Babe Ruth, and wearing "1918!" T-shirts
each time they were at the Stadium.
Reportedly cursed results
Before Ruth left Boston, the Red Sox had won five of the first fifteen World Series, with Ruth pitching for the 1916 and 1918 championship teams (he was with the Sox for the 1915 World Series
but the manager used him only once, as a pinch-hitter, and he did not
pitch). The Yankees had not played in any World Series up to that time.
In the 84 years after the sale, the Yankees played in 39 World Series,
winning 26 of them, twice as many as any other team in Major League
Baseball. Meanwhile, over the same time span, the Red Sox played in only
four World Series and lost each in seven games.
Even losses that occurred many years before the first mention of the supposed curse, in 1986, have been attributed to it. Some of these instances are listed below:
In 1946, the Red Sox appeared in their first World Series since the sale of Babe Ruth and were favored to beat the St. Louis Cardinals. The series went to a seventh game at Sportsman's Park in St. Louis. In the bottom of the eighth inning, with the score tied at 3–3, the Cardinals had Enos Slaughter on first base and Harry Walker at the plate. On a hit and run, Walker hit a double to very short left-center field. Slaughter ran through the third base coach's stop sign and beat Boston shortstop Johnny Pesky's relay throw to home plate.
Some say Pesky hesitated on the throw, allowing Slaughter to score, but
Pesky always denied this charge. Film footage is inconclusive, except
that it shows Pesky in bright sunlight and Slaughter in shadow. Boston
star Ted Williams, playing with an injury, was largely ineffective at bat in his only World Series.
In 1948, the Red Sox finished the regular season tied for first place, only to lose the pennant to the Cleveland Indians in the major leagues' first-ever one-game playoff.
In 1949, the Red Sox needed to win just one of the last two games of the season to win the pennant, but lost both games to the Yankees, who would go on to win a record five consecutive World Series from 1949 to 1953.
In 1967, the Red Sox surprisingly reversed the awful results of the 1966 season by winning the American League pennant on the last weekend of the season. In the World Series,
they once again faced the Cardinals, and just as in 1946, the Series
went to a seventh game. St. Louis won the deciding contest, 7–2, behind
their best pitcher Bob Gibson; Gibson defeated Boston ace Jim Lonborg, who was pitching on short rest and was ineffective. Gibson even hit a home run against Lonborg in the game.
In 1975, the Red Sox won the pennant and met the dynasticCincinnati Reds in the World Series. The Red Sox won Game 6 on a famous walk-off home run by catcher Carlton Fisk,
setting the stage for the deciding Game 7. Boston took a quick 3–0
lead, but the Reds tied the game. In the top of the ninth, the Reds
brought in the go-ahead run on a Joe Morgan single that scored Ken Griffey, Sr., winning what is regarded as one of the greatest World Series ever played.
In 1978, the Red Sox held a 14-game lead in the American League East over the Yankees on July 18.
However, the Yankees subsequently caught fire, eventually tying Boston
atop the standings on September 10 after sweeping a four-game series at Fenway Park, an event known to Red Sox fans as the "Boston Massacre." Six days later, the Yankees held a 31⁄2 game lead over the Red Sox, but the Sox won 12 of their next 14 games to overcome that deficit and force a one-game playoff on October 2 at Fenway Park. The memorable moment of the game came when light-hitting Yankee shortstop Bucky Dent cracked a three-run home run in the seventh inning that hit the top of the left field wall (the Green Monster)
and skipped out of the park, giving New York a 3–2 lead. The Yankees
held on to win the playoff game, 5–4, eventually winning the World Series.
In Game 6 of the 1986 World Series, Boston (leading the series three games to two) took a 5–3 lead in the top of the 10th inning. Red Sox reliever Calvin Schiraldi
retired the first two batters, putting the team within one out (and
shortly within one strike) of winning the World Series. However, the New York Mets scored three runs, tying the game on a wild pitch from Bob Stanley and winning it when Boston first baseman Bill Buckner allowed a ground ball hit by the Mets' Mookie Wilson to roll through his legs, scoring Ray Knight
from second base. In the seventh game, the Red Sox took an early 3–0
lead, only to lose, 8–5. The collapses in the last two games prompted New York Times columnist George Vecsey to write articles describing the Red Sox as cursed.
In 1988 and 1990,
the Red Sox advanced to the American League Championship Series, only
to suffer four-game sweeps both times at the hands of the Oakland Athletics. They were also swept by the Cleveland Indians in the 1995
AL Division Series in three games (extending their postseason losing
streak to a major-league record 13 games), lost again to the Indians in
the 1998 ALDS three games to one, and were defeated by the Yankees four games to one in the 1999 ALCS.
In 2003, the Red Sox were playing the Yankees in Game 7 of the American League Championship Series. Boston held a 5–2 lead in the eighth inning, and manager Grady Little opted to stay with starting pitcher Pedro Martínez rather than go to the bullpen. New York rallied against the tired Martínez, scoring three runs on a single and three doubles to tie the game. In the bottom of the 11th inning, Aaron Boone launched a solo home run against knuckleballing Boston starter Tim Wakefield (pitching in relief) to win the game and the pennant for the Yankees.
Attempts to break the curse
Red Sox fans attempted various methods over the years to exorcise their famous curse. These included placing a Boston cap atop Mt. Everest and burning a Yankees cap at its base camp; hiring professional exorcists and Father Guido Sarducci to purify Fenway Park; spray painting a "Reverse Curve" street sign on Storrow Drive
to change it to say "Reverse the Curse" (the sign was not replaced
until just after the 2004 World Series win); and finding a piano owned
by Ruth that he had supposedly pushed into a pond near his Sudbury, Massachusetts farm, Home Plate Farm.
In Ken Burns' 1994 documentary Baseball, former Red Sox pitcher Bill Lee suggested that the Red Sox should exhume the body of Babe Ruth, transport it back to Fenway and publicly apologize for trading Ruth to the Yankees.
Some declared the curse broken during a game on August 31, 2004, when a foul ball hit by Manny Ramírez flew into Section 9, Box 95, Row AA and struck a boy's face, knocking two of his teeth out.
16-year-old Lee Gavin, a Boston fan whose favorite player was Ramirez,
lived on the Sudbury farm owned by Ruth. That same day, the Yankees
suffered their worst loss in team history, a 22–0 clobbering at home
against the Cleveland Indians.
Some fans also cite a comedy curse-breaking ceremony performed by musician Jimmy Buffett and his warm-up team (one dressed as Ruth and one dressed as a witch doctor) at a Fenway concert in September 2004. Just after being traded to the Red Sox, Curt Schilling appeared in an advertisement for the Ford F-150 pickup truck hitchhiking with a sign indicating he was going to Boston. When picked up, he said that he had "an 86-year-old curse" to break.
End of the curse
In 2004, the Red Sox once again met the Yankees in the American League Championship Series. The Red Sox lost the first three games, including losing Game 3 at Fenway by the lopsided score of 19–8.
The Red Sox trailed 4–3 in the bottom of the ninth inning of Game 4. But the team tied the game with a walk by Kevin Millar and a stolen base by pinch-runner Dave Roberts, followed by an RBI single against Yankee closerMariano Rivera by third basemanBill Mueller, and won on a two-run home run in the 12th inning by David Ortiz.
The Red Sox won the next three games to become the first MLB team to
win a seven-game postseason series after losing the first three games.
The Red Sox then faced the St. Louis Cardinals, the team to whom they had lost in 1946 and 1967, and led throughout the series, winning in a four-game sweep. Cardinals shortstop Édgar Rentería, who wore the same number as Ruth (3), made the final out of the series, a ground ball back to the pitcher.
Antisemitism
Glenn Stout argues that the idea of a curse was indirectly influenced by antisemitism,
although that aspect was not part of its modern usage; he even says
"This does not mean that ... anyone who writes or speaks of the Curse
today—as a journalist or a fan—is either anti-Semitic or even remotely
aware of the anti-Semitic roots of the Curse." Because Frazee was from New York and involved in theatre, it was assumed he was Jewish (he was actually a Presbyterian). Though Frazee was well respected in Boston, Henry Ford's Dearborn Independent
ran a series of articles purporting to expose how Jews were "destroying
America," and among these were articles lambasting Frazee, saying that
with his purchase of the Red Sox "another club was placed under the
smothering influences of the 'chosen race'." These articles turned the tide of both baseball owners and public opinion against Frazee, and Fred Lieb's vilification of Frazee in his history of the Red Sox portrayed him implicitly as a Jew. Stout argues that this hatred indirectly created the atmosphere where the "curse" could be accepted.
In popular culture
Non-fiction works
The 2004 Red Sox season was the subject of several non-fiction books, including Faithful: Boston Red Sox Fans Chronicle the Historic 2004 Season, whose authors Stewart O'Nan and Stephen King decided to write the book before the season began, and Reversing the Curse by Dan Shaughnessy of The Boston Globe.
In the fall of 2003, HBO produced a documentary called The Curse of the Bambino, featuring commentary from native Boston celebrities such as Denis Leary, narrated by Ben Affleck.
After the 2004 World Series, the ending of the documentary was
re-filmed with a number of the same celebrities and it was retitled Reverse of the Curse of the Bambino, narrated by Liev Schreiber.
Fiction
The British memoir Fever Pitch, about author Nick Hornby's obsession with the Arsenal FC English soccer team, was adapted into an American film of the same name by the Farrelly brothers.
The American adaptation was about an obsessive Red Sox fan. It was made
during the 2004 World Series, which forced the filmmakers to rework the
story; the Red Sox were not originally supposed to make it to the World
Series.
In the movie 50 First Dates, Adam Sandler's character Henry Roth reminds his girlfriend about what happened in 2003
including a screen capture showing the Red Sox winning the World
Series, until the next clip shows the title 'just kidding'. The movie
was released in February 2004 and, by coincidence, the Red Sox
eventually won the World Series later that year.
On the television show Lost, Jack and his father Christian often use the phrase "That's why the Sox will never win the damn series" to describe fate. In season 3, Ben shows the end of the 2004 game to try to convince Jack that the Others have contact with the outside world.
An episode of the children's TV series Arthur
titled "The Curse of the Grebes" has Elwood City's baseball team losing
two of its games in the world championship series due to events based
directly on Bucky Dent's homer and Bill Buckner's error. The episode
states that the team had not won a championship in 87 years and that
their opponents, the Crown City Kings, had won 25 since then. Johnny
Damon, Edgar Renteria, and Mike Timlin all voice caricatures of themselves. The Kings resembled the Yankees while the Grebes resemble the Red Sox.
In the movie Moneyball, Brad Pitt's character Billy Beane talks to the Boston Red Sox' owner about a job as GM after taking the Oakland A's
to a 20-game winning streak. When the Red Sox' owner asks Billy Beane
why he returned his call, he says because he wants to help them end the
Curse of the Bambino.
Music
The Ben Harper song "Get It Like You Like It" includes the lines "But Johnny Damon swung his bat. Grand Slam. That was that. An 86-year curse is gone."
James Taylor "Angels of Fenway" (Album – Before This World)
released June 15, 2015. Taylor sings "86 summers gone by. Bambino put a
hex on the Bean. We were living on a tear and a sigh. In the shadow of
the Bronx machine..."
The Dropkick Murphys song "Tessie" (Album – Warrior's code) released June 15, 2005, is about the game that broke the curse.
In the Fallout
universe, one of the events in the Timeline Divergence is that the
curse was never broken and the Boston Red Sox never won the World
Series, even up to 2077. Newspaper articles in Fallout 4 show that the Red Sox were up 3–0 against Texas in 2077; Game 4 was scheduled for the day the nuclear bombs would fall.
In the first person shooter Team Fortress 2, there is an achievement
called "A Year To Remember", in which the player has to make 2004 kills
with the Scout (that is born in Boston, and uses a baseball bat as a
weapon), referencing the end of the "curse".
In Western culture, a four-leaf clover is often considered to bestow good luck.
Luck is the phenomenon and belief that defines the experience of notably positive, negative, or improbable events. The naturalistic
interpretation is that positive and negative events may happen all the
time, both due to random and non-random natural and artificial
processes, and that even improbable events can happen by random chance. In this view, the epithet "lucky" or "unlucky" is a descriptive label that refers to an event's positivity, negativity, or improbability.
Supernatural
interpretations of luck consider it to be an attribute of a person or
object, or the result of a favorable or unfavorable view of a deity upon a person. These interpretations often prescribe
how luckiness or unluckiness can be obtained, such as by carrying a
lucky charm or offering sacrifices or prayers to a deity. Saying
someone is "born lucky" then might mean, depending on the
interpretation, anything from that they have been born into a good
family or circumstance, or that they habitually experience improbably
positive events due to some inherent property or the lifelong favor of a
god or goddess in a monotheistic or polytheistic religion.
Many superstitions are related to luck, though these are often specific to a given culture or set of related cultures, and sometimes contradictory. For example, lucky symbols include the number 7 in Christian-influenced cultures, but the number 8 in Chinese-influenced cultures. Unlucky symbols
and events include entering and leaving a house by different doors in
Greek culture, throwing rocks into the wind in Navajo culture, and ravens
in Western culture. Some of these associations may derive from related
facts or desires. For example, in Western culture opening an umbrella
indoors might be considered unlucky partly because it could poke someone
in the eye, whereas shaking hands with a chimney sweep
might be considered lucky partly because it is a kind but unpleasant
thing to do given the dirty nature of their work. In Chinese culture,
the association of the number 4 as a homophone
with the word for death may explain why it is considered unlucky.
Extremely complicated and sometimes contradictory systems for
prescribing auspicious and inauspicious times and arrangements of things
have been devised, for example feng shui in Chinese culture and systems of astrology in various cultures around the world.
Many polytheistic religions have specific gods or goddesses that are associated with luck, both good and bad, including Fortuna and Felicitas in the Ancient Roman religion (the former related to the words "fortunate" and "unfortunate" in English), Dedun in Nubian religion, the Seven Lucky Gods in Japanese mythology, mythical American serviceman John Frum in Polynesian cargo cults, and the inauspicious Alakshmi in Hinduism.
Etymology and definition
1927 advertisement for lucky jewellery. "Why Be Unlucky?".
The English noun luck appears comparatively late, during the 1480s, as a loan from Low German, Dutch or Frisian luk, a short form of gelucke (Middle High Germangelücke). Compare to old Slavic word lukyj (лукый) - appointed by destiny and old Russian luchaj (лучаи) - destiny, fortune. It likely entered English as a gambling
term, and the context of gambling remains detectable in the word's
connotations; luck is a way of understanding a personal chance event.
Luck has three aspects:
Luck is good or bad.
Luck is the result of chance.
Luck applies to a sentient being.
Before the adoption of luck at the end of the Middle Ages, Old English and Middle English expressed the notion of "good fortune" with the word speed (Middle English spede, Old English spēd); speed besides "good fortune" had the wider meaning of "prosperity, profit, abundance"; it is not associated with the notion of probability or chance but rather with that of fate or divine help; a bestower of success can also be called speed, as in "Christ be our speed" (William Robertson, Phraseologia generalis, 1693).
The notion of probability was expressed by the Latin loanword chance, adopted in Middle English from the late 13th century, literally describing an outcome as a "falling" (as it were of dice), via Old French cheance from Late Latin cadentia "falling". Fortuna,
the Roman goddess of fate or luck, was popular an allegory in medieval
times, and even though it was not strictly reconcilable with Christian
theology, it became popular in learned circles of the High Middle Ages
to portray her as a servant of God in distributing success or failure in
a characteristically "fickle" or unpredictable way, thus introducing
the notion of chance.
Interpretations
Luck is interpreted and understood in many different ways.
As lack of control
Luck refers to that which happens to a person beyond that person's control. This view incorporates phenomena
that are chance happenings, a person's place of birth for example, but
where there is no uncertainty involved, or where the uncertainty is
irrelevant. Within this framework, one can differentiate between three
different types of luck:
Constitutional luck, that is, luck with factors that cannot be
changed. Place of birth and genetic constitution are typical examples.
Circumstantial luck—with factors that are haphazardly brought on. Accidents and epidemics are typical examples.
Ignorance luck, that is, luck with factors one does not know about. Examples can be identified only in hindsight.
Circumstantial luck with accidental happenstance of favorable discoveries and/or inventions is serendipity.
As a fallacy
Another view holds that "luck is probability taken personally." A rationalist approach to luck includes the application of the rules of probability and an avoidance of unscientific beliefs. The rationalist thinks that the belief in luck is a result of poor reasoning or wishful thinking. To a rationalist, a believer in luck who asserts that something has influenced his or her luck commits the "post hoc ergo propter hoc" logical fallacy: that because two events are connected sequentially, they are connected causally as well. In general:
A happens (luck-attracting event or action) and then B happens;
Therefore, A influenced B.
More contemporary authors writing on the subject believe that the
definition of good destiny is: One who enjoys good health; has the
physical and mental capabilities of achieving his goals in life; has
good appearance, and; has happiness in mind and is not prone to
accidents.
In the rationalist perspective, probability is only affected by confirmed causal connections.
The gambler's fallacy and inverse gambler's fallacy both explain some reasoning problems in common beliefs in luck. They involve denying the unpredictability of random events: "I haven't rolled a seven all week, so I'll definitely roll one tonight".
PhilosopherDaniel Dennett wrote that "luck is mere luck" rather than a property of a person or thing.
There is also a series of spiritual, or supernatural
beliefs regarding fortune. These beliefs vary widely from one to
another, but most agree that luck can be influenced through spiritual
means by performing certain rituals or by avoiding certain circumstances.
Luck can also be a belief in an organization of fortunate and unfortunate events. Luck is a form of superstition which is interpreted differently by different individuals. Carl Jung coined the term synchronicity, which he described as "a meaningful coincidence".
What will happen to you for offering food and wine to the gods you call good luck and fate? Your luck will end.
Belief in the extent of Divine Providence varies; most acknowledge providence as at least a partial, if not complete influence on luck. Christianity, in its early development, accommodated many traditional practices which at different times, accepted omens and practiced forms of ritual sacrifice in order to divine the will of their supreme being or to influence divine favoritism. The concepts of "Divine Grace" or "Blessing" as they are described by believers closely resemble what is referred to as "luck" by others.
Mesoamerican religions, such as the Aztecs, Mayans and Incas,
had particularly strong beliefs regarding the relationship between
rituals and the gods, which could in a similar sense to Abrahamic
religions be called luck or providence. In these cultures, human
sacrifice (both of willing volunteers and captured enemies), as well as
self-sacrifice by means of bloodletting,
could possibly be seen as a way to propitiate the gods and earn favor
for the city offering the sacrifice. An alternative interpretation
would be that the sacrificial blood was considered as a necessary
element for the gods to maintain the proper working order of the
universe, in the same way that oil would be applied to an automobile to
keep it working as designed.
Many traditional African practices, such as voodoo and hoodoo,
have a strong belief in superstition. Some of these religions include a
belief that third parties can influence an individual's luck. Shamans and witches are both respected and feared, based on their ability to cause good or bad fortune for those in villages near them.
As a self-fulfilling prophecy
Some evidence supports the idea that belief in luck acts like a placebo, producing positive thinking and improving people's responses to events.
In personality psychology, people reliably differ from each other
depending on four key aspects: beliefs in luck, rejection of luck,
being lucky, and being unlucky. People who believe in good luck are more optimistic, more satisfied with their lives, and have better moods.
People who believe they are personally unlucky experience more
anxiety, and less likely to take advantage of unexpected opportunities. One 2010 study found that golfers who were told they were using a "lucky ball" performed better than those who were not.
Some people intentionally put themselves in situations that increase the chances of a serendipitous encounter, such as socializing with people who work in different fields.
Luck is an important factor in many aspects of society.
Games
The
philosopher Nicholas Rescher has proposed that the luck of someone's
result in a situation of uncertainty is measured by the difference
between this party's yield and expectation: λ = Y - E. Thus skill
enhances expectation and reduces luck. The extent to which different games will depend on luck, rather than skill or effort, varies considerably. For example, chess does not involve any random factors (beyond the determination of which player moves first), while the outcome of Snakes and Ladders is entirely based on random dice rolls. In poker,
especially games with a communal board, pure luck may decide a winning
hand. Luck in games involving chance is defined as the change in a
player's equity after a random event such as a die roll or card draw.
Luck is positive (good luck) if the player's position is improved and
negative (bad luck) if it is worsened. A poker player who is doing well
(playing successfully, winning) is said to be "running good".
Almost all sports contain elements of luck. A statistical analysis in the book The Success Equation attempted to elucidate the differing balance between skill and luck with respect to how teams finished in the major North American sports leagues. This analysis concluded that, on a luck-skill continuum, the NBA had the most skill-dependant result while that of the NHL was most luck-dependant.
Lotteries
A defining feature of a lottery is that winners are selected purely
by chance. Marketing and other discussions regarding lotteries often
mention luck.
Means of resolving issues
"Leaving it to chance" is a way of resolving issues. For example, flipping a coin at the start of a sporting event may determine who goes first.
Numerology
Most cultures consider some numbers to be lucky or unlucky. This is found to be particularly strong in Asian cultures, where the obtaining of "lucky" telephone numbers, automobile license plate numbers, and household addresses are actively sought, sometimes at great monetary expense. Numerology,
as it relates to luck, is closer to an art than to a science, yet
numerologists, astrologists or psychics may disagree. It is interrelated
to astrology, and to some degree to parapsychology and spirituality and is based on converting virtually anything material into a pure number,
using that number in an attempt to detect something meaningful about
reality, and trying to predict or calculate the future based on lucky
numbers. Numerology is folkloric
by nature and started when humans first learned to count. Through human
history it was, and still is, practiced by many cultures of the world
from traditional fortune-telling to on-line psychic reading.
Science
Different thinkers like Thomas Kuhn have discussed the role of chance in scientific discoveries.
Richard Wiseman
did a ten-year scientific study into the nature of luck that has
revealed that, to a large extent, people make their own good and bad
fortune. His research revealed that "Lucky people generate their own
good fortune via four basic principles. They are skilled at creating and
noticing chance opportunities, making lucky decisions by listening to
their intuition, creating self-fulfilling prophecies via positive
expectations, and adopting a resilient attitude that transforms bad luck
into good." Researchers have suggested that good luck and good mood often co-occur (Duong & Ohtsuka, 2000)
and that lucky people are happy and optimistic whereas unlucky people
feel anxious and depressed (Day & Maltby, 2003; Wiseman, 2003).
Although previous studies have explored the antecedents and consequences of luck using attribution theory (e. g., Fischoff,
1976; Weiner et al., 1987), personality variables (Darke & Freedman, 1997a;b),
and more recently a cognitive priming approach (DeMarree et al., 2005;
Kramer & Block, 2008) research on the underlying mechanism of how
luck influences consumer judgment and behavior has been noticeably
absent in the extant literature. Moreover, in much of this previous
work, luck is manipulated in a way that is very likely to elicit
positive affect as well. Thus, it is difficult to articulate whether the
observed effects of luck are due to chronic beliefs about luck,
temporary changes in how lucky people feel, or because of changes caused
by the positive affect that is experienced. Their research showed that
priming participants subliminally with luck-related stimuli made them
feel luckier and happier. It was also found that the effects of priming
luck using subliminal messages
increased participants' estimates of the likelihood of favorable
events, their participation in lotteries, the amount of money they
invested in relatively risky financial options and these effects
appeared to be mediated by temporary changes in perceptions of luck
rather than by affect).
In religion and mythology
Buddhism
Gautama Buddha, the founder of Buddhism,
taught his followers not to believe in luck. He taught that all things
which happen must have a cause, either material or spiritual, and do not
occur due to luck, chance or fate. The idea of moral causality, karma (Pali: kamma), is central in Buddhism. In the Sutta Nipata, the Buddha is recorded as having said the following about selling luck:
Whereas some religious men, while living of food provided
by the faithful make their living by such low arts, such wrong means of
livelihood as palmistry, divining by signs, interpreting dreams ...
bringing good or bad luck ... invoking the goodness of luck ... picking
the lucky site for a building, the monk Gautama refrains from such low
arts, such wrong means of livelihood. D.I, 9–12
However, belief in luck is prevalent in many predominantly Buddhist countries. In Thailand, Buddhists may wear verses (takrut) or lucky amulets which have been blessed by monks for protection against harm.
Christianity and Judaism
Proverbs 16:33 states "the lot is cast into the lap, but the whole disposing thereof is of the Lord". Ecclesiastes
9:11 states: "chance happeneth to them all". Proverbs 16:33 would
indicate that something as random as the rolling of dice or the tossing
of a coin is not outside of God's sovereign control. And, therefore, its
results are not merely of chance.
God's sovereignty involves two aspects. God's active will or
sovereignty would involve something he causes to happen such as the
leading of wicked King Ahab into battle (2 Chronicles 18:18-19). Ahab's
death was not merely the result of a randomly shot arrow, but as 2
Chronicles 18 reveals, God actively directed the events that led Ahab
into battle and used that randomly shot arrow to accomplish his intended
will for Ahab that day.
God's passive will involves him allowing, rather than causing,
something to happen. Chapter 1 of the book of Job illustrates this in
what God allowed Satan to do in the life of Job. It is also involved in
the evil that God allowed Joseph's brothers to do to Joseph in order to
accomplish a greater good, a good not apparent to Joseph until years
later (Genesis 50:20).
Hinduism
The Gita says; “ Set thy heart upon selfless performance of thy
natural duty (Svakarma, Svadharma ) , but never on its reward . Work not
for a reward ; but never cease to do thy work “ . ( Gita , 2 . 47 ) .
There are five causes of all actions as given in the Samkhya wisdom ; says Gita—
“The physical body ( adhisthana ) , the lower’I am’ ( karta ) ,
the means of perception (karanam), the varied multiple efforts
(vividhasch pruthak cheshta ) and the Cosmic Wheel of Action ( daivam ),
these five sources together are responsible for success or failure of
any action “ . ( Gita, 18 . 14–15 ) .
Here the word ‘daivam’ does not mean luck, fate. fortune ,
providence or destiny. None of these English words are the exact synonym
for the Sanskrit word ‘Daivam’ here . ‘ Daivam ‘ is the Cosmic Whee of
Action ( Kshara-gati, Apara-Prakriti, Maya ) that keeps the perfect
account of our past and present actions.
A man who says ; “ Nothing is impossible for me; I am the only
hero of all these achievements ; who else is there like me ? “, he is a
man of clouded vision and he does not see the Truth
Islam
The
definition which is much closer to the concept of luck in Islam is "a
force that brings good fortune or adversity" Quran 17-13 (Isra): "And
(for) every man We have fastened to him his fate(fortune) in his neck,
and We will bring forth for him (on the) Day (of) the Resurrection a
record which he will find wide open". However, there is a very long
discussion on how this prefixed destiny, fortune or luck defines
attitudes and living behavior and so as to how much amends one can make
in this predetermined fate by one's own contribution through positive
actions in accordance with the teachings of Islam.
There is no concept of luck in Islam other than actions determined by Allah based on the merit of the choice made by human beings. It is stated in the Qur'an (Sura: Adh-Dhariyat
(The Winds that Scatter) verse:22) that one's sustenance is
pre-determined in heaven when the Lord says: "And in the heaven is your
provision and that which ye are promised." However, one should
supplicate towards Allah to better one's life rather than hold faith in
un-Islamic acts such as using "lucky charms". However, in the Arabic language there is a word which directly means "luck", which is حظḥaẓẓ, and a related word for "lucky", محظوظmaḥẓūẓ. It is also forbidden to believe in luck or anything else related to luck, as it is classified as shirk (associating partners to Allah or giving any share of any attribution which belongs to Allah and Allah alone).
The Tunisians retain some native beliefs of Berber origin such as the evil eye. A number of practices, such as shutters painted blue are also used to repel evil spirits.
Measuring belief in luck
A horseshoe on a door is regarded a protective talisman in some cultures
Belief in good luck
Darke and Freedman (1997) were the first researchers systematically to address directly both the concept and the measurement of belief in luck as a deterministic
and personal attribute. They define luck belief as the perception that
good luck is "a somewhat stable characteristic that consistently favors
some people but not others".
They define disbelief in luck as "a tendency to agree with the rational
view of luck as random and unreliable" (p. 490). To capture their
unidimensional definition of irrational luck belief, Darke and Freedman
developed a 12-item measure.
Unfortunately, they found their measure "does not seem particularly
good at distinguishing between people who [say] they [are] typically
lucky from those who [say] they [are] typically unlucky". They also found factor analyses of their measure produced a multi-component solution, as did Prendergast and Thompson (2008).
Multidimensional beliefs about luck
André (2006)
proposed a model of luck-related perceptions that includes separate
positive and negative beliefs. However, she found the positive and
negative components of personal luck beliefs correlate highly,
suggesting they are conceptually very close or in fact the same. Maltby
et al. (2008)
proposed a 6-dimensional model of beliefs around luck, but empirical
analyses supported only a 4-dimensional model: belief in being
personally lucky; belief in being personally unlucky; general belief in
luck; and rejection of belief in luck.
Belief in luck and luckiness
A barnstar, mounted on a wall, is seen as a lucky symbol in some parts of North America
Thompson and Prendergast (2013)
clarified the concepts of belief in luck and belief in personal
luckiness. They addressed the logical problem that nobody who
disbelieves in luck could consider themselves lucky by differentiating
between belief in luck as a deterministic phenomenon that affects the
future, on one hand, and on the other, belief in personal luckiness as
an appraisal of how fortunately or otherwise chance events in the past
might have turned out. They developed and validated an internationally
applicable scale to measure, respectively, belief in luck and personal
luckiness constructs. They found no correlation between the constructs
and no evidence of a distinction between positive and negative aspects
of each, suggesting they represent two discrete and unidimensional
constructs. Belief in luck and personal luckiness were also found to
correlate differently with personality and psychological variables, such
as the Big Five and affect.
The role of chance, or "luck", in science comprises all ways in which unexpected discoveries are made.
Many domains, especially psychology, are concerned with the way science interacts with chance — particularly "serendipity"
(accidents that, through sagacity, are transformed into opportunity).
Psychologist Dunbar adds that there is a great deal of writing about the role that
serendipity ("happy accidents") plays in the scientific method. Chance or luck is important.
Psychologist Alan A. Baumeister says a scientist must be "sagacious" (attentive and clever) to benefit from an accident. Dunbar quotes Louis Pasteur's saying that "Chance favors only the prepared mind".
The prepared mind, Dunbar suggests, is one trained for observational
rigor. Dunbar adds that there is a great deal of writing about the role
that serendipity ("happy accidents") plays in the scientific method. chance or luck is important.
Research suggests that scientists are taught various heuristics and practices that allow their investigations to benefit, and not suffer, from accidents. First, careful control conditions
allow scientists to properly identify something as "unexpected". Once a
finding is recognized as legitimately unexpected and in need of
explaining, researchers can attempt to explain it: They work across
various disciplines, with various colleagues, trying various analogies
in order to understand the first curious finding.
Preparing to make discoveries
A
model based on the work of Kevin Dunbar and Jonathan Fugelsang. The two
say that the first step is to realize a result is unexpected and
unexplained.
Accidental discoveries have been a topic of discussion especially
from the 20th century onwards. Kevin Dunbar and Jonathan Fugelsang say
that somewhere between 33% and 50% of all scientific discoveries are
unexpected. This helps explain why scientists often call their
discoveries "lucky", and yet scientists themselves may not be able to
detail exactly what role luck played (see also introspection illusion).
Dunbar and Fugelsang believe scientific discoveries are the result of
carefully prepared experiments, but also "prepared minds".
The author Nassim Nicholas Taleb
calls science "anti-fragile". That is, science can actually use — and
benefit from — the chaos of the real world. While some methods of
investigation are fragile in the face of human error and randomness, the
scientific method relies on randomness in many ways. Taleb believes
that the more anti-fragile the system, the more it will flourish in the
real world.
According to M. K. Stoskopf, it is in this way that serendipity is
often the "foundation for important intellectual leaps of understanding"
in science.
The word "Serendipity" is frequently understood as simply "a happy accident", but Horace Walpole
used the word 'serendipity' to refer to a certain kind of happy
accident: the kind that can only be exploited by a "sagacious" or clever
person. Thus Dunbar and Fugelsang talk about, not just luck or chance in science, but specifically "serendipity" in science.
Dunbar and Fugelsang suggest that the process of discovery often
starts when a researcher finds bugs in their experiment. These
unexpected results lead a researcher to self-doubt, and to try and fix
what they think is an error in their own methodology. The first
recourse is to explain the error using local hypotheses (e.g. analogies
typical of the discipline). This process is also local in the sense that
the scientist is relatively independent or else working with one
partner. Eventually, the researcher decides that the error is too
persistent and systematic to be a coincidence. Self-doubt is complete,
and so the methods shift to become more broad: The researcher begin to
think of theoretical explanations for the error, sometimes seeking the
help of colleagues across different domains of expertise. The highly
controlled, cautious, curious and even social aspects of the scientific
method are what make it well suited for identifying persistent
systematic errors (anomalies).
Albert Hofmann, the Swiss chemist who discovered LSD's psychedelic properties when he tried ingesting it at his lab, wrote
It is true that my discovery of LSD
was a chance discovery, but it was the outcome of planned experiments
and these experiments took place in the framework of systematic
pharmaceutical, chemical research. It could better be described as
serendipity.
Dunbar and colleagues cite the discoveries of Hofmann and others as
having involved serendipity. In contrast, the mind can be "prepared" in
ways that obstruct serendipity — making new knowledge difficult or
impossible to take in. Psychologist Alan A. Baumeister describes at
least one such instance: Researcher Robert Heath failed to recognize
evidence of "pleasure brain circuits" (in the septal nuclei).
When Heath stimulated the brains of his schizophrenic patients, some of
them reported feeling pleasure — a finding that Heath could have
explored. Heath, however, was "prepared" (based on prior beliefs) for
patients to report alertness, and when other patients did, it was on the
reports of alertness that Heath focused his investigations. Heath
failed to realize he had seen something unexpected and unexplained.
The brain
Fugelsang
and Dunbar observe scientists while they work together in labs or
analyze data, but they also use experimental settings and even neuroimaging. fMRI
investigation found that unexpected findings were associated with
particular brain activity. Unexpected findings were found to activate
the prefrontal cortex as well as the left hemisphere
in general. This suggests that unexpected findings provoke more
attention, and the brain applies more linguistic, conscious systems to
help explain those findings. This supports the idea that scientists are
using particular abilities that exist to some extent in all humans.
Absent sagacity, a
chance observation of an important phenomenon will have no impact, and
the observer may be denied historical attribution for the discovery.
Alan A. Baumeister
On the other hand, Dunbar and Fugelsang say that an ingenious
experimental design (and control conditions) may not be enough for the
researcher to properly appreciate when a finding is "unexpected".
Serendipitous discoveries often requires certain mental conditions in
the investigator beyond rigor. For example, a scientist must know all
about what is expected before they can be surprised, and this requires
experience in the field. Researchers also require the sagacity to know to invest in the most curious findings.
Serendipitous discoveries
Royston Roberts says that various discoveries required a degree of
genius, but also some lucky element for that genius to act on. Richard Gaughan writes that accidental discoveries result from the convergence of preparation, opportunity, and desire.
The hallucinogenic effects of lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) were discovered by Albert Hofmann, who was originally working with the substance to try and treat migraines
and bleeding after childbirth. Hofmann experienced mental distortions
and suspected it may have been the effects of LSD. He decided to test
this hypothesis on himself by taking what he thought was "an extremely
small quantity": 250 micrograms. Hofmann's description of what he
experienced as a result of taking so much LSD is regarded by Royston
Roberts as "one of the most frightening accounts in recorded medical
history".
