CHANGE MY LOCATION
You’re not superstitious? Better cross your fingers
SEE THE LATEST ON THIS STORY
Related Topics: SAN FRANCISCO
)
Norman Sun, left, and Letitia Chai tempt fate at Exploratorium’s Superstition Obstacle Course.
SAN FRANCISCO (Map, News) - Juliet Critchlow said she wouldn’t want to break her mother’s back, but she went ahead and stepped on the crack anyway.
“I step on cracks all the time, and my mom’s never broken her back,” the 12-year-old reasoned.
Of course, Critchlow says she isn’t superstitious, so she had little trouble waltzing under a ladder, shattering a mirror and letting the black cat stroll by Thursday afternoon in an exhibit at the Exploratorium that challenges visitors to butt heads with their bad-luck fears — and to question why many of us fall for them.
Whether it’s the dreaded number 13, the unlucky penny or the misfortune cookie, the museum’s Superstition Obstacle Course has patrons toying with superstitions they wouldn’t dare mess with in everyday life.
The idea is not to test our luck, but to examine how history, culture and stereotypes can influence the mind into making decisions that might not appear all that rational, according to Michael Pearce, the Exploratorium project manager who designed the course.
“There’s a strong social element to fear, and it affects the way our minds work,” Pearce said. “What everybody is believing, people tend to believe. What they are doing, people tend to do.”
Then again, the exhibit, which runs through Sept. 1, is not necessarily meant to debunk bad-luck myths. Who knows? Maybe Dan Marino would have won a Super Bowl with the Miami Dolphins had he not worn the number 13 on his jersey.
Although skeptic groups, such as the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal, are working to make bad-luck charms such as spilled salt seem like spilled milk, the new Exploratorium exhibit — which runs through Sept. 1 — exists solely to show how easily the human mind can be influenced by the masses.
“Our idea is to examine your own psychology of why you think the way you do,” Pearce said.
Comments from Examiner Readers
5:44 PM MST on Tue., Aug. 12, 2008 re: "Exploratorium thinks bigger at waterfront site"
Report as inappropriate
1:37 PM MST on Tue., Aug. 12, 2008
re: "Exploratorium thinks bigger at waterfront site"
Report as inappropriate
9:43 AM MST on Mon., Jun. 30, 2008
re: "You’re not superstitious? Better cross your fingers"
Report as inappropriate
1:36 PM MST on Wed., Feb. 13, 2008
re: "Exploratorium wants to give exhibits a place in the sun"
Report as inappropriate
11:52 AM MST on Wed., Feb. 13, 2008
re: "Exploratorium wants to give exhibits a place in the sun"
Report as inappropriate
Examiner Reader said:
now our creatures of the sea or not at the exploratorium, can have a haven closer to the ocean just in case of an earthquake, then they can swim off back into nature where they belong and not gawked at by the paying public how curious they are in glass or caged booths.
1 agree | 1 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
In response to Mr. Maritime Concern, I heard that the Navy will continue to berth ships at the end of the pier as needed. So the project does not exclude maritime...in fact knowing a cool place like the Exploratorium, you can bet they'll have their own ship and make the bay more accessible.
1 agree | 1 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
The link to the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP) apparently doesn't work from this site. The working link is here: www.csicop.org . The group is now called the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry now, btw.
2 agree | 2 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Native San Franciscan said:
The Exploratorium would be a fine addtion to the waterfront. It is a wonderful San Francisco institution enjoyed by generations of families in the Bay Area. Its new location would also make it easier for people to get to. Lets hope this comes to pass.
39 agree | 32 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Maritime Concern said:
What about keeping the waterfront for SHIPS . . . SF is losing piers to attrition, lack of funding, lack of vessel calls and lack of maintenance . . . I seem to recall USN berthing ships at Pier 15/17 for Fleet Week and other USN calls . . . and hope the Port Commissioners factor in the need to keep SOME piers along the SF waterfront for their original use . . FOR SHIPS!@@!!!! While real estate revenue for the port is important, we must not lose sight of the REAL purpose of the waterfront in this beautiful port
37 agree | 36 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree