Talk:Pronoia (psychology)

Why is this page still here?

Honestly, I'm confused at how someone can read this article and NOT do something about it.

"A peasant revolt therefore came into being as a result of outsourcing pronoia and the wikipedia. The technopeasants, sick and tired of being landless and ignored for decades by the media, rose up in defiance of the old pronoia laws."

WHAT does this mean? WHERE is this? What region of India? WHAT pronoia laws? An encyclopedia is not a dumping ground for New Age rhetoric, vagueries, or buzzwords like those featured here.

If this is indeed such a phenomenon as the article tries to describe, then let's have it rewritten (if nothing else), or deleted. --Addama 17:14, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Working on it.

I am going to rewrite this starting from the Wired Magazine article which introduced me to the Pronoia meme. I will attempt to locate subsequent references associated with the figures cited, or others. I too think the India/Africa content is dubious.

Once the edits are done, I wonder if Pronoia_(psychology) is a suitable title? Any suggestions?

I am wading in here... Discovered Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Zippies, and apparently the original India/Africa references are referred to in the New York Times although there is no mention of the word pronoia.

tokind 16:43, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Just a start. I welcome additional references and links to more detailed information. tokind 22:14, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Two articles?

Perhaps this should be split into Pronoia (philosophy) and Pronoia (psychology), and Pronoia (disambigiation) edited accordingly? tokind 23:54, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Message of the Zippies

The mixed message emanating from various quarters needs to be analysed. While some would concur on the belief of Clark, that rave culture involves designer drugs or that trance parties require shamanic medicine, the issue of self-medication needs to be addressed, if only, to avoid the issues associated with substance abuse and so on. I don't subscribe to Clark's message, nor do I have any sympathy for Tim Leary's message taken out of the context of the sixties. I do however agree with Aldous Huxley and do not want to associate myself with any populist appeal to drug usuage.Ethnopunk 13:21, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Psychology

This article doesn't belong in the WikiProject Psychology article base. It talks about a philosophy or worldview, not a psychological concept.--Cassmus 08:10, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Origin of the word

The section Pronoia affliction begins:

According to Pronoia.net, Dr. Fred H. Goldner claims that he, writing at Queens College in October 1982, published a paper in Social Problems (V.30, N.1:82-91), in which he coined the term pronoia to describe a psychological affliction.

The wording ("according to...", "claims") implies that Goldner is falsely claiming authorship of the article and/or the term.

The second paragraph of the article includes a straightforward citation for the article, and a URL is listed under External links. I just checked the link, which resolves to a JSTOR page. It is accurate, and the abstract includes the claim of coinage.

The origin of the doubt seems to be Pronoia.net, which is cited as the source of the content of the 3rd paragraph. Their definition page says:

The first modern use* of the word pronoia I can trace occurred during the psychedelic 1960s and 1970s - following a charismatic smile from John Perry Barlow. The EFF co-founder, Grateful Dead lyricist, and grizzled veteran of both Millbrook and Haight-Ashbury defined pronoia as: "the suspicion the Universe is a conspiracy on your behalf".

* FOOTNOTE

It was brought to our attention several years ago, via e-mail by Mr. Fred H. Golder [sic], that he believes HE in fact deserves credit for the revival of the word Pronoia in 1982. To his point, Pronoia.net offers a taste of his serious academic paper here. Writing at Queens College in October 1982 (in SOCIAL PROBLEMS,V.30,N.1:82-91), Mr. Golder summarizes:

[...]

Our response: Well, maybe feelings of pronoia are always just a "delusion"... or maybe Mr. Golder just hasn't gotten the vibe? :-) Seriously, it seems to us as if this pop-psych definition of the word Pronoia holds up a dysfunctional and delusional minority to a scientific zoom lense [sic], and reports the view as if it were an accurate representation of the larger youth phenomenon. Pronoia.net disagrees with this basic premise.

It's clear there are two different senses of the word here, which this (WP) article separates as Pronoia philosophy and Pronoia affliction. Pronoia.net apparently disagrees, snarkily (and the pop-psych here is not Goldner's), and without seeing Goldner's email it's not clear whether he viewed them as distinct. But Pronoia.net gives no citation for the "1960s and 1970s" origin of the philosophy sense, and there's no reason to doubt Goldner's independent origination of the term for the affliction. FWIW, the OED cites Goldner's paper as the origin of the word in this sense.

I've added the citation to the article here and removed the weasel wording. --Thnidu (talk) 01:02, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Use of the word by ancient Greeks and especially Proclus

Just to let you guys know that the word was already coined by the Ancient Greeks and was especially elaborated upon in the fifth century by Proclus, the head of the Athenian neo-Platonic academy, in his work on providence and fate. In Latin it would translate as "providentia"/providence, but, unlike in the Christian sense, Proclus used the word to signify the ability of each human being to understand himself, not as in understanding his various individual peculiarities which are bound to his time, but rather to understand how he participates of the eternal and divine idea of a human being. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.35.15.209 (talk) 12:27, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Further documentation of this ancient origin is S. Bergjan, "Der Fursorgende Gott: Der Begriff Der Pronoia Gottes in Der Apologetischen Literatur Der Alten Kirche" In this work she explores Pronoia in the early Christian sense. The description:

"Diese begriffsgeschichtliche Untersuchung widmet sich der spaetantiken Diskussion zwischen Christen und ihren Zeitgenossen ueber Gottes Vorsehung (Pronoia). Die Ueberzeugung, dass Gott sich um die Welt kuemmert, war in der Spaetantike allgemein verbreitet. Umstritten war in der philosophischen Diskussion des 2. und 3. Jahrhunderts, wie man sich dieses Wirken vorzustellen hat: als allgemeinen Sinnhorizont, als gute Ordnung oder als individuelle Fuersorge? Die Autorin analysiert die Bedeutung des Wortes Pronoia und zeichnet eine Diskussion aus der Perspektive der christlichen Autoren nach (vor allem: Justin, Clemens von Alexandrien, Origenes, Euseb von Caesarea)."

Pronoia means Providence not in the sense of luck, but of providing. The key sentence of the above is "The belief that God takes care of the world was widespread in late antiquity".

p.s. I see now that there is an article on Divine Providence in which these ancient usages are addressed. That article should be referred to here so that people don't get the idea that Goldner coined his usage in a vacuum. In other words, the meaning in Greek is part of the etymology and should not be omitted.

2001:171B:2274:7C21:5D8A:B87E:340D:EFA8 (talk) 10:27, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Order of development is wrong

The order of development in this article is all wrong.

It starts out by citing a fortuitous word-play by J.D. Salinger. While this is exactly the kind of serendipitous particularity that I enjoy learning from Wikipedia, it's not the main line of development.

It then leans on an unpublished, private work of Philip K. Dick as a kind of "origin". Much as I appreciate the brilliant subjectivism of Philip K. Dick, it is simply not the case that a word comes into use when it comes into a brain, but rather when it made available to public discourse.

It's clear that the 1982 article must be taken as the source of the modern usage. The ideas diffused from that article, not from Dick's Exegesis. Exegesis was first published in 2011.

Accordingly I'd suggest that the psychology usage be placed first in the article.

Another thing that concerns me is that citations that merely mention "positive conspiracy of universe" without using the word "pronoia" are too broad to include. That would make the article too much of a cloud-chaser. I'll check if any of these occur, if I can. 2001:171B:2274:7C21:5D8A:B87E:340D:EFA8 (talk) 21:45, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

I've now implemented this large change of emphasis, and numerous small changes.

I removed the Coelho quote entirely for the following reasons.

a) First because there is no evidence given in the cited page that he actually uses the word "pronoia" or "pronoid",

b) Second because lacking the specific word pronoia, the Coehlo quote is inspiring, but generic, and apparently there is a history of similar inspirational quotes, including one by Ralph Waldo Emerson (disputed).

c) Third, because it refers to actual benevolence of the universe, not an irrational or spiritual belief in that benevolence.

I checked that the other citations (with the exception of Salinger) actually use the word, and put in explicit quotation marks in appropriate places to make this clear.

I removed the moniker "neologism" since pronoia is now in the dictionary with the psychological meaning.

I moved the Barlow comment out of the introduction since it is not well attested. In particular the 1993 date, preceding the zippy article, is not attested at all, even in the source. (The source, https://web.archive.org/web/20171021070530/http://www.pronoia.net/def.html, is an unsigned, self-published, online page that lacks detail or citations.)

I found two more references below that might be useful. The first is another psychology article in 1983. It looks interesting in itself. The second is a link to the Zippy article in Wired, which was mysteriously missing from the article. [Now added]

There is an additional Zippy source in the John Perry Barlow article, I think.

2001:171B:2274:7C21:5D8A:B87E:340D:EFA8 (talk) 10:21, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Another psychology reference

Paranoia and Pronoia: The Visionary and the Banal, Laurence J. Kirmayer, Social Problems, Vol. 31, No. 2 (Dec., 1983), pp. 170-179 (10 pages) Published By: Oxford University Press

https://doi.org/10.2307/800208, https://www.jstor.org/stable/800208 2001:171B:2274:7C21:5D8A:B87E:340D:EFA8 (talk) 19:26, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Wired reference

Jules Marshall, May 1, 1994, Zippies!, Wired magazine, https://www.wired.com/1994/05/zippies/ 2001:171B:2274:7C21:5D8A:B87E:340D:EFA8 (talk) 21:25, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Added it to the article. 2001:171B:2274:7C21:5D8A:B87E:340D:EFA8 (talk) 10:44, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

This is unrelated and it is only a passing mention. Veverve (talk) 13:45, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

Potentially controversial change

I removed the Philip K. Dick reference entirely for the following reasons.

A) First, it is quite clear from searching all the uses of pronoia in Exegesis that Dick was using the word strictly in the theological historical sense of Divine Providence, and not in the sense of an "opposite to paranoia".

Dick was very familiar with Catholic theology, and Exegesis is loaded with Greek theological terms (including the title), many of them in direct proximity to pronoia. So he knew the Greek meaning. Furthermore, he uses it to refer to the benevolence of the universe, not to his attitude or belief in the benevolence of the universe.

So he's using the classical meaning. Not the antonym-of-paranoia meaning.

He's not reviving it either; scholars were continually studying this term.

B) Second, the paragraph about Exegesis is not correct even considered in isolation, unfortunately. It is full of projections and anachronisms. Here is the paragraph as it was:

The writer Philip K Dick referred to pronoia as an antidote to paranoia in his private work, Exegesis, in which it is mentioned in relation to his perceived protection by an entity he called V.A.L.I.S., an acronym for Vast Active Living Intelligence System. Published posthumously in 2011, the word "pronoia" first appeared in his Exegesis in January 1980. Dick suggested his own pronoia was based on an "intelligent analysis" of his mystical experiences, and was not "reflexive or mechanical" in its nature.

a) Dick does not refer to pronoia as an "antidote to paranoia". This phrase does not appear in Exegesis, nor does he juxtapose the two words, or set them against each other, despite the obvious play on words.

Indeed, the phrase "an antidote to paranoia" appears (almost) in the title of the book Pronoia Is the Antidote for Paranoia: How the Whole World Is Conspiring to Shower You with Blessings by the horoscope columnist Rob Brezsny. I think that this title is simply being pasted onto Exegesis as an interpretation.

Now, clearly Dick needed an antidote to paranoia, and from a cursory skimming of Exegesis, it appears that a belief in Divine Providence (pronoia) functioned in that way for him. But that does not mean that Dick used "pronoia" to mean "a belief in Divine Providence", nor "an exuberant or irrational belief that the universe is conspiring in your favor". He's simply using the classical meanings of pronoia and paranoia.

b) The editors of Exegesis get it right. From the glossary of that book:

pronoia: In theology, and in the writings of Philo of Alexandria in particular, pronoia refers to God's governance of creation. It is roughly analogous to the concept of divine providence. More recently, the term has assumed a psychological valence as an inverse to paranoia, so that it denotes the belief that the universe is a conspiracy on one's behalf.

They correctly identify the new meaning in psychology as being recent (namely after Dick's book was written) but they don't claim that Dick was using it that way.

c) Consider the sentence

Dick suggested his own pronoia was based on an "intelligent analysis" of his mystical experiences, and was not "reflexive or mechanical" in its nature.

in the paragraph about Exegesis. This is a posthumous application of the psychological term to Dick's mental state. The application is being done by a Wikipedia editor, not by Dick. In the book, Dick never referred to himself as "having" pronoia (a mental state). In the book Dick is explaining how he came to understand pronoia, or believe in pronoia (Divine Providence). So it is misleading (anachronistic) to have Dick suggesting something about his own pronoia.

d) Dick's ruminations on "pronoia" in Exegesis are interesting. Maybe a good place to include this material (after making it accurate) is in the article Divine Providence under "Divine providence (pronoia) in popular culture".

Of course, that could be a large category -- like, the solar system in popular culture, or Roman history in popular culture.

e) This got long. Sorry. 2001:171B:2274:7C21:5D8A:B87E:340D:EFA8 (talk) 00:48, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

P.S. I'm happy to discuss this change, but if you want to put back in the Dick material (I admit that it is interesting), for goodness sake make it accurate in the spirit of B) above. The version you'll get if you revert is my provisional rewrite, which does not address the issues in B) and is therefore still incorrect:

"The writer Philip K Dick used the word independently in 1980 as an antidote to paranoia in his private work, Exegesis, where it refers to his perceived protection by an entity he called V.A.L.I.S., an acronym for Vast Active Living Intelligence System. Dick suggested his own pronoia was based on an "intelligent analysis" of his mystical experiences, and was not "reflexive or mechanical" in its nature. The word "pronoia" first appeared in his Exegesis in January 1980. It was published posthumously in 2011."

2001:171B:2274:7C21:5D8A:B87E:340D:EFA8 (talk) 00:57, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

References