Running Head: THE REALITY OF A SCIENCE OF MAGIC 1 Rubber hands and astral bodies: An argument for the reality of a cognitive science of magic Juensung J. Kim*1, Daniel Greig2, Alexandra Abramovich2, and John Vervaeke2, 3 1 Department of Applied Psychology and Human Development, University of Toronto 2 Cognitive Science Program, University of Toronto 3 Department of Psychology, University of Toronto Draft version 1.3, 3/3/20. This paper has not been peer reviewed. Please do not copy or cite without author's permission. Author Note This paper draws on work from a poster accepted for presentation to APA Division 24, Society for Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, at the 2020 annual meeting of the American Psychological Association in Washington D.C. * Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Juensung J. Kim, University of Toronto, Department of Applied Psychology and Human Development, 252 Bloor Street West, Toronto, Ontario, M5S 1V6, Canada, E-mail:
[email protected] 2 Abstract Recent academic discussion of magic has largely fallen into three camps: the psychological study of magical thinking, in an effort to explain it away; the sociological or anthropological study of magical beliefs and practices, remaining agnostic about their efficacy; and some attempts to make magic presentable as a subject of serious cognitive science. The present paper presents an alternative approach to the empirical study of magical practices. Rather than present an apologetic for magical practitioners or argue for a future area of research, the present paper argues that magical practices, by many other names, are already subject to serious scientific investigation, and to pretend otherwise is disingenuous.