10 Levels of Deception: The Neuroscience of Magic
This video has literally been years in the making, and it’s taken me the most time to create compared to any video on my channel. I really hope you like it! The crediting information was so long that it wouldn’t fit in a YouTube description or comment.
CREDITS, CITATIONS, and FURTHER INFORMATION:
I studied neurobiology at the University of Pennsylvania. This routine is adapted from a talk I gave alongside Barbara Schildkrout, MD, and Kathy Niu, MD, at the 2021 Annual American Neuropsychiatric Association (ANPA) Conference. I’ve covered far more topics (in slightly less technical detail) in this version. To learn more in general about the neuroscience of magic, I’d recommend Gustav Kuhn’s book Experiencing the Impossible: The Science of Magic.
Level 1: This idea comes from the old magicians’ adage “never do the same trick twice.” If the audience knows what will happen in advance, they’re far more likely to know exactly where to look to try and catch the deception.
Level 2: We carry many false assumptions about physics, facts, and even ourselves without realizing it. I’d recommend reading the book “The Elephant in the Brain” if you’d like to learn more about this concept and how it arises in everyday life. Our ability to deceive ourselves is remarkable. The wrist turning game, “Magical Supination and Pronation,” was invented by Lennart Green, published in Secret Agenda (October 15th Issue) by Roberto Giobbi. For more information on how the forearm works, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forearm.
Level 3: Inattentional blindness is one of the most potent tools in a magicians’ arsenal. You can almost literally “blindfold” your audience — in a cognitive sense — for a few moments. The wrist twisting game I demonstrated was popularized by David Copperfield and Kieth Barry, among many others. I’ve been unable to track down it’s true origin, so if you know where it comes from, let me know. For more information about inattentional blindness, see Mack, A. and Rock, I. (1998). Inattentional Blindness, MIT Press: https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/inattentional-blindness. The idea of looking inwards vs. looking outwards comes from Darwin Ortiz. For more information on this concept, see his books Strong Magic and Designing Miracles.
Level 4: This “look over there while I do something sneaky over here” is the most intuitive form of misdirection, yet it still works well as long as the audience has a compelling reason to look where you want them to look. The best explanation for the idea of “moving the spotlight” I’ve seen is this TED talk by world-class pickpocket Apollo Robbins: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZGY0wPAnus&t=1s. The card trick I perform and explain is called “inversion.” The first reference of tricks with this title comes from James Lewis, Piet Forton, and Michael Ammar. Their versions were published in Encore II in 1981. The first appearance of this concept comes from “Reversing Whole Pack - 1st Method” published in Greater Magic in 1938. The inventor is unknown. Bruce Cervon and Richard Kaufman have also published versions of this effect under different titles.
Level 5: In order to experience magic, an audience member must experience the initial condition and the final condition with the impression that there is no causal link. Some impossible “transformation” must have occurred between the initial and final conditions. Magic defies physics, not logic. The concept of the initial and final conditions was pioneered by Arturo de Ascanio in the book “The Structural Conception of Magic.” The way I explain it follows the format used by Robert Giobbi in the “Theory” chapter in Card College, Volume 2. That’s also where the “cult of the ace of hearts” line comes from. I got the phrase “impression that there is no causal link” from my friend Barbara Schildkrout, MD, a neuropsychiatrist from Harvard University. The time that elapses in between the initial condition and the final condition is called the critical interval. To learn about this concept, see Designing Miracles by Darwin Ortiz.
Level 6: Change blindness is a fascinating phenomenon that is perfectly illustrated in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3iPrBrGSJM. The deck of cards used is David Regal’s Color Changing Deck, although the way I use the cards is very different from his original marketed routine. To learn more about change blindness, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Change_blindness. The full technical definition is as follows: “Change blindness is the finding that observers often fail to notice large changes to objects or scenes when the change coincides with a brief visual disruption (Simons & Levin, 1997).
Level 7: Through many performances, I’ve found it easiest to lie to an audience if I bury the lie amongst many truths. Many other performers, I’m sure, have noticed this as well.
Level 8: I was first introduced to the idea of hand gestures from the performances of Roberto Giobbi and Juan Tamariz. Giobbi uses the interlaced finger gesture multiple times throughout his Card College books.
Level 9: A time delay is a widely used concept in magic. Our memories are far more unreliable than we think. You can learn more about the science of memory distortion in this study by Daniel L. Schacter, Scott A. Guerin,* and Peggy L. St. Jacques: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3183109/.
Level 10: While the previous 9 levels explained some of the deception, there’s a whole other layer of trickery hiding underneath that I don’t explain. The modern incarnation of the one-at-a-time suit production comes from Ricky Jay, who apparently found inspiration in one of Hofzinser's original routines. Pepe Carroll and Denis Behr have also made significant contributions in this area. Some of the card production sequences come from Darwin's Nine-Card Location published in Darwin Ortiz at the Card Table. A few of the productions used are the Benzais Spin-Out Move, the Frank Thompson False Cut, the Friction Toss, and Joshua Jay's Dribblocation.
Bonus Level: This is a concept I may focus on more in the future. I arrived at this specific phrasing of “how vs. why” myself, though I wouldn’t be surprised if others have explained this idea using similar terms.
I learned how to make the thumbnail in photoshop from this video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQSKseBlA4c) which was shared with me by my friend Kim. I was inspired to make this kind of thumbnail after seeing his video about dice cheats: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWmyfTTHlpY.
That’s all for now.