146 ANTHROPOLOGICAL FORUM terms xie('incorrect)and mi(confused")(Feuchtwang 2001: 35). Confucius had urged scholars to leave the spirit world alone; Confucianists held a sceptical but respectful stance. Modernist intellectuals came to see tradition and'superstition as the roots of Chinas weakness, and advocated'science and democracy as the main solutions to China s problems in the may 4th Movement of 1919. The term superstition has become the core concept around which a critique of religion was developed by modernist Chinese intellectuals-and not just the Chines Communist Party; the Nationalist KMT was just as active in fighting'supersti- tionuntil the 1980s, when democratisation of Taiwan led the party to change its stance. With mixin taking on the derogatory modernist meaning, the term chaoziran, or supernatural, has retained a more neutral, even positive, meaning, in that the use of the term allows the supposition that such a supernatural realm exists and is not mere fantasy Are ghosts supernatural? Students themselves have different views, and often are not sure. In a survey of 45 students, 56 per cent said yes, 31 per cent said no, and 13 per cent were not sure. Some students who believe in ghosts view them as real and natural Phenomena, while others have adopted the Western categorisation of spirits as supernatural. Christian students also are divided, some insisting that as Christians they believe the soul exists, so ghosts are not supernatural, while others assert that, since science cannot study the soul, it must be supernatural. Thus, as a contemporary concept in Hong Kong, e supernal as a confused meaning. If we use it, it must be for its analytical value, not because it is a native concept We have, then, a paradox. We need, on the one hand, to preserve a concept of the supernatural, so that we know we have to investigate certain claims like these ghost stories at a cultural and not natural level. We do not need to try to interview ghosts. On the other hand, however, we also need to treat supposedly supernatural phenomena as natural in order to analyse them. This is true as much for ghost stories and phenomena like fire walking as for claims of extraordinary powers such as those of spoon bender Uri Geller, all of which have natural explanations Many anthropologists argue that the truth of stories is not important; what matters is that they are believed. Klass (1995: 6), for example, argues about beliefs lust never ask whether they are"true whether they really"".As a research strategy this is fine advice. As theory, however, Glucklich(1997: 7) points out that 'this may be a cozy relativism, a scholar's hideout and a way to avoid the question that interests everyone else: Is there such a thing as real magic?" In addition, this agnostic attitude risks being dishonest: the scholar is giving a nod and a wink, admitting that he or she does not believe, and would never visit the shaman for a serious malady, but might for something minor, for the experience, or if failed by biomedicine. Despite saying we should never ask, in fact we are left to assume that beliefs and146 ANTHROPOLOGICAL FORUM terms xie (‘incorrect’) and mi (‘confused’) (Feuchtwang 2001:35). Confucius had urged scholars to leave the spirit world alone; Confucianists held a sceptical but respectful stance. Modernist intellectuals came to see tradition and ‘superstition’ as the roots of China’s weakness, and advocated ‘science and democracy’ as the main solutions to China’s problems in the May 4th Movement of 1919.3 The term ‘superstition’ has become the core concept around which a critique of religion was developed by modernist Chinese intellectuals—and not just the Chinese Communist Party; the Nationalist KMT was just as active in fighting ‘supersti￾tion’ until the 1980s, when democratisation of Taiwan led the party to change its stance. With mixin taking on the derogatory modernist meaning, the term chaoziran, or ‘supernatural’, has retained a more neutral, even positive, meaning, in that the use of the term allows the supposition that such a supernatural realm exists and is not mere fantasy. Are ghosts supernatural? Students themselves have different views, and often are not sure. In a survey of 45 students, 56 per cent said yes, 31 per cent said no, and 13 per cent were not sure. Some students who believe in ghosts view them as real and natural phenomena, while others have adopted the Western categorisation of spirits as supernatural. Christian students also are divided, some insisting that as Christians they believe the soul exists, so ghosts are not supernatural, while others assert that, since science cannot study the soul, it must be supernatural. Thus, as a contemporary concept in Hong Kong, the supernatural has a confused meaning. If we use it, it must be for its analytical value, not because it is a native concept. We have, then, a paradox. We need, on the one hand, to preserve a concept of the supernatural, so that we know we have to investigate certain claims like these ghost stories at a cultural and not natural level. We do not need to try to interview ghosts. On the other hand, however, we also need to treat supposedly supernatural phenomena as natural in order to analyse them. This is true as much for ghost stories and phenomena like fire walking as for claims of extraordinary powers such as those of spoon bender Uri Geller, all of which have natural explanations.4 Many anthropologists argue that the truth of stories is not important; what matters is that they are believed. Klass (1995:6), for example, argues about beliefs and practices that: ‘We must never ask whether they are ‘‘true’’, whether they really ‘‘work’’.’ As a research strategy, this is fine advice. As theory, however, Glucklich (1997:7) points out that ‘this may be a cozy relativism, a scholar’s hideout and a way to avoid the question that interests everyone else: Is there such a thing as real magic?’ In addition, this agnostic attitude risks being dishonest: the scholar is giving a nod and a wink, admitting that he or she does not believe, and would never visit the shaman for a serious malady, but might for something minor, for the experience, or if failed by biomedicine. Despite saying we should never ask, in fact we are left to assume that beliefs and