Once again the question arises as to why some scholars cannot reason about mafiosi in the same terms they would apply to other groups. One possible explanation evokes the difficulty we have in believing that somebody else believes something that strikes us as ludicrous, for fear of making ourselves appear equally ludicrous. Thus, believing char mafiosi undergo a seemingly ridiculous ritual could make one seem equally ridiculous. But why should this fear arise only in the case of criminals when some people seem far less reluctant to believe, for instance, that there are others who practice black magic? Could it be that by sneering at such activities we ultimately reveal a dichotomous view of the criminal as either a hopelessly brutish creature with no symbolic life or a mythically powerful genius who could not possibly stoop so low as to deal in childish symbols other than for purely instrumental reasons?

QUESTION: Why would belief in black magic be more credible to scholars than belief in mafioso rituals? This asymmetry itself is worth investigating.

Diego Gambetta, The Sicilian Mafia The Busi…, loc. 944