Conspiracy Theories

 

Problems with existing Definitions:

            Too broad in which they let supported explanations in with unsupported information

            Contain truth value as part of the definition (e.g. False)

            Ignore the central theme of any “conspiracy theory”—which is the coverup of the truth.

 

My Proposed Definition:

            An alternative explanation for an event/phenomenon, for which the central claim is a purposeful direct concealment of the truth by a group of actors; for which the evidence is inadequate to support the claim.

 

Kinds: Not all conspiracy theories are equal and it is a mistake to treat them as such.

            Scope: size of the conspiracy theory. Event, Systemic, Super, or Omni

          Focus: based on the target. Academic or Ideological conspiracy theories.

            Presentation: is it offered as a conspiracy theory. Implied or Direct theories

 

Kennedy assassination theories: Direct, ideological, event theories

Anti-vaccination theories: implied, academic, systemic conspiracy theory

Illuminati global control: Super-conspiracy

Flat Earth: Omni-conspiracy

 

The need for engagement: Conspiracy theories cause harm. Anti-vaccination, antisemitic, or just creating division amongst populations

 

Soft-Particularism: An approach that allows the rejection of conspiracy theories which break natural laws, and reserves skepticism for those that are presenting novel explanations. Engagement with facts does not work. Engagement must be directed at the motive for belief. These reasoning for why a person believes in a theory will allow engagement that does not cause the “double down effect.”

 

Conspiracy theory argumentation is weak and based on four methods:

            Unaccounted for Data: anything left out of the official story

            Contradictory data: information in direct opposition to the official story

            Proof of ignorance: arguments which are pulled out of thin air because no counter facts exist to dispute them

Argument based on false complexity: rhetoric relying on overly-complicated terminology in order to bewilder and trick the audience into thinking there is something to say.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Conspiracy of Font: Behold a Pale Horse...pp. 156-159

We have finally returned to Cooper's own writing...allegedly. My suspicion that Dr. Pabst was really Cooper cannot be confirmed, but let's give Cooper the benefit of the doubt and welcome him back for chapter 7: Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 H.R. 5210 P.L. 100-690 Preparation for the Police State An Analysis. Right off the bat, we should know that we are in for a treat. Cooper, has already tried to read laws and executive orders and failed to understand them. I suspect that this will continue here, but we might be in for a surprise. While Cooper wrote this book in the early 90s the majority of legal regulations that he's been referring to have been from the Nixon administration. My assumption here is that he had this stuff lying around for use when he was a big name in the UFOlogy circuit. He would have needed "evidence" of the FEMA camps for the eventual UFO takeover so he just had it lying around. When the UFO conspiracy ebbed away he switched it over to this New
Read more

The Drug WARS: Behold a Pale Horse pp. 159-162

Last week we introduced Cooper's poor understanding of the omnibus drub bill of 1986. This followed his poor understanding of a series of executive orders. That's not counting the Dr. Pabst contribution which also misunderstood the legal system. Cooper is going to finish his analysis of the drug bill this week, and as a spoiler--it will not get better.  The way to understand works like this is to become familiar with certain topics that conspiracy theorists are obsessed with. It helps put things into perspective. For example, the Cooper strain of conspiracy theorists obsess over the Federal Reserve Bank of the United States. The reason is that they don't quite understand what it does (regulate the money supply through interest rates--I'm being very simplistic, but that little blurb is profoundly more informative than anything they can claim about it). They do so because it is something you can point to, we don't elect the board of governors, and a bank has probably
Read more

Irony: Behold a Pale Horse pp. 149-155

The more people claim to have read and love three documents the more you know that they have not read them. The three documents are the Bible, 1984, and the Constitution. Sure, your average conservative probably knows the three parts in the Bible where God hates gay people but is blissfully unaware of the three dozen parts where that same God commands them to take care of and shelter immigrants without qualification. They are somewhat aware that surveillance was bad in 1984 but couldn't at all explain the meaning of the two minutes of hate. And I'm not even going to be charitable on the Constitution, they know it begins with We the People...but dollars to donuts they get the rest of it confused with the Declaration of Independence. When conspiracy theorists talk about the Constitution, they just mean the Bill of Rights...the part that the founders had to add later. Pabst/Cooper titles this section "Ignoring the Constitution," and that title is going to be ironic. Pabs
Read more