Conspiracy Theories, Skepticism, and Critical Thinking

  Towards the end of the Robison book that is the origin story for this conspiracy theory, Robison began complaining about a German reading society. For Robison the Illuminati thing had run its course and it was difficult for him to pretend that that an organization that lasted just over a decade was secretly in charge. He sought a new enemy, someone was running continental Masonry, and he jumped from place to place and target to target. The German Reading Societies were his final target. These societies were going to do two things: the first began publishing as many books as cheaply as possible. The second was that they were going to establish a system within the German speaking states so that a person in Berlin could request a book from a library in Bavaria and have it delivered to them. This was a problem, but Robison never explains why this is an issue. Webster tells us what the problem is: they’ll be reading unapproved books, “ Not only have the moden Illuminati succeeded in...

We’re hitting the final stretch of this book, and I realize with foreboding that I am going to have to find another one to keep going. I can say, without hyperbole, that I have probably read more of these conspiracy books than any other person. Not that I’ve read more conspiracy books, but that I’ve read more of the books. I’m actually reading them page by page and I doubt that anyone else has really done that. So, self-aggrandizement aside, even Webster knows that it’s time to wrap this thing up in a bow. She asks us to ponder the question that if the last 140 years of world history are not being directed by a single power then, “ how are we to account for the following undeniable facts?” Now, the last time she attempted to go line by line she absolutely flubbed it. To her advantage she hasn’t given us a specific number of undeniable facts so she’s learned from her earlier attempt. Her first is that the “ grievances of the people throughout this period have varied according to t...

The woozle effect is a method of arguing where you just place the responsibility of a piece of information on some source, then just repeatedly claim that the source said the thing. It doesn’t matter if the source said it or not because most people are not going to check and just assume that it’s true. This is Webster’s favorite conspiracy theory trick. The reader, by this point 2/3 of the way through the book, is just taking it at face value. She claims that the punishment for being an idler or objector to the syndicalist/socialist system is death, but we’ve seen no evidence for that. We have a quote, “ If a man will not work neither shall he eat!” and we are told that this is a rule that must be carried out by a Socialist state. We are given neither the source for this quote or a document which states that it is to be a rule. I’d even take one of her anti-Socialist writers saying it, but it’s just her attempt to imply that this is a thing. The attempt here is to frame Socialism a...

Last week we discovered that an ancestor of Jonathan May’s was given a benefit by King Charles I, and no one in his family ever knew this. He then began to invest and set up charters for thousands of different businesses (?) in order to collect on it or something. He was, as he claims, already a successful businessman and this was just more money for him. We left off with his claim that, “ I discovered that a minute cartel controlled all banking policies worldwide, and that the provision or non-provision of ‘money’ was all controlling.” Because we just finished reading the Protocols inside this book, I have a certain expectation for what May is going to claim (hint: I think he’s going to blame the Jews), but I do have to suspend that. So far we know very little, and what we do know is very difficult to verify. This is largely because May likes to brag alot. He’s a very successful businessman, even though he has no education. He claims that he is known for finding things at good price, ...

Goal post shifting is not a fallacy that is used in arguing for conspiracy theories. Rather it is used in defense of them. Perhaps the biggest problem in dealing with conspiracism is that facts do not matter. The person arguing a conspiracy theory has their little quasi facts, but more importantly they are arguing from a position of belief first evidence later. This is once the conspiracy theory takes hold. I know that I am generalizing the position here but typically a person has a feeling that something isn't right, then they move toward digging around for evidence that they were right, then they begin a series of only looking for the evidence that supports that belief. Make no mistake, conspiracism is every bit a faith based argument as religious belief. Try arguing with the Ken Hams of the world that the story of Noah's ark is literally impossible to have happened (never mind the putting the animals on the boat, think about the plants and oddly, the fish). They won't bu...

We've been on the Ad Hominem for a few posts by now and it will end soon, but first we must consider the use of the Ad Hominem and how can create an effect. The important thing to remember is that a fallacious ad hominem argument doesn't need to be false, the truth value of the attack is irrelevant to the argument. What matters, and this is important, is that relevance. The Birther Argument is the argument that the former president of the United States, was not a naturalized citizen, and thus unfit to serve the office. This presents a good litmus test for Ad Hominem because, like it or hate it, it is relevant. The Constitution is very specific on this point, that only a naturalized (that is to say, a person born within the legal definition of the United States--this includes embassies and military bases) citizen can serve the office. In the 18th century, this was a law that made a great deal of sense. The framers of the Constitution did not want someone with ties to a foreign...