The text below is from http://gnwmythr.blogspot.com.au/2015/06/post-no-718-intellectual-cowardice-and.html, but also see here for the sort of appalling behaviour conspiracy nuts are capable of, here for tactics used by climate change deniers, here for evidence that they just can't think, here for thoughts on their intellectual cowardice, and also LBI.
I object to dignifying such malicious, dangerous, anti-thinking rubbish with the word theory, and thus I now refer to these as conspiracy fantasies - and have edited the below copy accordingly.
PS - see also:
- “A rebuttal of the so-called “Rapid-onset gender dysphoria” conspiracy fantasy” https://politicalmusingsofkayleen.blogspot.com/2024/04/a-rebuttal-of-so-called-rapid-onset.html and “gender flat earthers (GFEs)” https://gnwmythrsglossary.blogspot.com/2024/04/gender-flat-earthers-gfes.html
I've always been dubious about conspiracy fantasies. I've known people who held to those, and some of the them were truly nutters - like the woman I knew a few decades ago who believed the moon landings were faked. I didn't have any sense that she strongly felt that: it was more a case of mild incredulity combined with wanting to have a characteristic that would set her apart - and that's probably the key for me: the lack of intellectual rigour that many of these people have. That is part of why I consider it so essential for children to be taught Brendan Myers' "Clear and Present Thinking", and to generally find the balance point between scepticism and gullibility.
Some matters that seem to be conspiracy fantasies are later found to be true - for instance, those who have been crying wolf over FIFA could possibly have been viewed as a conspiracy fantasy, but now the facts have shown the allegations were true.
Others, such as the people who still believe the Earth is flat are clearly wrong (in my view :) - which is based on as objective assessment of the facts as I can make), and never will be right.
What is the difference?
Facts, and clear thinking.
Conspiracy fantasies are largely built around what the legal profession would describe as circumstantial evidence: it is not the equivalent of "facts" determined by forensic science (which are largely over-rated by members of the public). Now, there is a whole range of facts that mainstream science dismisses without proper investigation, and that is anything related to psychism or mediumship. However, in my opinion, there is adequate evidence supporting the existence of psychism and mediumship (including the problems that can and do happen with those as well - don't discount what the sceptics say: it is important to avoid being gullible). For more on this, refer to Victor Zammit's website, here, "Briefing for the Landing on Planet Earth" by Stuart Holroyd, and no doubt many other websites and sources. (And I consider many "skeptics" - particularly those I encounter in everyday life - are guilty of bullying, as well as intellectual cowardice and dishonesty and the other matters I have touched on.)
Having got that out of the way, I have rarely felt that the conspiracy fantasists I have met were dedicated to the truth: there was mostly (not in all cases!) some emotional flaw or need (remember to do your shadow work!) that was being met by their adherence to their position - just as many "skeptics" also are comforted by their emotional allegiance to their ideology. In both groups, there are exceptions - for instance, here - but that doesn't excuse or justify the problems that go with both sides.
Now, I have come across a few articles where people look at the problem of conspiracy fantasies from the point of view of intellectual thinking style, in my words:
- http://aeon.co/magazine/philosophy/intellectual-character-of-conspiracy-theorists/;
- http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2013/11/conspiracy_theory_psychology_people_who_claim_to_know_the_truth_about_jfk.html;
- http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-people-believe-conspiracy-theoies/.
Oftentimes, no - but it is when it stops other people being all that they can be, or robs resources from worthy causes, then I become concerned.
In the case of faked moon landing or flat earth conspiracy fantasies, I don't think it matters - considerations of funding and survival (there is an argument that Gaea promoted the evolution of a species which could leave the planet to enable survival of the next "planet killing" asteroid or super-volcano) are far more important than whether or not the moon landings happened. In many cases, it harms the advocate more than anyone else (for instance, there are a couple of ET contact groups here in Australia that I have considered going along to, to see what they're like, but they've failed on intellectual rigour because they consider the UN is an attempt to impose a bad form of world government - I am all in favour of a world government, if it is a good form, incidentally - it might take care of many of the conflicts and the misallocation of food and other resources), and a post about the Exhibition Building and a fountain in the Carlton Gardens which alleged "Illuminati" and reptilian * symbols. The symbols were typical of that era, and what is termed a classical education! The "half reptile" people described were mer-people! How the hell can anyone not know what a mermaid or a merman are?
You don't do your case any good if you cannot get these sort of fundamentals right. If they had shown awareness of that, and then argued their case, it would have had more cogency and credibility.
From a personal point of the view, the greatest harm in that is that I also want to experience a sense of belongingness, and clearly, I have to keep searching.
* see about one third of the way through here, for an explanation of this term.
PS - if you're not familiar with a particular conspiracy fantasy, I would suggest you at least listen to them. To not do so is much intellectual cowardice as those who I have written about in this post. Also, people cannot effectively "de-bunk" a conspiracy fantasy unless they know how those who adhere to it think. For example, I have been planning on writing my version of a de-bunking of the hollow earth fantasy - largely because I think I know enough to do so, including having some familiarity with how those who adhere to that fantasy think. Incidentally, if a conspiracy fantasy is bunk, there will be, or it will be possible to prepare, an effective, calm, sensible rebuttal. If no-one has done so yet, well, maybe think about it all very carefully - in fact, why not MEDITATE on it ... Also, see here.
Also:
- from http://gnwmythr.blogspot.com.au/2015/01/post-no-633-for-tomorrow-nights.html:
the “War on the Rocks” blog has an article which mentions astral battles between the US and Russia (despite the somewhat disparaging reference, potentially significant in view of the Correllians determination of the causes of current negativity in the world) and gives a good example of the dangers of ‘urban myths’ and other conspiracy fantasies ; - from http://gnwmythr.blogspot.com.au/2014/11/post-no-614-for-tomorrow-nights.html:
I first started looking in to this as a result of a BBC online article: http://www.bbc.co.uk/guides/z26bjxs#zsvdhyc, which I wound up looking at after I started research to see what others had thought of the possibility of avoiding World War Part One – and it seems that, if the violence in 1914 had been delayed, or limited to a small conflict, it would have been possible to avoid the larger world wide violence. Of course, the question then becomes, what would the world have been like? Obviously, Hitler wouldn’t have come to power on the basis of the “stab in the back” conspiracy lunacy, and thus no Holocaust and no World War Part Two, and no Russian Revolution and no Cold War but would the empires have been swept away? Would women have had a boost to employment and other rights? Would the massive changes in social attitudes that have led to a world more committed to equality and less inclined to automatic obedience of the upper classes? I’ve found a book which looks at a few scenarios, some better and some worse, and am looking forward to getting it one day. The book is “Archduke Franz Ferdinand Lives! A without World War 1”, by Richard Ned Lebow (it even seems that the Archduke himself would have made some good changes to the Austro-Hungarian Empire, had he lived). - from http://gnwmythr.blogspot.com.au/2013/11/reading_17.html:
finally, an interesting and reasonably well thought out and presented article on UFO conspiracy stuff (I normally dislike these because of the shallowness of thinking - often being based on downright stupidity): http://whitehouseufo.blogspot.ca/2013/10/ufos-what-does-thepresident-know.html. I particularly liked the following quotes from Eisenhower:“I hate war as only a soldier who has lived it can, only as one who has seen its brutality, its futility, its stupidity.”
- from http://gnwmythr.blogspot.com.au/2012/11/forms-living-in-chakras-more-fear-and.html:
Now, one of the sets of people who almost unfailingly annoy me are conspiracy fantasists. I think they are often seeking distraction and entertainment to pass time at the expense of other people - but a comment I posted some time ago, to the effect that they're trying to impose order on what is frightening chaos, could also be applicable [8]. Recently, as I did some clearing, a thought occurred to me, that the problem is that conspiracy fantasists assume people in the physical are aware and actively involved in what is being theorised - such as the "the US government did 9/11", or the idea of "economic Shock Doctrine". The truth is, such things may be happening on non-physical levels (a lot of them aren't!), but aren't at conscious level. Thus, for instance, a politician may wish on the physical level for something like a war to take voters minds off internal problems, and this tends to be latched on by negative forces on the non-physical and thus is created. This activity on non-physical levels is what Dion Fortune was working against and wrote about in "The Magical Battle of Britain" (see here). - from http://gnwmythr.blogspot.com.au/2012/10/what-do-i-do-next.html:
My last quote is from Alan Moore [2], on the topic of conspiracy fantasies:
"Yes, there is a conspiracy, indeed there are a great number of conspiracies, all tripping each other up… the main thing that I learned about conspiracy fantasies is that conspiracy fantasists actually believe in the conspiracy because that is more comforting. The truth of the world is that it is chaotic. The truth is, that it is not the Jewish banking conspiracy, or the grey aliens, or the twelve-foot reptiloids from another dimension that are in control, the truth is far more frightening; no-one is in control, the world is rudderless." - from http://gnwmythr.blogspot.com.au/2010/11/some-links-for-reading-and-maybe-even.html:
One of my former friends loved conspiracy fantasies - she loved the idea that the landings on the Moon were all faked (my view is that I was glad when an astronaut punched one idiot who was stupid enough to try challenging him face to face about it), she loved the X Files (I liked them too for a while, but it got a bit over-long for me). I know there is even a Flat Earth Society!
Some of this is just harmless, or even entertaining. Other conspiracy fantasies are not: there are some very vicious, nasty and evil fantasies on the basis of race, religion or sexuality, for instance. Those conspiracy fantasies are far from harmless.
Personally, I simply don't have time to engage in rubbish, and so I won't when it comes to conspiracy fantasies. In fact, my tendency to dislike conspiracy fantasies is one of the reasons I didn't like the Matrix series of films when they came out: my friend loved them because they played into her love of conspiracy fantasies, and I reacted against that. Well, to continue a recent theme, I actually wound up watching the series again: I still dislike the conspiracy-fantasy-like aspects of the film (I feel like conspiracy fantasies are a device of the week minded which detracts from the serious purpose of those of us who know our stuff isn't a conspiracy fantasy - it's real! [Joke, Joyce!]), but there are some interesting links I have come across as a result of that, including here and here. - and http://gnwmythr.blogspot.com.au/2010/04/some-thoughts-on-tim-weiner-book-legacy.html.
Finally, there is also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_theory,and a good debunking of the 2012 hysteria on Witchvox at http://www.witchvox.com/va/dt_va.html?a=ustx&c=words&id=14189.
For my original writing ONLY on this blog:
Copyright © Kayleen White 2016-2024 NO AI I do not consent to any machine learning aka Artificial Intelligence (AI), generative AI, large language model, machine learning, chatbot, or other automated analysis, generative process, or replication program to reproduce, mimic, remix, summarise, or otherwise replicate any part of this post or other posts on this blog via any means. Typo’s may be inserrted deliberately to demonstrate this is not an AI product. Otherwise, fair and reasonable use is accepted under Creative Commons 4.0 on an Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike basis https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
Links to others works and excerpts from others works are NOT covered by the hereinbefore, and remain subject to the conditions of the original source.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.