Conspiracy Theories and Narcissism.

[Walker]

So this is why Hillary said, "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy."

This is a bonus statement.

It's narcissism and it's also lies, thus it's the classic totalitarian propaganda tactic of accusing political enemies of committing your actions, because as everyone now knows, Hillary is a little conspirator, although any objective cause of her narcissism is a mystery.

[Iwannaplato]

Some of them sort of change their minds and move onto new conspiracies to theorise about. The ones who are in it for political reasons and need to believe the right conspiracy theories to keep up with their peers and pass some purity test.

I think it's too complex a phenomenon to be summed up like that. There are people who believe that X was a conspiracy, but didn't think about conspiracy theories (those that people mean by that term) before they changed their minds or decided that X was a conspiracy. There are people who believe in a couple of these not accepted by the mainstream conspiracies.

So the general alt-right, such as Walker, run through a constantly updating series of conspiracy theories and consider very rude if you remind them they used to believe that Italian satellites switched the votes in an American election. There seems to be a list of conspiracy theories that alt-right types have to converge on for fear of being branded RINOs and they are really good at internalising it.

Sure, my point isn't that all conspiracy theorists (god, I hate that term) fit a certain pattern. I just think there are lots of things getting lumped into a single pattern.

In the UK, 20 years ago it was normal for far left tankies to believe that global warming was a capitalist conspiracy designed to inhibit development in the 3rd world and ensure that African countries could never develop electrical infrastructure necessary for economic progress thus relegating them to permanent resource extraction status. I think that once the American right tookover the global warming conspiracy game, the European left kind of gave up on it.

Which is a terrible reason to give up on it. I notice that the left, which used to be more skeptical about media, government oversight or industry, the government, has stopped having a critical view of these things. I am not suggesting they need to conclude in a specific way, but now it seems everyone tries to decide what their team believes, and then the choose their belief based on team allegience.

[Skepdick]

<blah blah blah>

There is no material difference between unshakable philosophical presupposition and an unfalsifiable conspiratorial belief.

Dogmatism is dogmatism is dogmatism.

[FlashDangerpants]

Some of them sort of change their minds and move onto new conspiracies to theorise about. The ones who are in it for political reasons and need to believe the right conspiracy theories to keep up with their peers and pass some purity test.

I think it's too complex a phenomenon to be summed up like that. There are people who believe that X was a conspiracy, but didn't think about conspiracy theories (those that people mean by that term) before they changed their minds or decided that X was a conspiracy. There are people who believe in a couple of these not accepted by the mainstream conspiracies.

If the telling of any story involves believable bad guys with complex emotional ranges and recognisably complex agency for all the characters involved, we don't consider it a fairy tale, it may be fiction but it isn't children's bedtime fiction about gingerbread houses and wicked pixies.

These Conspiratorial Theorising things are narratvie events, acts of story telling or <insert whatever specious shit Jacobi would write about interpretations here>, so a lot depends upon the story telling of the thing. The outlandish conspiracy thoeries are acts of bad story telling in which sometimes millions of characters are just doing dumb shit for confusingly stupid reasons because the bad story teller needs to move the plot along. In his OP here, GrandWizzzard22 mentions jews 18 times and describes a rambling conspiracy in which magic jewish pixies do evil stuff just because they are cartoonishly malevolent creatures. I am sure that Wizzy doesn't think of himself as a conspiracy theorist, but the hat fits like a glove I tells ya!

A conspiracy theory you don't have to be quite so mad to believe is that Pan Am flight 103 was not brought down by the Libyans at all. The supposition here is that having vowed revenge the previous year for an incident in which a US ship shot down an Iranian passenger aircraft in the gulf (having mistaken it for a hostile F15 Tomcat apparently), the Iranians retained the services of a Palestinian terror cell to bring down a US passenger jet for them. But for geopolitcal reasons (aka Straights of Hormuz, and the true but internationally unpopular excuse the US had used for shooting down a passenger jet) neither the Americans nor the British (Brits because the bombed plane fell on the Scottish town of Lockerbie and killed people on the ground as well) wanted to be put into a position where they might need to engage Iran militarily. Therefore the British police, working with British and American intelligence agencies, completely stitched up a much more convenient target in the Libyans, and provided casus belli for the subsequent retaliatory bombing of Libya. That conspiracy theory has stuck around for years because it is highly probable that it is true. All of the actions and motives of all the participants fall into line with usual expectations as well.

[Gary Childress]

Dogmatism is dogmatism is dogmatism.

Looking at the etymology of "dogma", it appears to transform over time within Greek from meaning "seems good" to meaning "opinion". It seems like a fitting evolution. However, the question remains, what is justified true belief? Does the center hold or does it not?

We are like sailors who on the open sea must reconstruct their ship but are never able to start afresh from the bottom. Where a beam is taken away a new one must at once be put there, and for this the rest of the ship is used as support. In this way, by using the old beams and driftwood the ship can be shaped entirely anew, but only by gradual reconstruction.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurath%27s_boat

[Iwannaplato]

That conspiracy theory has stuck around for years because it is highly probable that it is true. All of the actions and motives of all the participants fall into line with usual expectations as well.

A lot of conspiracy theories have stuck around. Yes, there are silly people who believe things on poor grounds. But there are whole ranges of narratives about some of the various leading conspiracy theories not accepted by mainstream experts. Anything from groups of experts in the relevant field to whistleblowers to people who don't even create a counternarrative but question what they think are strange, inadequate and often convenient narratives that are accepted.

But when the issues get lumped together along with lumped together 'conspiracy theorists' and then a psychological narrative is aimed at them, I think it's of a parallel to the pejorative conspiracy theory.

Most people who believe in complex things understand them terribly and for poor reasons. And I am including things I believe are true on both sides of the conspiracy and non-conspiracy theory sides of the fence.

[FlashDangerpants]

That conspiracy theory has stuck around for years because it is highly probable that it is true. All of the actions and motives of all the participants fall into line with usual expectations as well.

A lot of conspiracy theories have stuck around. Yes, there are silly people who believe things on poor grounds. But there are whole ranges of narratives about some of the various leading conspiracy theories not accepted by mainstream experts. Anything from groups of experts in the relevant field to whistleblowers to people who don't even create a counternarrative but question what they think are strange, inadequate and often convenient narratives that are accepted.

But when the issues get lumped together along with lumped together 'conspiracy theorists' and then a psychological narrative is aimed at them, I think it's of a parallel to the pejorative conspiracy theory.

Most people who believe in complex things understand them terribly and for poor reasons. And I am including things I believe are true on both sides of the conspiracy and non-conspiracy theory sides of the fence.

But surely sometimes the psychological narrative is more or less true?

Something explains Wizzy's obsessions with jews and I don't think that we should be looking at jewy things the dirty jews did for that explanation. The boy is an idiot, and he is insane, so I posit that something to do with those qualities of the conspiracy theorist explains why he belives in jewish conspiracy theories. And they definitely are conspiracy theories, they do not under circumstances deserve some dignified circumlocution to spare the feelies of a fanatical fucknut.



I am interested though in which of these conspiracy theories that have lasted a long time, are not accepted by mainstream experts, and should not be explained by cognitive disfunction or any of those sorts of things. I'm confused why there are experts who aren't mainstream experts involved in them? I've seen some of those things, but it tends to be an expert in some unrelated field, such as geologist who swears that the WTC couldn't fall that way, even though the mainstream experts (structural engineers and so on) can rather easily explain how it did happen.

[Alexiev]

There are two important problems with conspiracy theories.

First, they cannot be "falsified" because, according to the adherents, any falsifying evidence is part of (if not proof of) the conspiracy.

Second, there are dozens of equally plausible explanations for the event. Any particular conspiracy is unlikely, even if some conspiracy exists. Take JFK's assassination. It seems likely that there was some conspiracy (why else would Ruby have shot Oswald?), but which of the dozen theories is correct is problematic. The logical error is "assuming the antecedant". The facts which fit one antecedent probably also fit a dozen others.

[FlashDangerpants]

There are two important problems with conspiracy theories.

First, they cannot be "falsified" because, according to the adherents, any falsifying evidence is part of (if not proof of) the conspiracy.

Second, there are dozens of equally plausible explanations for the event. Any particular conspiracy is unlikely, even if some conspiracy exists. Take JFK's assassination. It seems likely that there was some conspiracy (why else would Ruby have shot Oswald?), but which of the dozen theories is correct is problematic. The logical error is "assuming the antecedant". The facts which fit one antecedent probably also fit a dozen others.

Those do seem like two relevant factors now you mention it. Certainly with Walker, even as one conspiracy theory detail falls apart, the overall picture remains unassailable. Like, on Jan 7th he was talking about facial recognition showing that the insurrection in the Capitol was all antifa, within hours the public story of the guy in the picture that was goinmg round twitter was debunked, so Walker just knew of some other facial recognition thing that nobody else knew about for a few months, until it became time that the facial stuff was over and he had moved onto some other shit. The whack-a-mole is eternal, and thus the theory is unfalsifiable if you can be counted on to fabulate new facts out of failed ancestors.

I suspect they enjoy confirming the consequent as much as anything they get up to with the antecedent. Sometimes the logic seems to go.... If the jews invented the holocaust then the jews who own the media will ban me from speaking up about it so if somebody is mean to me about saying hte jews did the holocaust then I am ontot he truth and THEY are trying to silence me ... who is this nasty man on some forum calling me a nazi? Why those sneaky jewy jews!!!!!

[Atla]

Except massive conspiracies do happen, just look at 9/11.

I'm surprised that anyone pays demolition companies for their work after 9/11. Three buildings perfectly destroyed into their footprints (and mostly into dust) by two asymmetrical explosions and fires in two of the buildings. I mean, jesus, what's all this careful laying of charges, simultanesous disruption of all main supports in buildings for outrageous fees. Demolition companies have been running a scam on us for over a century.

I wonder what all the "Republican" Trump supporters, who believe that the "Democrats" are the source of all evil, would say if they realized that the biggest conspiracy of the century so far happened under a Republican government. Probably would melt their brains.

[Iwannaplato]

Except massive conspiracies do happen, just look at 9/11.

I'm surprised that anyone pays demolition companies for their work after 9/11. Three buildings perfectly destroyed into their footprints (and mostly into dust) by two asymmetrical explosions and fires in two of the buildings. I mean, jesus, what's all this careful laying of charges, simultanesous disruption of all main supports in buildings for outrageous fees. Demolition companies have been running a scam on us for over a century.

I wonder what all the "Republican" Trump supporters, who believe that the "Democrats" are the source of all evil, would say if they realized that the biggest conspiracy of the century so far happened under a Republican government. Probably would melt their brains.

I think some realize this. And I think some have managed to realize that Gulf War 2 was BS. The latter is a conspiracy theory that more or less was confirmed, with no consequences. The WOMD and Colin Powell and what they did to whistle-blowers and more.

[Iwannaplato]

There are two important problems with conspiracy theories.

First, they cannot be "falsified" because, according to the adherents, any falsifying evidence is part of (if not proof of) the conspiracy.

Second, there are dozens of equally plausible explanations for the event. Any particular conspiracy is unlikely, even if some conspiracy exists. Take JFK's assassination. It seems likely that there was some conspiracy (why else would Ruby have shot Oswald?), but which of the dozen theories is correct is problematic. The logical error is "assuming the antecedant". The facts which fit one antecedent probably also fit a dozen others.

But even believing the Warren Commission lone gunman conclusion was false and that there was a conspiracy would have gotten you labelled a conspiracy theorist. Now it's a more commonly held position and yes hypotheses vary. But there is a trend where over time what once was a conspiracy theory is no longer necessarily seen as one.

And yes, some people who believe in conspiracies that are not accepted by mainstream media, say, cannot have their theories falsified to their satisfaction. But that's true in the context of many conventional beliefs and believers of all kinds. It's part of the human cognitive tendencies.

If, to us, a person believes in the right conclusion, then we tend not to care that they arrived at this conclusion via terrible reasoning, if any, or terrible intuition, if any.

We get very wise about the opposition.

[Atla]

I'm surprised that anyone pays demolition companies for their work after 9/11. Three buildings perfectly destroyed into their footprints (and mostly into dust) by two asymmetrical explosions and fires in two of the buildings. I mean, jesus, what's all this careful laying of charges, simultanesous disruption of all main supports in buildings for outrageous fees. Demolition companies have been running a scam on us for over a century.

I wonder what all the "Republican" Trump supporters, who believe that the "Democrats" are the source of all evil, would say if they realized that the biggest conspiracy of the century so far happened under a Republican government. Probably would melt their brains.

I think some realize this. And I think some have managed to realize that Gulf War 2 was BS. The latter is a conspiracy theory that more or less was confirmed, with no consequences. The WOMD and Colin Powell and what they did to whistle-blowers and more.

Would be nice if I had more time to look at conspiracy theories, but there are many more interesting things to do. Sometimes I tried harassing some of the paid US shills who comment under some 9/11 and Moon landing videos, to maybe narrow down possibilites faster by bouncing ideas off them. Seemed like some of them had that job for over 10 years I don't envy them.

[Iwannaplato]

But surely sometimes the psychological narrative is more or less true?

Sure, just as the crass 'sheep' psychological narrative is sometimes true.

Something explains Wizzy's obsessions with jews and I don't think that we should be looking at jewy things the dirty jews did for that explanation. The boy is an idiot, and he is insane, so I posit that something to do with those qualities of the conspiracy theorist explains why he belives in jewish conspiracy theories. And they definitely are conspiracy theories, they do not under circumstances deserve some dignified circumlocution to spare the feelies of a fanatical fucknut.

That's peachy, but this thread is a generalization. Conspiracy theorists.

I am interested though in which of these conspiracy theories that have lasted a long time, are not accepted by mainstream experts, and should not be explained by cognitive disfunction or any of those sorts of things.

I'm confused why there are experts who aren't mainstream experts involved in them? I've seen some of those things, but it tends to be an expert in some unrelated field, such as geologist who swears that the WTC couldn't fall that way, even though the mainstream experts (structural engineers and so on) can rather easily explain how it did happen.

There are mainstream experts on pretty much every main conspiracy theory. Sometimes they even form rather large groups. And while some of the experts may be in related fields, there are, for example, many engineers and scientists with relevant expertise in Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth. There have been whistleblowers, including firemen and police at the scene, people who worked for the company that analyzed the causes for the fall of building 7, pilots and other experts who not only had expertise but were witnesses and other kinds of relevant experts. These things are marginalized by mainstream media for a variety of reasons - many of them needed not conspiracy explanation.

And the psychological factors that make people want to disbelieve conspiracies are extremely strong also.

A thread like this can easily devolve into an argument over a specific conspiracy, with all the attendant psychological factors as potentials on all sides. But one thing I notice about most people who dismiss conspiracy theories is that they really have no idea what counter-experts and whistleblowers have as evidence.

They have a conspiracy theory archetype in mind. They have a simple psychological theory that allows them to dismiss all theories about conspiracies that fall outside the mainstream acceptance. They tend to want to talk about conspiracy theorists in general and the worst case proponants of them.

Another way to put this is that essentially this thread is an ad hom.

I understand that ad homs fly the other way also, but this doesn't really make it any better. I understand that it could be a topic of inquiry: the psychology of people who believe in conspiracies not accepted by the mainstream. But generally in most discussion forums it as, at the very least, also an ad hom and presented with all those theories and all those people put into one pile.

[Iwannaplato]

Would be nice if I had more time to look at conspiracy theories, but there are many more interesting things to do. Sometimes I tried harassing some of the paid US shills who comment under some 9/11 and Moon landing videos, to maybe narrow down possibilites faster by bouncing ideas off them. Seemed like some of them had that job for over 10 years I don't envy them.

Do you mean you were harrassing debunkers? or proponants?