Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSomething to separate conspirasy theories
And bullshit from the truth.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-conspiracy-theory-director/
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
5 replies, 393 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (3)
ReplyReply to this post
5 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Something to separate conspirasy theories (Original Post)
I_UndergroundPanther
Aug 2020
OP
ret5hd
(20,502 posts)1. Man, now even Scientific American is in on it!!!
This goes all the way to the top, i tell ya'! All the way to the top!
flotsam
(3,268 posts)2. I found the article biased
in that while it agreed that conspiracies do occur it listed only reasons to disbelieve them and gave not a single example of true failed conspiracies or suspected successful conspiracies. It might have been a much stronger article with such examples included.
I_UndergroundPanther
(12,480 posts)3. Maybe a significant amount of them
At least these days are wrong?
flotsam
(3,268 posts)4. I think in general a majority are BS
But the piece was one sided and if these theories are easily debunked why are JFK files from when I was 9 years old still being withheld as I approach seventy?
whttevrr
(2,345 posts)5. Such a quick read
It deserves a list of the characteristics
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-conspiracy-theory-director/
The more that it manifests the following characteristics, the less probable that the theory is grounded in reality:
1.) Proof of the conspiracy supposedly emerges from a pattern of connecting the dots between events that need not be causally connected. When no evidence supports these connections except the allegation of the conspiracy or when the evidence fits equally well to other causal connectionsor to randomnessthe conspiracy theory is likely to be false.
2.) The agents behind the pattern of the conspiracy would need nearly superhuman power to pull it off. People are usually not nearly so powerful as we think they are.
3.) The conspiracy is complex, and its successful completion demands a large number of elements.
4.) Similarly, the conspiracy involves large numbers of people who would all need to keep silent about their secrets. The more people involved, the less realistic it becomes.
5.) The conspiracy encompasses a grand ambition for control over a nation, economy or political system. If it suggests world domination, the theory is even less likely to be true.
6.) The conspiracy theory ratchets up from small events that might be true to much larger, much less probable events.
7.) The conspiracy theory assigns portentous, sinister meanings to what are most likely innocuous, insignificant events.
8.) The theory tends to commingle facts and speculations without distinguishing between the two and without assigning degrees of probability or of factuality.
9.) The theorist is indiscriminately suspicious of all government agencies or private groups, which suggests an inability to nuance differences between true and false conspiracies.
10.) The conspiracy theorist refuses to consider alternative explanations, rejecting all disconfirming evidence and blatantly seeking only confirmatory evidence to support what he or she has a priori determined to be the truth.